Me lo podrias enviar a mi tambien Gracias Rolando --- El vie, 12/3/10, Wania Freitas <freitas.wania@gmail.com> escribió:
|
rec.bicycles.racing@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Paris Nice, stage 4 summary - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/48f06045e0a3817c?hl=en
* Real Racomg - 19 messages, 10 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/915ec745b06e4a6a?hl=en
* leave it to a Polack - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/71adb827efecb4f4?hl=en
* Paris Nice, stage 5 summary - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/a8d13fa609f3637b?hl=en
* Tirreno Adriatico, stage 3 summary - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/59cf2650b339d777?hl=en
* Testemax - Not for you one balled sissies - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/ebf676fa35ab767b?hl=en
* 2010 looks like it's going to be a great year for rbr - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/230e948089aed6fe?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Paris Nice, stage 4 summary
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/48f06045e0a3817c?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 12:17 am
From: "Fred K. Gringioni"
"Bob Martin" <bob.martin@excite.com> wrote in message
news:wZlmn.49571$Ym4.4535@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>
> Yep! the program tripped up (yet again) on comparing "Alberto Contador"
> with "Alberto Contador Velasco". Lucky it's only Spanish riders who have
> 2 names ;-)
Dumbass -
Brute Force it.
thanks,
Fred. presented by Gringioni.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Real Racomg
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/915ec745b06e4a6a?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 12:40 am
From: Wilma Munro
Fred K. Gringioni wrote:
> Dumbass -
> OWN THE PODIUM!
Dumbass,
I'd rather own the podium girl.
== 2 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 12:46 am
From: Wilma Munro
Tom Kunich wrote:
> How many of you are here for the conversation about real racing and
> those of you who are just showing that you're alive?
This is the official Turing test implementation site. And you failed.
== 3 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:05 am
From: Fred Flintstein
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> Started my racing season last week. When you look like a sausage casing,
> a parcours with 3m of gain per 10 km lap is exactly what is on order.
>
> I think, seriously, I may have executed 20 stupid "attacks" in a 70 km
> race. No worry, it's a training race, not a serious race. I needed the
> exercise.
Dumbass,
I have it on good authority that you are still going to
be shit in July.
As for the tactics question, unless your friend has the
horsepower to ride away from all the people that might
chase, ability as a time trialist is of no value. We
are talking Cat 4s, right?
Fred Flintstein
== 4 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:48 am
From: "Tom Kunich"
The problem with Cat 4 is that everyone is attacking all the time.
Your strategy seems sound except it would probably work a little better if
you jump just as the pack catches someone else's try.
== 5 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 7:32 am
From: Scott
On Mar 12, 12:13 am, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article <ut2dncnm8baASwTWnZ2dnUVZ_r-dn...@earthlink.com>,
> "Tom Kunich" <tkun...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > How many of you are here for the conversation about real racing and those of
> > you who are just showing that you're alive?
>
> I'm here for conversation about amateur racing.
>
> Started my racing season last week. When you look like a sausage casing,
> a parcours with 3m of gain per 10 km lap is exactly what is on order.
>
> I think, seriously, I may have executed 20 stupid "attacks" in a 70 km
> race. No worry, it's a training race, not a serious race. I needed the
> exercise.
>
> OTOH, I was still game for the finish, but got caught behind the only
> crash of the day, with 5 km to go. Race over, go home.
>
> Weather: overcast to start, wet to finish.
>
> Bike racing is wonderful.
>
> Regarding this race, I've got a tactical question for the cold and timid
> souls here:
>
> I'm a pretty good sprinter, my teammate is a pretty good TTist. We want
> to exploit these skills for attacks.
>
> Here's my guess as to ideal Cat4 strategy: after the race warms up, I
> jump off the front as fast as my friend can comfortably draft me (45
> km/h?) and try to hold that speed for as long as I can without blowing
> up completely when it comes to the next step.
>
> Next step: I pull off, look back. If we're 10m clear of the pack, and
> haven't dragged more than 5-6 riders with us, teammate takes over for
> the next leg. When I recover, I do short pulls, he does long ones, try
> to hold on until the end of the race.
>
> If I haven't made a gap over the main pack, I call it off. Recover,
> lather, rinse, repeat.
>
> Sound about right? Variant: if he likes his chances, he can try to go
> solo after my attack fails.
>
> --
> Ryan Cousineau rcous...@gmail.comhttp://www.wiredcola.com/
> "In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
> "In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."
A 10m gap? Nope, won't work.
Take Tom's idea about countering, and instead of attacking violently
off the front, just gradually roll off the front as the pack slows
naturally. Don't make a big deal of it, don't get out of the saddle.
If you're lucky, you could easily find yourself 100m or so off the
front before anyone even notices. Only once you've gotten clear, ramp
up the speed gradually.
Or, if you're able to recover well, be THAT guy who just keeps
attacking until everyone is about to get pissed. But, don't attack
all out. Do your attacks at about 80% effort so you don't blow up,
but knowing full well you're going to get chased and caught. If
you're lucky, after 4 or 5 of these 'attacks' someone will try a
counter. When that person is caught, try to roll off the front
gradually and don't look back, just peek under your shoulder to see if
the pack is responding. There's a really good chance that the folks
in the front of the pack will just let you go, thinking 'eh, it's just
Ryan, he'll be right back' since you've already attacked/been brought
back a half dozen times or so. So, when you find yourself dangling
off the front and eventually get about 200-250m off the front, ramp up
the speed. By the time they notice you're up the road, there's a
chance they'll revert to "I'm not chasing him, you chase him". It
helps if you have teammates in the group that no one wants to drag
along so that they win the sprint anyway.
I'm just saying.
== 6 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 7:54 am
From: ronaldo_jeremiah
On Mar 12, 1:13 am, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm a pretty good sprinter, my teammate is a pretty good TTist. We want
> to exploit these skills for attacks.
<whole bunch of convoluted dumbass strategy snipped>
Dumbass -
Let your friend try to get away solo while you sit in and stay fresh
for the sprint. Duh.
-rj
== 7 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 7:56 am
From: ronaldo_jeremiah
On Mar 11, 11:50 pm, "Tom Kunich" <tkun...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> How many of you are here for the conversation about real racing and those of
> you who are just showing that you're alive?
I'm here mostly to slander, stock, and play grab ass.
If I wanted to discuss real racing, it probably wouldn't be with you.
-rj
== 8 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 8:29 am
From: "Fred K. Gringioni"
"Tom Kunich" <tkunich@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ut2dncnm8baASwTWnZ2dnUVZ_r-dnZ2d@earthlink.com...
> How many of you are here for the conversation about real racing and those
> of you who are just showing that you're alive?
Dumbass -
I am only here to call people Dumbass.
thanks,
Fred. presented by Gringioni.
== 9 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 8:57 am
From: Fred Flintstein
ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
> On Mar 12, 1:13 am, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm a pretty good sprinter, my teammate is a pretty good TTist. We want
>> to exploit these skills for attacks.
>
> <whole bunch of convoluted dumbass strategy snipped>
>
>
> Dumbass -
>
>
> Let your friend try to get away solo while you sit in and stay fresh
> for the sprint. Duh.
What he said.
Seriously, if breakaways rarely win Cat 4 races in BC then
trying to break away is not a smart tactic.
I knew a guy that upgraded to Cat 2 by training only for
sprints. That's all he did, sprints. No distance work at
all. He raced crits and never took a pull. He rode in
circles and then sprinted.
Once he upgraded he was dog meat because all of a sudden
he wasn't at the end anymore to sprint. But he did get his
upgrade.
Or you could try Scott's suggestions, which are to try to
get away in a fashion that no one will chase. But if
sprinting is the card you play then keep your nose out of
the wind.
Fred Flintstein
== 10 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 9:14 am
From: curtis@the-md-russells.org
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:29:25 -0800, "Fred K. Gringioni"
<kgringioni@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Tom Kunich" <tkunich@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:ut2dncnm8baASwTWnZ2dnUVZ_r-dnZ2d@earthlink.com...
>> How many of you are here for the conversation about real racing and those
>> of you who are just showing that you're alive?
>
>
>Dumbass -
>
>I am only here to call people Dumbass.
>
>thanks,
>
>Fred. presented by Gringioni.
Dumbass:
No upgrade for you until you get consistently call two people Dumbass
in one post. If you are going to specialize, show some panache,
Dumbass.
And, no, calling the same person Dumbass in the same post doesn't
count. That's just a neener, neener thing.
I'm here to say stuff my wife doesn't put up with in real life, at
least not when she is within striking distance. Bad jokes, any puns,
personal criticism of LA, off the wing opinions unsupported by fact or
circumstance, that sort of stuff. Now you know why...
FWIW (nothing, coincidentally), I think we stay on topic better than
most groups. There is a general centering around things bicycle
racing, even if I haven't been completely in touch with things since
races began to be won with marques other than Italian, French and
occasionally Brit. What's with this Specialized crap, anyway? Anyone
have a Winner Pro available? What happened to the good stuff?
Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
== 11 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 9:41 am
From: "A. Dumas Fred"
curtis@the-md-russells.org wrote:
> No upgrade for you
You upgrade nazi.
== 12 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 10:00 am
From: heather
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> I'm a pretty good sprinter, my teammate is a pretty good TTist. We want
> to exploit these skills for attacks.
>
> Here's my guess as to ideal Cat4 strategy: after the race warms up, I
> jump off the front as fast as my friend can comfortably draft me (45
> km/h?) and try to hold that speed for as long as I can without blowing
> up completely when it comes to the next step.
>
> Next step: I pull off, look back. If we're 10m clear of the pack, and
> haven't dragged more than 5-6 riders with us, teammate takes over for
> the next leg. When I recover, I do short pulls, he does long ones, try
> to hold on until the end of the race.
Use your sprint speed to get a gap, use your teammate's tt ability to
hold it, leading to an increased chance for you to win the sprint out of
a smaller group than then entire cat 4 peloton? (Or am I reading your
intentions wrong?) It at least sounds fun :)
h
== 13 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 10:12 am
From: heather
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> Started my racing season last week. When you look like a sausage casing,
> a parcours with 3m of gain per 10 km lap is exactly what is on order.
>
>
I forgot to ask this in my last reply to you, but maybe you will
understand my pain here, Sausage Casing- Why does it take an entire week
to lose a single pound, but only one day to gain it back??
h
== 14 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 10:35 am
From: "Fred K. Gringioni"
"Fred Flintstein" <bob.schwartz@sbcREMOVEglobal.net> wrote in message
news:wfCdna1m7pEZ7wfWnZ2dnUVZ_j2dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>
> I knew a guy that upgraded to Cat 2 by training only for
> sprints. That's all he did, sprints. No distance work at
> all. He raced crits and never took a pull. He rode in
> circles and then sprinted.
>
> Once he upgraded he was dog meat because all of a sudden
> he wasn't at the end anymore to sprint. But he did get his
> upgrade.
<snip>
Dumbass -
Too bad for him.
The real fun in local Cat 1/2 races is trying to read the race correctly and
get into the right breakaway.
thanks,
Fred. presented by Gringioni.
== 15 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 10:37 am
From: "Fred K. Gringioni"
"Tom Kunich" <tkunich@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ut2dncnm8baASwTWnZ2dnUVZ_r-dnZ2d@earthlink.com...
<snip>
Dumbass -
As an aside, what is "Racomg"?
thanks,
Fred. presented by Gringioni.
== 16 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 10:51 am
From: "Fred K. Gringioni"
"Fred K. Gringioni" <kgringioni@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hne1lm$tqg$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "Tom Kunich" <tkunich@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:ut2dncnm8baASwTWnZ2dnUVZ_r-dnZ2d@earthlink.com...
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> Dumbass -
>
> As an aside, what is "Racomg"?
How about "Rbr Assholes Cry Oh My God!"
== 17 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 12:42 pm
From: Wilma Munro
heather wrote:
> Sausage Casing- Why does it take an entire week
> to lose a single pound, but only one day to gain it back??
Something to do with entropy perhaps.
== 18 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 1:21 pm
From: "K. Fred Gauss"
Tom Kunich wrote:
> How many of you are here for the conversation about real racing and
> those of you who are just showing that you're alive?
>
>
I'm here in search of the love, validation and admiration that I can
never find in real life.
Would you be my friend?
== 19 of 19 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 1:28 pm
From: Wilma Munro
K. Fred Gauss wrote:
> Would you be my friend?
Wouldn't you rather have a political argument with a naked Kunich ?
==============================================================================
TOPIC: leave it to a Polack
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/71adb827efecb4f4?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 7:17 am
From: Scott
On Mar 12, 12:14 am, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article
> <58960032-e2bf-4f1d-a273-91bf48564...@s36g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
>
> Fred <fred.gar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > (or two) to think they could get away with it.
>
> >http://preview.tinyurl.com/yzpfdqh
>
> > Fred pb dumbass is genetic
>
> EPO is a hell of a drug.
>
> --
> Ryan Cousineau rcous...@gmail.comhttp://www.wiredcola.com/
> "In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
> "In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."
It's dope!
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Paris Nice, stage 5 summary
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/a8d13fa609f3637b?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 11:11 am
From: Bob Martin
Stage 5 : Mar 12, Pernes-les-Fontaines - Aix-en-Provence, 153.5 km
1 Peter Sagan (Svk) Liquigas - Doimo 3.34.15
2 Mirco Lorenzetto (Ita) Lampre - Farnese Vini 0.02
3 Alejandro Valverde (Spa) Caisse d'Epargne
4 Matthieu Ladagnous (Fra) Francaise des Jeux
5 Jens Voigt (Ger) Team Saxo Bank
6 Simon Gerrans (Aus) Sky Professional Cycling Team
7 Koldo Fernandez (Spa) Euskatltel - Euskadi
8 Nicolas Roche (Irl) AG2R La Mondiale
9 Matthew Harley Goss (Aus) Team HTC - Columbia
10 Alberto Contador (Spa) Astana
Changes in stage 5 compared to stage 4 :
Biggest gainers by position :
+45 Craig Lewis
+41 Joost Posthuma
+40 Matthew Harley Goss
+40 Matteo Bono
+37 Mathieu Perget
+37 Christian Vandevelde
+37 Amael Moinard
+36 Pierrick Fedrigo
+36 Christopher Horner
+32 Samuel Dumoulin
Biggest losers by position :
-70 Romain Sicard
-65 Johnny Hoogerland
-57 Thomas Peterson
-49 Serguei Ivanov
-48 Tony Martin
-47 Yannick Talabardon
-45 Laurent Mangel
-43 Jose Ivan Gutierrez
-36 Mickael Delage
-33 David Le Lay
-33 Gregory Henderson
Biggest gainers by time :
+0:12 Peter Sagan
+0:06 Mirco Lorenzetto
+0:04 Alejandro Valverde
+0:02 Luis-Leon Sanchez
+0:01 David Millar
Biggest losers by time :
-16:48 Adam Hansen
-16:48 Alberto Ongarato
-16:48 Alessandro Spezialetti
-16:48 Alexandre Geniez
-16:48 Andre Greipel
-16:48 Anthony Geslin
-16:48 Arnaud Gerard
-16:48 Benjamin Noval Gonzalez
-16:48 Bjorn Leukemans
-16:48 Brian Vandborg
-16:48 Daniel Lloyd
Favourites by position :
+37 Christian Vandevelde
+9 Damiano Cunego
+8 Frank Schleck
+4 Janez Brajkovic
-14 Levi Leipheimer
-16 Xavier Tondo
-48 Tony Martin
Favourites by time :
+0:04 Alejandro Valverde
+0:01 David Millar
-0:23 Janez Brajkovic
-0:23 Christian Vandevelde
-2:34 Xavier Tondo
-2:34 Levi Leipheimer
-2:34 Damiano Cunego
-16:48 Tony Martin
Top 3 and favourites standings :
1 Alberto Contador 20.41.40
2 Alejandro Valverde 0.20
3 Roman Kreuziger 0.25
.....
5 Samuel Sanchez 0.29
6 Jens Voigt 0.34
.....
9 David Millar 1.02
.....
17 Janez Brajkovic 1.56
.....
20 Frank Schleck 2.05
.....
28 Xavier Tondo 3.48
.....
30 Levi Leipheimer 3.57
.....
72 Damiano Cunego 11.39
.....
90 Christian Vandevelde 16.35
.....
99 Tony Martin 21.03
Retirements to date : Stage
Borut Bozic (Slo) Vacansoleil Pro Cycling Team 5 <<<
Daniel Moreno Fernandez (Spa) Omega Pharma - Lotto 5 <<<
Dennis Van Winden (Ned) Rabobank 5 <<<
Francesco Chicchi (Ita) Liquigas-Doimo 5 <<<
Serge Pauwels (Bel) Team Sky 5 <<<
Heinrich Haussler (Ger) Cervelo Testteam 4
Kevin Van Impe (Bel) Quick Step Cycling Team 4
Grega Bole (Slo) Lampre - Farnese 3
Joaquin Novoa Menedez (Spa) Cervelo Testteam 3
Marcel Sieberg (Ger) Team HTC - Columbia 3
Danilo Napolitano (Ita) Katusha 2
Hayden Roulston (NZl) Team HTC - Columbia 2
Simone Ponzi (Ita) Lampre - Farnese 2
Fredrik Kessiakoff (Swe) Garmin - Transitions 1
Gert Steegmans (Bel) Team Radioshack 1
Total retirements : 15
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Tirreno Adriatico, stage 3 summary
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/59cf2650b339d777?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 11:11 am
From: Bob Martin
Stage 3 : Mar 12, San Miniato - Monsummano Terme, 159 km
1 Daniele Bennati (Ita) Liquigas-Doimo 3.54.09
2 Alessandro Petacchi (Ita) Lampre-Farnese Vini
3 Bernhard Eisel (Aut) Team HTC - Columbia
4 Tyler Farrar (USA) Garmin - Transitions
5 Juan Antonio Flecha Giannoni (Spa) Sky Professional Cycling Team
6 Sacha Modolo (Ita) Colnago - CSF Inox
7 Assan Bazayev (Kaz) Astana
8 Edvald Boasson Hagen (Nor) Sky Professional Cycling Team
9 Francesco Ginanni (Ita) Androni Giocattoli
10 Matti Breschel (Den) Team Saxo Bank
Changes in stage 3 compared to stage 2 :
Biggest gainers by position :
+88 Alessandro Petacchi
+41 Mathias Frank
+38 Oscar Freire Gomez
+38 Johan Van Summeren
+37 Valerio Agnoli
+35 Rui Alberto Faria Da Costa
+35 Ludovic Turpin
+33 Luca Mazzanti
+33 George Hincapie
+32 Bernhard Eisel
Biggest losers by position :
-103 Luca Paolini
-95 Thor Hushovd
-87 Roger Hammond
-74 Yauheni Hutarovich
-71 Sebastien Hinault
-68 Alexandre Vinokourov
-66 Alessandro Ballan
-58 Simon Clarke
-56 Daniele Pietropolli
-49 Allan Davis
-49 Marcus Burghardt
Biggest gainers by time :
+0:06 Daniele Bennati
+0:02 Alessandro Petacchi
Biggest losers by time :
-11:49 Alan Marangoni
-11:49 Alessandro Donati
-11:49 Andrea Masciarelli
-11:49 Anthony Roux
-11:49 Arnaud Coyot
-11:49 Baden Cooke
-11:49 Bert Grabsch
-11:49 Blel Kadri
-11:49 Brett Lancaster
-11:49 Carlo Scognamiglio
-11:49 Domenik Klemme
Favourites by position :
+38 Johan Van Summeren
+19 Kim Kirchen
+19 Franco Pellizotti
+10 Andy Schleck
+8 Stefano Garzelli
+8 Robert Gesink
+1 Lars Ytting Bak
+1 Fabian Cancellara
-1 Linus Gerdemann
-13 Marzio Bruseghin
-49 Allan Davis
Favourites by time :
-0:04 Vincenzo Nibali
-0:04 Stefano Garzelli
-0:04 Robert Gesink
-0:04 Michele Scarponi
-0:04 Linus Gerdemann
-0:04 Kim Kirchen
-0:04 Johan Van Summeren
-0:04 Franco Pellizotti
-0:04 Fabian Cancellara
-0:04 Cadel Evans
-3:32 Allan Davis
-6:59 Andy Schleck
-11:49 Marzio Bruseghin
-11:49 Lars Ytting Bak
Top 3 and favourites standings :
1 Daniele Bennati 11.44.23
2 Linus Gerdemann 0.04
3 Tom Boonen 0.04
.....
9 Cadel Evans 0.13
.....
33 Vincenzo Nibali 0.14
.....
36 Kim Kirchen 0.14
.....
38 Stefano Garzelli 0.14
.....
46 Robert Gesink 0.14
.....
48 Michele Scarponi 0.14
.....
60 Fabian Cancellara 0.14
.....
72 Franco Pellizotti 0.14
.....
92 Allan Davis 3.42
.....
126 Marzio Bruseghin 13.15
.....
128 Johan Van Summeren 13.50
.....
144 Andy Schleck 16.39
.....
164 Lars Ytting Bak 25.35
Retirements to date : Stage
Aitor Hernandez Gutierrez (Spa) Euskaltel - Euskadi 3 <<<
Fabian Wegmann (Ger) Team Milram 3 <<<
Johannes Frohlinger (Ger) Team Milram 3 <<<
Leif Hoste (Bel) Omega Pharma-Lotto 3 <<<
Leonardo Scarselli (Ita) ISD - Neri 3 <<<
Jussi Veikkanen (Fin) Francaise Des Jeux 1
Massimo Giunti (Ita) Androni Giocattoli 1
Total retirements : 7
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Testemax - Not for you one balled sissies
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/ebf676fa35ab767b?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 1:59 pm
From: Anton Berlin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyWBmTq3JJw
==============================================================================
TOPIC: 2010 looks like it's going to be a great year for rbr
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/230e948089aed6fe?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:52 pm
From: Carl Sundquist
On Mar 10, 10:27 am, "K. Fred Gauss"
<Some...@Somewhere.You.Dont.Wanna.Be> wrote:
> Fred Flintstein wrote:
> > Keith Dumbass is starting us off with a hellacious
> > lead out. Maintaining that intensity into July will
> > be difficult, but I think he's up to it.
>
> > Fred Flintstein
>
> Did you write the Keith code?
Hey! Don't be hating on Keith Code!
http://www.themotorbookstore.com/enlarge.html?http://ep.yimg.com/ca/I/motobooks_2098_23715270
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.bicycles.racing"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.bicycles.racing+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
On 12 mar, 19:17, fsas <f...@telefonica.net> wrote:
> NECESITARÍA EL SIGUIENTE ARTICULO
> Biosignal Monitoring and Recording
> Thomas Penzel, Karl Kesper and Heinrich F. Becker
> Information Technology Solutions for Healthcare
> PAGINAS 288-301
> DOI: 10.1007/1-84628-141-5_13
> SPRINGERLINK 2006
> gracias
--
You can edit your Group Email settings by visiting the following link.
http://groups.google.com/group/medarticles/subscribe
You can choose abridged email or digest email so that you will receive only one email per day.
--
You can edit your Group Email settings by visiting the following link.
http://groups.google.com/group/medarticles/subscribe
You can choose abridged email or digest email so that you will receive only one email per day.
|
Drug News & Perspectives; 2007, 20(9): 565
The link (for Abstract): http://journals.prous.com/journals/servlet/xmlxsl/pk_journals.xml_summary_pr?p_JournalId=3&p_RefId=3884&p_IsPs=Y
The use of the suicide CYP450 inhibitor ABT for distinguishing absorption and metabolism processes in in-vivo pharmacokinetic screens
European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics
2005, vol. 30, no 1-2, pp. 75-83 [9 page(s) (article)] (30 ref.)
alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* LaDainian Tomlinson may visit NY Jets - 4 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/aaf439ce55b25e08?hl=en
* Jets Brass - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/46c346d251aebec7?hl=en
* New Jets blog worth checking out... - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/beb609a05e58837e?hl=en
* Tanny on the radio re: TJ - 3 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/72dd339ad71bbefe?hl=en
* Tiffany Accessories Juicy Bracelet Dior Earrings Chanel Necklace for sale <
wholesale free shipping><www.vipchinatrade.com> - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/29b1386c4cefe8d6?hl=en
* Nice article: Ten logical cap casualties for 2010... - 9 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/8ebb60190d19b6f7?hl=en
* Jets sign S Brodney Pool... - 2 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/a73a619bb35a9f1a?hl=en
* Washington - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/5cbcd8f7b52cb99d?hl=en
* ◆⊙◆ 2010 Cheap wholesale ED Hardy Long Sleeve, AF Long Sleeve, LV Long
Sleeve ect at http://www.rijing-trade.com <Paypal Payment> - 1 messages, 1
author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/2310431b5c4dbd9d?hl=en
* PFT: Reports: Merlin Olsen dies at 69 - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/9160b0cf9af6ea35?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: LaDainian Tomlinson may visit NY Jets
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/aaf439ce55b25e08?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 11 2010 8:20 pm
From: Still Roper
On Mar 11, 4:16 pm, Johnctx <j...@spamtx.net> wrote:
> HUH?
>
> When did the word complacent get linked with Greene?
>
> http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2010/03/tomlinson_may_visit_the_ny_j...
>
> If veteran running back LaDainian Tomlinson leaves Minnesota without a
> contract on Thursday, he's scheduled to visit the Jets on Friday,
> according to an report on ESPN.
>
> The Jets are searching for a veteran running back to replace the
> departed Thomas Jones and complement second-year pro Shonn Greene.
>
> Tomlinson, a nine-year veteran, has been on the decline in recent years,
> however. Last season, he rushed for 730 yards and 12 touchdowns on 223
> carries (3.3-yard average). It was the first time in his career he
> didn't reach the 1,000-yard mark.
>
> I find the courting of Tomlinson a bit curious even though he played in
> San Diego with Jets offensive coordinator Brian Schottenheimer and knows
> the offense.
>
> First, I thought the Jets were looking for a between-the-tackles running
> back to replace Jones. Although Tomlinson can do it (he's extremely
> effective near the goal line), that's not his forte. He's more of an
> open-field runner.
>
> All I can think of is that perhaps Tomlinson would be insurance against
> the Jets possibly losing restricted free agent running back Leon
> Washington. Like Washington, Tomlinson is quick and can catch the ball
> out of the backfield.
>
> That said, Tomlinson has looked done over the past two seasons. Unlike
> Jones, he had a ton of carries early in his career and his body is
> obviously breaking down. I guess the Jets see something on film that I
> don't see.
>
> © 2010 NJ.com. All rights reserved.
I love the idea.
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:13 am
From: Johnctx
buRford wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 15:16:39 -0600, Johnctx <jc@spamtx.net> wrote:
>
>> HUH?
>>
>> When did the word complacent get linked with Greene?
>
> It's complement, son, not complacent ;)
>
>
>> http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2010/03/tomlinson_may_visit_the_ny_jet.html
>>
>> If veteran running back LaDainian Tomlinson leaves Minnesota without a
>> contract on Thursday, he's scheduled to visit the Jets on Friday,
>> according to an report on ESPN.
>>
>> The Jets are searching for a veteran running back to replace the
>> departed Thomas Jones and complement second-year pro Shonn Greene.
>>
>> Tomlinson, a nine-year veteran, has been on the decline in recent years,
>> however. Last season, he rushed for 730 yards and 12 touchdowns on 223
>> carries (3.3-yard average). It was the first time in his career he
>> didn't reach the 1,000-yard mark.
>>
>> I find the courting of Tomlinson a bit curious even though he played in
>> San Diego with Jets offensive coordinator Brian Schottenheimer and knows
>> the offense.
>>
>> First, I thought the Jets were looking for a between-the-tackles running
>> back to replace Jones. Although Tomlinson can do it (he's extremely
>> effective near the goal line), that's not his forte. He's more of an
>> open-field runner.
>>
>> All I can think of is that perhaps Tomlinson would be insurance against
>> the Jets possibly losing restricted free agent running back Leon
>> Washington. Like Washington, Tomlinson is quick and can catch the ball
>> out of the backfield.
>>
>> That said, Tomlinson has looked done over the past two seasons. Unlike
>> Jones, he had a ton of carries early in his career and his body is
>> obviously breaking down. I guess the Jets see something on film that I
>> don't see.
>>
>>
>>
>> © 2010 NJ.com. All rights reserved.
Now I can''t read.
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:28 am
From: Johnctx
Johnny Morongo wrote:
> Johnctx wrote:
>> HUH?
>>
>> When did the word complacent get linked with Greene?
>>
>> http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2010/03/tomlinson_may_visit_the_ny_jet.html
>>
>>
>> If veteran running back LaDainian Tomlinson leaves Minnesota without a
>> contract on Thursday, he's scheduled to visit the Jets on Friday,
>> according to an report on ESPN.
>>
>
> <snip>
>
> In the first place, mention the author of the story, dunderhead.
> (Dave Hutchinson)
> Secondly, what's your take on Tomlinson coming to the Jets?
>
> A running tandem of Green, Washington and Tomlinson (law firm?) sounds
> very productive to me. I LIKE the idea, *IF*:
> 1. Green leaves behind his freshman fumbles and does not prove to be an
> injury waiting to happen,
> 2. Washington heals back to his pre-injury skill set, and if
> 3. Tomlinson is used wisely and effectively for his diminished skills
>
> Take away any one of the above caveats and the running game is in
> trouble. HOWEVER, Jones was not all that he's been cracked up to be. We
> tend to forget that he and LT managed the same 3.3 ypc, Jones' yardage
> was further enhanced by a few long breakaways. So Jones or no Jones,
> the Jets' running gamemight not be as fearsome as was last years.'
> Remember, both Faneca and Woody are a year older and getting at least a
> step closer to a step slower and a corresponding diminishment in strength.
I am still reeling from reading complacent instead of complement. I
really shouldn't do this & work at the same time.
RB's are generally toxic after 30. They fall off & fall off hard so if
you always dump them when their contract is up after 30 you would
usually be making the right decision. Having said that we need another RB.
LT 's numbers
http://www.nfl.com/players/ladainiantomlinson/profile?id=TOM683150
Thomas Jones
http://www.nfl.com/players/thomasjones/profile?id=JON755755
Jones got his avg up to 4.2 by the end of the year. His numbers suck
when he touches the ball >20 times a game. So that is another argument
to support changing him out as how do you waste Greene & Washington to
accomplish that.
LT can catch the ball out of the backfield as can Washington which is
something Jones couldn't do or Schott didn't trust him doing it. We
know Schott likes screens so there is a use there. Line up Washington &
LT in the backfield, put Smith in motion, move one or both into the slot
may make up for having only one TE that can catch.
Then again he could suck.
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:36 am
From: Johnctx
Harlan Lachman wrote:
> In article <k42dnY59XonJOwTWnZ2dnUVZ_tmdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> "papa.carl44" <papadotcarl@nospamverizon.net> wrote:
>
>> "Johnny Morongo" <j.mirehiel@harmonicconcordance.com> wrote in message
>> news:isWdnQs-6cSKPATW4p2dnAA@giganews.com...
>>> Johnctx wrote:
>>>> HUH?
>>>>
>>>> When did the word complacent get linked with Greene?
>>>>
>>>> http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2010/03/tomlinson_may_visit_the_ny_jet.htm
>>>> l
>>>> If veteran running back LaDainian Tomlinson leaves Minnesota without a
>>>> contract on Thursday, he's scheduled to visit the Jets on Friday,
>>>> according to an report on ESPN.
>>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> In the first place, mention the author of the story, dunderhead.
>>> (Dave Hutchinson)
>>> Secondly, what's your take on Tomlinson coming to the Jets?
>>>
>>> A running tandem of Green, Washington and Tomlinson (law firm?) sounds
>>> very productive to me. I LIKE the idea, *IF*:
>>> 1. Green leaves behind his freshman fumbles and does not prove to be an
>>> injury waiting to happen,
>>> 2. Washington heals back to his pre-injury skill set, and if
>>> 3. Tomlinson is used wisely and effectively for his diminished skills
>>>
>>> Take away any one of the above caveats and the running game is in trouble.
>>> HOWEVER, Jones was not all that he's been cracked up to be. We tend to
>>> forget that he and LT managed the same 3.3 ypc, Jones' yardage was further
>>> enhanced by a few long breakaways. So Jones or no Jones, the Jets'
>>> running gamemight not be as fearsome as was last years.' Remember, both
>>> Faneca and Woody are a year older and getting at least a step closer to a
>>> step slower and a corresponding diminishment in strength.
>> Oh shit...let's get rid of the O line then too...what the Hell, if they
>> aren't at least second year players they're probably too old. :-)
>
> Papa, whether we get rid of some of the older OL guys or not, I really
> hope we draft a stud G or replacement for Woody with one of our first
> two picks. Faneca whiffed a lot last year. Woody is older and grooming
> an OT makes sense.
>
> H
I have written about this kid before. He has great feet and is probably
a LT so he would give depth at 3 maybe 4 positions. We have been lucky
on the line with injuries. Hell maybe he replaces Hunter as the extra
guard as this kid was a great hoop player and I mean dribbling the ball
at 6'6" to break the press.
http://www.nfl.com/players/danielloper/profile?id=LOP465682
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Jets Brass
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/46c346d251aebec7?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:12 am
From: Johnctx
Johnny Morongo wrote:
> Johnctx wrote:
>
>>
>> I am not worried about Washington it was a broken bone. I assume his
>> head will be there but you are right you never know. I have separated
>> a shoulder, broke a nose a few times, and pulled some muscles but no
>> personal experience with broke bones.
>
> This is such a soft ball, that to comment would be akin to taking a ball
> bat to a pumpkin. :)
:)
I didn't type "broked" but I know my spelling isn't where your mind was
headed. You need to get out of the desert more often.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: New Jets blog worth checking out...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/beb609a05e58837e?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:24 am
From: graybeard
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 00:19:03 -0500 buRford <buRford@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:42:02 -0500, graybeard <graybeard@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:30:34 -0500 buRford <buRford@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Nice to see us go International ;)
>>>
>>>http://bit.ly/5ZxSaU
>>
>>I was going to post something there, but my keyboard won't make those
>>letters.
>
>Linux must have the ability to change keyboards? I mean, even Windows can ;)
By gølly, yøu håve å pøint!
BTW, how did you know that I run Linux? Most people would assume from my
headers showing Agent that I'm using Windows. Actually, I use Agent
under WINE in Linux because I have just never found a newsreader that I
like as much, just as I use Eudora through WINE for email. Maybe I'm
just a creature of habit.
--
graybeard
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Tanny on the radio re: TJ
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/72dd339ad71bbefe?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:31 am
From: Tutor
repotrtedly, Rosenhaus called the Jets and gave them a chanced to
match the offer from KC and they declined it.
Boomer & Carton asked Tanny and he didnt deny it.
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:37 am
From: Tutor
On Mar 12, 9:31 am, Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> repotrtedly, Rosenhaus called the Jets and gave them a chanced to
> match the offer from KC and they declined it.
>
> Boomer & Carton asked Tanny and he didnt deny it.
LINK:
http://www.wfan.com/topic/play_window.php?audioType=Episode&audioId=4465297
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:48 am
From: Tutor
On Mar 12, 9:37 am, Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 12, 9:31 am, Tutor <dcat4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > repotrtedly, Rosenhaus called the Jets and gave them a chanced to
> > match the offer from KC and they declined it.
>
> > Boomer & Carton asked Tanny and he didnt deny it.
>
> LINK:
>
> http://www.wfan.com/topic/play_window.php?audioType=Episode&audioId=4...
LOL at the suggestion to inject an "Unprotected sex" clause in
Cromartie's contract. Tanny: "Anything's possible". Hahaha
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Tiffany Accessories Juicy Bracelet Dior Earrings Chanel Necklace for
sale <wholesale free shipping><www.vipchinatrade.com>
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/29b1386c4cefe8d6?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:34 am
From: danmark
Chanel Accessories:
Chanel Bracelet
Chanel Chain Bracelet
Chanel Earrings
Chanel Necklace www.vipchinatrade.com paypal payment
Coach Accessories:
Coach Chain Bracelet
Coach Earrings
Coach Necklace www.vipchinatrade.com paypal payment
(wholesale free shipping )
TOUS Accessories:
TOUS Chain Bracelet www.vipchinatrade.com
(wholesale free shipping )
D&G Accessories:
D&G Chain Bracelet
D&G Earrings
D&G Necklace www.vipchinatrade.com paypal payment
(wholesale free shipping )
Dior Accessories:
Dior Chain Bracelet
Dior Earrings www.vipchinatrade.com paypal payment
Dior Necklace
(wholesale free shipping )
Gucci Accessories:
Gucci Bracelet
Gucci Chain Bracelet
Gucci Earrings
Gucci Necklace www.vipchinatrade.com paypal payment
Gucci Rings www.vipchinatrade.com
(wholesale free shipping )
Juicy Accessories:
Juicy Chain Bracelet
Juicy Earrings www.vipchinatrade.com paypal payment
Juicy Necklace
www.vipchinatrade.com (wholesale free shipping )
Links Accessories:
Links Chain Bracelet www.vipchinatrade.com paypal payment
Links Necklace
Links Pendants
Links Rings
www.vipchinatrade.com (wholesale free shipping )
LV Accessories:
LV Chain Bracelet
LV Necklace
www.vipchinatrade.com (wholesale free shipping )
Pandora Chain Bracelet:
(wholesale free shipping )
Swarovski Chain Bracelet: www.vipchinatrade.com
(wholesale free shipping )
Tiffany Accessories:
Tiffany Bracelet
Tiffany Chain Bracelet
Tiffany Earrings
Tiffany Necklace
Tiffany Rings(wholesale free shipping )
www.vipchinatrade.com paypal payment
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Nice article: Ten logical cap casualties for 2010...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/8ebb60190d19b6f7?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:36 am
From: "Remy McSwain"
"buRford" <buRford@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
news:7h4gp590ur41v69ul3kaq8jo15t7d4j60v@4ax.com...
> Well, VG made another Top Ten list ;)
>
>
> Ten logical cap casualties for 2010
> By Bill Barnwell
> Football Outsiders
>
> While NFL owners appear willing to lock out their players in 2011,
> they already have one
> advantage that none of the owners in other professional sports
> have: nonguaranteed
> contracts. While a team in virtually any other sport is stuck
> paying an underperforming
> player for the full length of his contract, NFL organizations can
> choose to cut a player,
> and avoid paying any future bonuses and base salaries due to him.
>
>
> Normally, there's a downside to that move. Players receive the
> cash from a signing bonus
> immediately upon signing a deal, but teams are allowed to spread
> the cap hit from a
> signing bonus across the length of a contract.
>
>
> For example, a $10 million signing bonus on a five-year deal
> results in a cap hit of $2
> million in each of those five seasons (in addition to a player's
> base salary, incentives
> and other bonuses). When a player is released or traded, the bonus
> money assigned to the
> cap in future years is accelerated onto the current year's cap,
> forcing the team to devote
> a portion of its precious cap space to players who are no longer
> on the roster. That's
> commonly known as "dead money."
>
>
> This year, though, things are different. Because this is an
> uncapped year, teams can
> release players with onerous base salaries and large signing
> bonuses without having to
> worry about cutting corners on this year's roster. That presents
> teams with a
> once-in-a-generation opportunity to erase their mistakes for good.
> Assuming there will be
> a salary cap on the other side of any lockout, there are plenty of
> examples of bad
> contracts teams would be wise to get rid of. We've identified 10
> below, listed
> alphabetically.
This guy is obviously confused about whatever point he's trying to
make. He talks about how NFL teams get to save money because of
non-guaranteed contracts as though bonuses don't exist, but then,
because they do exist, marginalizes them because the cap
consequences of those bonuses get to be spread over multiple years.
What does how the bonuses get cost accounted have to do with whether
or not they exist?
What is oft misunderstood about the NFL and it's non-guaranteed
contracts is that they only exist because, given the cap and how
it's designed, that's the way the players want it anyway. Take the
case of a player who signs a $40MM five year deal with $25MM to be
guaranteed. He has a simple choice. Take the $25MM in the form of
$5MM per year in guaranteed money, or take the whole $25MM up front
in the form of a signing bonus. Which would you take? Sure, you
could make the case that the whole $40MM should be guaranteed, but
that would be a case for increasing the total amount of money to be
paid to players, and not a case for guaranteed contracts. If the
total amount of money to be paid to players remained the same, and
all contracts had to be guaranteed, then that $40MM would never have
been the deal in that case to begin with.
The whole "non-guarenteed contract" in the NFL is a bad thing
argument is bogus on its face.
== 2 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:49 am
From: Johnctx
Remy McSwain wrote:
> "buRford" <buRford@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
> news:7h4gp590ur41v69ul3kaq8jo15t7d4j60v@4ax.com...
>> Well, VG made another Top Ten list ;)
>>
>>
>> Ten logical cap casualties for 2010
>> By Bill Barnwell
>> Football Outsiders
>>
>> While NFL owners appear willing to lock out their players in 2011,
>> they already have one
>> advantage that none of the owners in other professional sports
>> have: nonguaranteed
>> contracts. While a team in virtually any other sport is stuck
>> paying an underperforming
>> player for the full length of his contract, NFL organizations can
>> choose to cut a player,
>> and avoid paying any future bonuses and base salaries due to him.
>>
>>
>> Normally, there's a downside to that move. Players receive the
>> cash from a signing bonus
>> immediately upon signing a deal, but teams are allowed to spread
>> the cap hit from a
>> signing bonus across the length of a contract.
>>
>>
>> For example, a $10 million signing bonus on a five-year deal
>> results in a cap hit of $2
>> million in each of those five seasons (in addition to a player's
>> base salary, incentives
>> and other bonuses). When a player is released or traded, the bonus
>> money assigned to the
>> cap in future years is accelerated onto the current year's cap,
>> forcing the team to devote
>> a portion of its precious cap space to players who are no longer
>> on the roster. That's
>> commonly known as "dead money."
>>
>>
>> This year, though, things are different. Because this is an
>> uncapped year, teams can
>> release players with onerous base salaries and large signing
>> bonuses without having to
>> worry about cutting corners on this year's roster. That presents
>> teams with a
>> once-in-a-generation opportunity to erase their mistakes for good.
>> Assuming there will be
>> a salary cap on the other side of any lockout, there are plenty of
>> examples of bad
>> contracts teams would be wise to get rid of. We've identified 10
>> below, listed
>> alphabetically.
>
> This guy is obviously confused about whatever point he's trying to
> make. He talks about how NFL teams get to save money because of
> non-guaranteed contracts as though bonuses don't exist, but then,
> because they do exist, marginalizes them because the cap
> consequences of those bonuses get to be spread over multiple years.
> What does how the bonuses get cost accounted have to do with whether
> or not they exist?
>
> What is oft misunderstood about the NFL and it's non-guaranteed
> contracts is that they only exist because, given the cap and how
> it's designed, that's the way the players want it anyway. Take the
> case of a player who signs a $40MM five year deal with $25MM to be
> guaranteed. He has a simple choice. Take the $25MM in the form of
> $5MM per year in guaranteed money, or take the whole $25MM up front
> in the form of a signing bonus. Which would you take? Sure, you
> could make the case that the whole $40MM should be guaranteed, but
> that would be a case for increasing the total amount of money to be
> paid to players, and not a case for guaranteed contracts. If the
> total amount of money to be paid to players remained the same, and
> all contracts had to be guaranteed, then that $40MM would never have
> been the deal in that case to begin with.
>
> The whole "non-guarenteed contract" in the NFL is a bad thing
> argument is bogus on its face.
>
>
>
There are some guaranteed salaries. The Jets have used it a few times.
With Vilma it was smart. They had cap space & they knew they wouldn't
cut him so you get more of the guaranteed portion out of the way. We did
the same thing with Gholston and that doesn't look too smart now.
The non-guaranteed portion is a two edged sword & has value for player &
team.. If Greene doesn't step up & play so well at the end of the year
then Jones makes $6MM and is a FA. Instead he will make $5MM at the
back end of his career.
== 3 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 7:42 am
From: "Remy McSwain"
"Johnctx" <jc@spamtx.net> wrote in message
news:H8-dnR24SbLuyQfWnZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@giganews.com...
> Remy McSwain wrote:
>> "buRford" <buRford@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
>> news:7h4gp590ur41v69ul3kaq8jo15t7d4j60v@4ax.com...
>>> Well, VG made another Top Ten list ;)
>>>
>>>
>>> Ten logical cap casualties for 2010
>>> By Bill Barnwell
>>> Football Outsiders
>>>
>>> While NFL owners appear willing to lock out their players in
>>> 2011, they already have one
>>> advantage that none of the owners in other professional sports
>>> have: nonguaranteed
>>> contracts. While a team in virtually any other sport is stuck
>>> paying an underperforming
>>> player for the full length of his contract, NFL organizations
>>> can choose to cut a player,
>>> and avoid paying any future bonuses and base salaries due to
>>> him.
>>>
>>>
>>> Normally, there's a downside to that move. Players receive the
>>> cash from a signing bonus
>>> immediately upon signing a deal, but teams are allowed to spread
>>> the cap hit from a
>>> signing bonus across the length of a contract.
>>>
>>>
>>> For example, a $10 million signing bonus on a five-year deal
>>> results in a cap hit of $2
>>> million in each of those five seasons (in addition to a player's
>>> base salary, incentives
>>> and other bonuses). When a player is released or traded, the
>>> bonus money assigned to the
>>> cap in future years is accelerated onto the current year's cap,
>>> forcing the team to devote
>>> a portion of its precious cap space to players who are no longer
>>> on the roster. That's
>>> commonly known as "dead money."
>>>
>>>
>>> This year, though, things are different. Because this is an
>>> uncapped year, teams can
>>> release players with onerous base salaries and large signing
>>> bonuses without having to
>>> worry about cutting corners on this year's roster. That presents
>>> teams with a
>>> once-in-a-generation opportunity to erase their mistakes for
>>> good. Assuming there will be
>>> a salary cap on the other side of any lockout, there are plenty
>>> of examples of bad
>>> contracts teams would be wise to get rid of. We've identified 10
>>> below, listed
>>> alphabetically.
>>
>> This guy is obviously confused about whatever point he's trying
>> to make. He talks about how NFL teams get to save money because
>> of non-guaranteed contracts as though bonuses don't exist, but
>> then, because they do exist, marginalizes them because the cap
>> consequences of those bonuses get to be spread over multiple
>> years. What does how the bonuses get cost accounted have to do
>> with whether or not they exist?
>>
>> What is oft misunderstood about the NFL and it's non-guaranteed
>> contracts is that they only exist because, given the cap and how
>> it's designed, that's the way the players want it anyway. Take
>> the case of a player who signs a $40MM five year deal with $25MM
>> to be guaranteed. He has a simple choice. Take the $25MM in the
>> form of $5MM per year in guaranteed money, or take the whole
>> $25MM up front in the form of a signing bonus. Which would you
>> take? Sure, you could make the case that the whole $40MM should
>> be guaranteed, but that would be a case for increasing the total
>> amount of money to be paid to players, and not a case for
>> guaranteed contracts. If the total amount of money to be paid to
>> players remained the same, and all contracts had to be
>> guaranteed, then that $40MM would never have been the deal in
>> that case to begin with.
>>
>> The whole "non-guarenteed contract" in the NFL is a bad thing
>> argument is bogus on its face.
>>
>>
>>
>
> There are some guaranteed salaries. The Jets have used it a few
> times.
>
> With Vilma it was smart. They had cap space & they knew they
> wouldn't cut him so you get more of the guaranteed portion out of
> the way. We did the same thing with Gholston and that doesn't look
> too smart now.
>
> The non-guaranteed portion is a two edged sword & has value for
> player & team.. If Greene doesn't step up & play so well at the
> end of the year then Jones makes $6MM and is a FA. Instead he
> will make $5MM at the back end of his career.
All of which provides further proof that there is no rule against
non-guaranteed contracts, and that it's a natural consequence of the
way the salary cap was designed.
== 4 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 7:55 am
From: MZ
Remy McSwain wrote:
> "Johnctx" <jc@spamtx.net> wrote in message
> news:H8-dnR24SbLuyQfWnZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> Remy McSwain wrote:
>>> "buRford" <buRford@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
>>> news:7h4gp590ur41v69ul3kaq8jo15t7d4j60v@4ax.com...
>>>> Well, VG made another Top Ten list ;)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ten logical cap casualties for 2010
>>>> By Bill Barnwell
>>>> Football Outsiders
>>>>
>>>> While NFL owners appear willing to lock out their players in
>>>> 2011, they already have one
>>>> advantage that none of the owners in other professional sports
>>>> have: nonguaranteed
>>>> contracts. While a team in virtually any other sport is stuck
>>>> paying an underperforming
>>>> player for the full length of his contract, NFL organizations
>>>> can choose to cut a player,
>>>> and avoid paying any future bonuses and base salaries due to
>>>> him.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Normally, there's a downside to that move. Players receive the
>>>> cash from a signing bonus
>>>> immediately upon signing a deal, but teams are allowed to spread
>>>> the cap hit from a
>>>> signing bonus across the length of a contract.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For example, a $10 million signing bonus on a five-year deal
>>>> results in a cap hit of $2
>>>> million in each of those five seasons (in addition to a player's
>>>> base salary, incentives
>>>> and other bonuses). When a player is released or traded, the
>>>> bonus money assigned to the
>>>> cap in future years is accelerated onto the current year's cap,
>>>> forcing the team to devote
>>>> a portion of its precious cap space to players who are no longer
>>>> on the roster. That's
>>>> commonly known as "dead money."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This year, though, things are different. Because this is an
>>>> uncapped year, teams can
>>>> release players with onerous base salaries and large signing
>>>> bonuses without having to
>>>> worry about cutting corners on this year's roster. That presents
>>>> teams with a
>>>> once-in-a-generation opportunity to erase their mistakes for
>>>> good. Assuming there will be
>>>> a salary cap on the other side of any lockout, there are plenty
>>>> of examples of bad
>>>> contracts teams would be wise to get rid of. We've identified 10
>>>> below, listed
>>>> alphabetically.
>>> This guy is obviously confused about whatever point he's trying
>>> to make. He talks about how NFL teams get to save money because
>>> of non-guaranteed contracts as though bonuses don't exist, but
>>> then, because they do exist, marginalizes them because the cap
>>> consequences of those bonuses get to be spread over multiple
>>> years. What does how the bonuses get cost accounted have to do
>>> with whether or not they exist?
>>>
>>> What is oft misunderstood about the NFL and it's non-guaranteed
>>> contracts is that they only exist because, given the cap and how
>>> it's designed, that's the way the players want it anyway. Take
>>> the case of a player who signs a $40MM five year deal with $25MM
>>> to be guaranteed. He has a simple choice. Take the $25MM in the
>>> form of $5MM per year in guaranteed money, or take the whole
>>> $25MM up front in the form of a signing bonus. Which would you
>>> take? Sure, you could make the case that the whole $40MM should
>>> be guaranteed, but that would be a case for increasing the total
>>> amount of money to be paid to players, and not a case for
>>> guaranteed contracts. If the total amount of money to be paid to
>>> players remained the same, and all contracts had to be
>>> guaranteed, then that $40MM would never have been the deal in
>>> that case to begin with.
>>>
>>> The whole "non-guarenteed contract" in the NFL is a bad thing
>>> argument is bogus on its face.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> There are some guaranteed salaries. The Jets have used it a few
>> times.
>>
>> With Vilma it was smart. They had cap space & they knew they
>> wouldn't cut him so you get more of the guaranteed portion out of
>> the way. We did the same thing with Gholston and that doesn't look
>> too smart now.
>>
>> The non-guaranteed portion is a two edged sword & has value for
>> player & team.. If Greene doesn't step up & play so well at the
>> end of the year then Jones makes $6MM and is a FA. Instead he
>> will make $5MM at the back end of his career.
>
> All of which provides further proof that there is no rule against
> non-guaranteed contracts, and that it's a natural consequence of the
> way the salary cap was designed.
I don't think the author says otherwise. I think all he said was that
it's allowed in the NFL and apparently not in other leagues.
== 5 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 8:00 am
From: "Ray O'Hara"
"buRford" <buRford@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
news:cvbjp55v08h5rh6h65km0qtsehgk6th37q@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 21:41:15 -0500, "papa.carl44"
> <papadotcarl@nospamverizon.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Glenn Greenstein" <lexa695@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:25c24de0-d058-4672-a2d1-845cd9a5938b@33g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>>On Mar 11, 12:05 pm, "papa.carl44" <papadotc...@nospamverizon.net>
>>wrote:
>>> "Johnctx" <j...@spamtx.net> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:k--dnTm2Vro6nQTWnZ2dnUVZ_gWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > Ray O'Hara wrote:
>>> >> "Johnctx" <j...@spamtx.net> wrote in message
>>> >>news:y4CdnRXeBJZNZQXWnZ2dnUVZ_g8AAAAA@giganews.com...
>>> >>> Ray O'Hara wrote:
>>> >>>> "buRford" <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
>>> >>>>news:7h4gp590ur41v69ul3kaq8jo15t7d4j60v@4ax.com...
>>> >>>>> Well, VG made another Top Ten list ;)
>>>
>>> >>>>> Ten logical cap casualties for 2010
>>> >>>>> By Bill Barnwell
>>> >>>>> Football Outsiders
>>>
>>> >>>> 2010 is an uncapped year.
>>> >>>> and more importantly its a year with no minimum.
>>> >>>> teams can dump players with no consequences.
>>> >>>> the players and agents see uncapped and think the sky is the limit.
>>> >>>> the owners see no minimum and the floor is the limit.
>>> >>>> big stars will get their money.
>>> >>>> the average guy and rookies will get screwed.
>>> >>> for the 100th time dead money hits the team in the first capped
>>> >>> year.
>>> >>> teams will cut if the salary is unreasonable but won't load up on
>>> >>> dead
>>> >>> cap space.
>>>
>>> >> How do you know that? What's yor source that the dead money is just
>>> >> saved
>>> >> for the future?
>>> >> a deal has to be negotiated and everything is open to negotiation.
>>>
>>> > Ray it has been posted before...if i have time I will look for it.
>>>
>>> It's really not an uncapped year then....a delayed year or something
>>> maybe....but the league should consider becoming The National Financial
>>> League...forget about football. :-)
>>
>>If you think this is bad, try following the NBA.
>>Wow, that was a great trade in terms of freeing up cap space. Who were
>>the players involved again?
>>
>>When somebody said that league is thugs in short pants they were mostly
>>right....that game has become unwatchable to me. Curling was more fun to
>>watch.
>>
>
> Yeah, it breaks me heart.
> Always loved watching the NBA... can't watch anymore, but more because it
> aint Basketball
> anymore, with all the uncalled traveling & palming that goes on these
> days.
it's not travelling it's a "jump stop".
I blame Pat Riley for the mug & thg ball it's become. he started that crap
when he coached Orlando.
== 6 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 8:02 am
From: "Ray O'Hara"
"Remy McSwain" <Paradis70080@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:au-dne80zbqL_AfWnZ2dnUVZ_o-dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>
> "Johnctx" <jc@spamtx.net> wrote in message
> news:H8-dnR24SbLuyQfWnZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> Remy McSwain wrote:
>>> "buRford" <buRford@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
>>> news:7h4gp590ur41v69ul3kaq8jo15t7d4j60v@4ax.com...
>>>> Well, VG made another Top Ten list ;)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ten logical cap casualties for 2010
>>>> By Bill Barnwell
>>>> Football Outsiders
>>>>
>>>> While NFL owners appear willing to lock out their players in 2011, they
>>>> already have one
>>>> advantage that none of the owners in other professional sports have:
>>>> nonguaranteed
>>>> contracts. While a team in virtually any other sport is stuck paying an
>>>> underperforming
>>>> player for the full length of his contract, NFL organizations can
>>>> choose to cut a player,
>>>> and avoid paying any future bonuses and base salaries due to him.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Normally, there's a downside to that move. Players receive the cash
>>>> from a signing bonus
>>>> immediately upon signing a deal, but teams are allowed to spread the
>>>> cap hit from a
>>>> signing bonus across the length of a contract.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For example, a $10 million signing bonus on a five-year deal results in
>>>> a cap hit of $2
>>>> million in each of those five seasons (in addition to a player's base
>>>> salary, incentives
>>>> and other bonuses). When a player is released or traded, the bonus
>>>> money assigned to the
>>>> cap in future years is accelerated onto the current year's cap, forcing
>>>> the team to devote
>>>> a portion of its precious cap space to players who are no longer on the
>>>> roster. That's
>>>> commonly known as "dead money."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This year, though, things are different. Because this is an uncapped
>>>> year, teams can
>>>> release players with onerous base salaries and large signing bonuses
>>>> without having to
>>>> worry about cutting corners on this year's roster. That presents teams
>>>> with a
>>>> once-in-a-generation opportunity to erase their mistakes for good.
>>>> Assuming there will be
>>>> a salary cap on the other side of any lockout, there are plenty of
>>>> examples of bad
>>>> contracts teams would be wise to get rid of. We've identified 10 below,
>>>> listed
>>>> alphabetically.
>>>
>>> This guy is obviously confused about whatever point he's trying to make.
>>> He talks about how NFL teams get to save money because of non-guaranteed
>>> contracts as though bonuses don't exist, but then, because they do
>>> exist, marginalizes them because the cap consequences of those bonuses
>>> get to be spread over multiple years. What does how the bonuses get cost
>>> accounted have to do with whether or not they exist?
>>>
>>> What is oft misunderstood about the NFL and it's non-guaranteed
>>> contracts is that they only exist because, given the cap and how it's
>>> designed, that's the way the players want it anyway. Take the case of a
>>> player who signs a $40MM five year deal with $25MM to be guaranteed. He
>>> has a simple choice. Take the $25MM in the form of $5MM per year in
>>> guaranteed money, or take the whole $25MM up front in the form of a
>>> signing bonus. Which would you take? Sure, you could make the case
>>> that the whole $40MM should be guaranteed, but that would be a case for
>>> increasing the total amount of money to be paid to players, and not a
>>> case for guaranteed contracts. If the total amount of money to be paid
>>> to players remained the same, and all contracts had to be guaranteed,
>>> then that $40MM would never have been the deal in that case to begin
>>> with.
>>>
>>> The whole "non-guarenteed contract" in the NFL is a bad thing argument
>>> is bogus on its face.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> There are some guaranteed salaries. The Jets have used it a few times.
>>
>> With Vilma it was smart. They had cap space & they knew they wouldn't
>> cut him so you get more of the guaranteed portion out of the way. We did
>> the same thing with Gholston and that doesn't look too smart now.
>>
>> The non-guaranteed portion is a two edged sword & has value for player &
>> team.. If Greene doesn't step up & play so well at the end of the year
>> then Jones makes $6MM and is a FA. Instead he will make $5MM at the back
>> end of his career.
>
> All of which provides further proof that there is no rule against
> non-guaranteed contracts, and that it's a natural consequence of the way
> the salary cap was designed.
>
There weren't any guaranteed contracts before the cap.
== 7 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 8:11 am
From: "Remy McSwain"
"MZ" <mark@nospam.void> wrote in message
news:YvmdnT20acWS-QfWnZ2dnUVZ_ternZ2d@giganews.com...
> Remy McSwain wrote:
>> "Johnctx" <jc@spamtx.net> wrote in message
>> news:H8-dnR24SbLuyQfWnZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>> Remy McSwain wrote:
>>>> "buRford" <buRford@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:7h4gp590ur41v69ul3kaq8jo15t7d4j60v@4ax.com...
>>>>> Well, VG made another Top Ten list ;)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ten logical cap casualties for 2010
>>>>> By Bill Barnwell
>>>>> Football Outsiders
>>>>>
>>>>> While NFL owners appear willing to lock out their players in
>>>>> 2011, they already have one
>>>>> advantage that none of the owners in other professional sports
>>>>> have: nonguaranteed
>>>>> contracts. While a team in virtually any other sport is stuck
>>>>> paying an underperforming
>>>>> player for the full length of his contract, NFL organizations
>>>>> can choose to cut a player,
>>>>> and avoid paying any future bonuses and base salaries due to
>>>>> him.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Normally, there's a downside to that move. Players receive the
>>>>> cash from a signing bonus
>>>>> immediately upon signing a deal, but teams are allowed to
>>>>> spread the cap hit from a
>>>>> signing bonus across the length of a contract.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> For example, a $10 million signing bonus on a five-year deal
>>>>> results in a cap hit of $2
>>>>> million in each of those five seasons (in addition to a
>>>>> player's base salary, incentives
>>>>> and other bonuses). When a player is released or traded, the
>>>>> bonus money assigned to the
>>>>> cap in future years is accelerated onto the current year's
>>>>> cap, forcing the team to devote
>>>>> a portion of its precious cap space to players who are no
>>>>> longer on the roster. That's
>>>>> commonly known as "dead money."
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This year, though, things are different. Because this is an
>>>>> uncapped year, teams can
>>>>> release players with onerous base salaries and large signing
>>>>> bonuses without having to
>>>>> worry about cutting corners on this year's roster. That
>>>>> presents teams with a
>>>>> once-in-a-generation opportunity to erase their mistakes for
>>>>> good. Assuming there will be
>>>>> a salary cap on the other side of any lockout, there are
>>>>> plenty of examples of bad
>>>>> contracts teams would be wise to get rid of. We've identified
>>>>> 10 below, listed
>>>>> alphabetically.
>>>> This guy is obviously confused about whatever point he's trying
>>>> to make. He talks about how NFL teams get to save money
>>>> because of non-guaranteed contracts as though bonuses don't
>>>> exist, but then, because they do exist, marginalizes them
>>>> because the cap consequences of those bonuses get to be spread
>>>> over multiple years. What does how the bonuses get cost
>>>> accounted have to do with whether or not they exist?
>>>>
>>>> What is oft misunderstood about the NFL and it's non-guaranteed
>>>> contracts is that they only exist because, given the cap and
>>>> how it's designed, that's the way the players want it anyway.
>>>> Take the case of a player who signs a $40MM five year deal with
>>>> $25MM to be guaranteed. He has a simple choice. Take the
>>>> $25MM in the form of $5MM per year in guaranteed money, or take
>>>> the whole $25MM up front in the form of a signing bonus. Which
>>>> would you take? Sure, you could make the case that the whole
>>>> $40MM should be guaranteed, but that would be a case for
>>>> increasing the total amount of money to be paid to players, and
>>>> not a case for guaranteed contracts. If the total amount of
>>>> money to be paid to players remained the same, and all
>>>> contracts had to be guaranteed, then that $40MM would never
>>>> have been the deal in that case to begin with.
>>>>
>>>> The whole "non-guarenteed contract" in the NFL is a bad thing
>>>> argument is bogus on its face.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> There are some guaranteed salaries. The Jets have used it a few
>>> times.
>>>
>>> With Vilma it was smart. They had cap space & they knew they
>>> wouldn't cut him so you get more of the guaranteed portion out
>>> of the way. We did the same thing with Gholston and that doesn't
>>> look too smart now.
>>>
>>> The non-guaranteed portion is a two edged sword & has value for
>>> player & team.. If Greene doesn't step up & play so well at the
>>> end of the year then Jones makes $6MM and is a FA. Instead he
>>> will make $5MM at the back end of his career.
>>
>> All of which provides further proof that there is no rule against
>> non-guaranteed contracts, and that it's a natural consequence of
>> the way the salary cap was designed.
>
> I don't think the author says otherwise. I think all he said was
> that it's allowed in the NFL and apparently not in other leagues.
I agree that the author didn't say otherwise. It's just a pet peeve
I have about how the whole issue of non-guaranteed contracts are
misperceived in many circles.
== 8 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 8:14 am
From: "Remy McSwain"
"Ray O'Hara" <raymond-ohara@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hndojg$qc8$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "Remy McSwain" <Paradis70080@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:au-dne80zbqL_AfWnZ2dnUVZ_o-dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>
>> "Johnctx" <jc@spamtx.net> wrote in message
>> news:H8-dnR24SbLuyQfWnZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>> Remy McSwain wrote:
>>>> "buRford" <buRford@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:7h4gp590ur41v69ul3kaq8jo15t7d4j60v@4ax.com...
>>>>> Well, VG made another Top Ten list ;)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ten logical cap casualties for 2010
>>>>> By Bill Barnwell
>>>>> Football Outsiders
>>>>>
>>>>> While NFL owners appear willing to lock out their players in
>>>>> 2011, they already have one
>>>>> advantage that none of the owners in other professional sports
>>>>> have: nonguaranteed
>>>>> contracts. While a team in virtually any other sport is stuck
>>>>> paying an underperforming
>>>>> player for the full length of his contract, NFL organizations
>>>>> can choose to cut a player,
>>>>> and avoid paying any future bonuses and base salaries due to
>>>>> him.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Normally, there's a downside to that move. Players receive the
>>>>> cash from a signing bonus
>>>>> immediately upon signing a deal, but teams are allowed to
>>>>> spread the cap hit from a
>>>>> signing bonus across the length of a contract.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> For example, a $10 million signing bonus on a five-year deal
>>>>> results in a cap hit of $2
>>>>> million in each of those five seasons (in addition to a
>>>>> player's base salary, incentives
>>>>> and other bonuses). When a player is released or traded, the
>>>>> bonus money assigned to the
>>>>> cap in future years is accelerated onto the current year's
>>>>> cap, forcing the team to devote
>>>>> a portion of its precious cap space to players who are no
>>>>> longer on the roster. That's
>>>>> commonly known as "dead money."
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This year, though, things are different. Because this is an
>>>>> uncapped year, teams can
>>>>> release players with onerous base salaries and large signing
>>>>> bonuses without having to
>>>>> worry about cutting corners on this year's roster. That
>>>>> presents teams with a
>>>>> once-in-a-generation opportunity to erase their mistakes for
>>>>> good. Assuming there will be
>>>>> a salary cap on the other side of any lockout, there are
>>>>> plenty of examples of bad
>>>>> contracts teams would be wise to get rid of. We've identified
>>>>> 10 below, listed
>>>>> alphabetically.
>>>>
>>>> This guy is obviously confused about whatever point he's trying
>>>> to make. He talks about how NFL teams get to save money because
>>>> of non-guaranteed contracts as though bonuses don't exist, but
>>>> then, because they do exist, marginalizes them because the cap
>>>> consequences of those bonuses get to be spread over multiple
>>>> years. What does how the bonuses get cost accounted have to do
>>>> with whether or not they exist?
>>>>
>>>> What is oft misunderstood about the NFL and it's non-guaranteed
>>>> contracts is that they only exist because, given the cap and
>>>> how it's designed, that's the way the players want it anyway.
>>>> Take the case of a player who signs a $40MM five year deal with
>>>> $25MM to be guaranteed. He has a simple choice. Take the
>>>> $25MM in the form of $5MM per year in guaranteed money, or take
>>>> the whole $25MM up front in the form of a signing bonus. Which
>>>> would you take? Sure, you could make the case that the whole
>>>> $40MM should be guaranteed, but that would be a case for
>>>> increasing the total amount of money to be paid to players, and
>>>> not a case for guaranteed contracts. If the total amount of
>>>> money to be paid to players remained the same, and all
>>>> contracts had to be guaranteed, then that $40MM would never
>>>> have been the deal in that case to begin with.
>>>>
>>>> The whole "non-guarenteed contract" in the NFL is a bad thing
>>>> argument is bogus on its face.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> There are some guaranteed salaries. The Jets have used it a few
>>> times.
>>>
>>> With Vilma it was smart. They had cap space & they knew they
>>> wouldn't cut him so you get more of the guaranteed portion out
>>> of the way. We did the same thing with Gholston and that doesn't
>>> look too smart now.
>>>
>>> The non-guaranteed portion is a two edged sword & has value for
>>> player & team.. If Greene doesn't step up & play so well at the
>>> end of the year then Jones makes $6MM and is a FA. Instead he
>>> will make $5MM at the back end of his career.
>>
>> All of which provides further proof that there is no rule against
>> non-guaranteed contracts, and that it's a natural consequence of
>> the way the salary cap was designed.
>>
>
> There weren't any guaranteed contracts before the cap.
Yes, and instead of the NFL following suit with, for instance, MLB,
and going to a system of no cap, but guaranteed contracts, they,
with the players, wisely chose to go in a different direction. IMO,
this lead to the rise of the NFL to heights of well above where it
would otherwise exist today.
== 9 of 9 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 8:28 am
From: MZ
Remy McSwain wrote:
> "MZ" <mark@nospam.void> wrote in message
> news:YvmdnT20acWS-QfWnZ2dnUVZ_ternZ2d@giganews.com...
>> Remy McSwain wrote:
>>> "Johnctx" <jc@spamtx.net> wrote in message
>>> news:H8-dnR24SbLuyQfWnZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>> Remy McSwain wrote:
>>>>> "buRford" <buRford@buR.ford.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:7h4gp590ur41v69ul3kaq8jo15t7d4j60v@4ax.com...
>>>>>> Well, VG made another Top Ten list ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ten logical cap casualties for 2010
>>>>>> By Bill Barnwell
>>>>>> Football Outsiders
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While NFL owners appear willing to lock out their players in
>>>>>> 2011, they already have one
>>>>>> advantage that none of the owners in other professional sports
>>>>>> have: nonguaranteed
>>>>>> contracts. While a team in virtually any other sport is stuck
>>>>>> paying an underperforming
>>>>>> player for the full length of his contract, NFL organizations
>>>>>> can choose to cut a player,
>>>>>> and avoid paying any future bonuses and base salaries due to
>>>>>> him.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Normally, there's a downside to that move. Players receive the
>>>>>> cash from a signing bonus
>>>>>> immediately upon signing a deal, but teams are allowed to
>>>>>> spread the cap hit from a
>>>>>> signing bonus across the length of a contract.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For example, a $10 million signing bonus on a five-year deal
>>>>>> results in a cap hit of $2
>>>>>> million in each of those five seasons (in addition to a
>>>>>> player's base salary, incentives
>>>>>> and other bonuses). When a player is released or traded, the
>>>>>> bonus money assigned to the
>>>>>> cap in future years is accelerated onto the current year's
>>>>>> cap, forcing the team to devote
>>>>>> a portion of its precious cap space to players who are no
>>>>>> longer on the roster. That's
>>>>>> commonly known as "dead money."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This year, though, things are different. Because this is an
>>>>>> uncapped year, teams can
>>>>>> release players with onerous base salaries and large signing
>>>>>> bonuses without having to
>>>>>> worry about cutting corners on this year's roster. That
>>>>>> presents teams with a
>>>>>> once-in-a-generation opportunity to erase their mistakes for
>>>>>> good. Assuming there will be
>>>>>> a salary cap on the other side of any lockout, there are
>>>>>> plenty of examples of bad
>>>>>> contracts teams would be wise to get rid of. We've identified
>>>>>> 10 below, listed
>>>>>> alphabetically.
>>>>> This guy is obviously confused about whatever point he's trying
>>>>> to make. He talks about how NFL teams get to save money
>>>>> because of non-guaranteed contracts as though bonuses don't
>>>>> exist, but then, because they do exist, marginalizes them
>>>>> because the cap consequences of those bonuses get to be spread
>>>>> over multiple years. What does how the bonuses get cost
>>>>> accounted have to do with whether or not they exist?
>>>>>
>>>>> What is oft misunderstood about the NFL and it's non-guaranteed
>>>>> contracts is that they only exist because, given the cap and
>>>>> how it's designed, that's the way the players want it anyway.
>>>>> Take the case of a player who signs a $40MM five year deal with
>>>>> $25MM to be guaranteed. He has a simple choice. Take the
>>>>> $25MM in the form of $5MM per year in guaranteed money, or take
>>>>> the whole $25MM up front in the form of a signing bonus. Which
>>>>> would you take? Sure, you could make the case that the whole
>>>>> $40MM should be guaranteed, but that would be a case for
>>>>> increasing the total amount of money to be paid to players, and
>>>>> not a case for guaranteed contracts. If the total amount of
>>>>> money to be paid to players remained the same, and all
>>>>> contracts had to be guaranteed, then that $40MM would never
>>>>> have been the deal in that case to begin with.
>>>>>
>>>>> The whole "non-guarenteed contract" in the NFL is a bad thing
>>>>> argument is bogus on its face.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> There are some guaranteed salaries. The Jets have used it a few
>>>> times.
>>>>
>>>> With Vilma it was smart. They had cap space & they knew they
>>>> wouldn't cut him so you get more of the guaranteed portion out
>>>> of the way. We did the same thing with Gholston and that doesn't
>>>> look too smart now.
>>>>
>>>> The non-guaranteed portion is a two edged sword & has value for
>>>> player & team.. If Greene doesn't step up & play so well at the
>>>> end of the year then Jones makes $6MM and is a FA. Instead he
>>>> will make $5MM at the back end of his career.
>>> All of which provides further proof that there is no rule against
>>> non-guaranteed contracts, and that it's a natural consequence of
>>> the way the salary cap was designed.
>> I don't think the author says otherwise. I think all he said was
>> that it's allowed in the NFL and apparently not in other leagues.
>
> I agree that the author didn't say otherwise. It's just a pet peeve
> I have about how the whole issue of non-guaranteed contracts are
> misperceived in many circles.
Yeah, I've seen some people say that it's unfair to the players. They
fail to recognize that contracts have adapted with this in mind and that
bonus money and the overall guaranteed money of the contract tends to be
lower when the entire thing is guaranteed.
In the end, as far as fairness goes, it doesn't really matter. It's
still an open market and players can still negotiate the best possible
deal. The exception to this is the franchise/transition tags, RFA/ERFA,
and the draft. If the NFLPA was really interested in "fairness", they'd
demand that tagging and restricted free agency is eliminated. But I
haven't heard that that's even on the table.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Jets sign S Brodney Pool...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/a73a619bb35a9f1a?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:41 am
From: Johnctx
buRford wrote:
> 1 year... $1.3mil.
>
> Lots of concussions... we'll see.
>
> Looks like Tanny is going for the athletes with issues, to fill out the Roster.
> Building a strange team, these days... lots of question marks, with a lot of upside, if
> the issues are in the past. We'll see...
Pool & Coles are one knock on the coconut away from being done.
buRf, it is the ugly part of this sport and the problem is how many were
hidden at the jhs, hs, & college level? It is a one year deal.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:56 am
From: Johnctx
Johnctx wrote:
> buRford wrote:
>> 1 year... $1.3mil.
>>
>> Lots of concussions... we'll see.
>>
>> Looks like Tanny is going for the athletes with issues, to fill out
>> the Roster.
>> Building a strange team, these days... lots of question marks, with a
>> lot of upside, if
>> the issues are in the past. We'll see...
>
> Pool & Coles are one knock on the coconut away from being done.
>
> buRf, it is the ugly part of this sport and the problem is how many were
> hidden at the jhs, hs, & college level? It is a one year deal.
btw you need to get over your hatred of anything Texas.
:)
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Washington
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/5cbcd8f7b52cb99d?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:51 am
From: Johnctx
Harlan Lachman wrote:
> In article <y4CdnRreBJa_ZQXWnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> Johnctx <jc@spamtx.net> wrote:
>
>> Harlan Lachman wrote:
>>> In article <wrqdnQMmx6ffEgrWnZ2dnUVZ_ukAAAAA@giganews.com>,
>>> Johnctx <jc@spamtx.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Harlan Lachman wrote:
>>>>> In article <Z-qdneNvzM7R5gvWnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>> Johnctx <jc@spamtx.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Harlan Lachman wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <-6CdnT_lHd8BZgnWnZ2dnUVZ_qydnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>>>>>> Johnctx <jc@spamtx.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My first reaction was that we should have tendered him a # 1 but there
>>>>>>>> could be some logic in tendering teh #2. Someone may sign him &
>>>>>>>> eliminate the prolem of negotiating with his inexperienced agent.
>>>>>>>> Who
>>>>>>>> may quite possibly be stupid.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The Jets know who they are negotiating with & have decide to let the
>>>>>>>> market set the price. They couldn't get him to take their money last
>>>>>>>> summer. So the jets have a value in mind & if Washington comes in at
>>>>>>>> that level or lower they sign him. If not & he signs elsewhere we
>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>> his contract to use on a FA we can want.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Washington will make $1.79 MM with the Jets. If he doesn't get paid
>>>>>>>> significantly more than that he will just come back and that is an
>>>>>>>> outcome no one has considered.
>>>>>>> what do you mean no one? I have loved this move from the beginning for
>>>>>>> exactly that reason.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> h
>>>>>> H, after reading this I am thinking about few things:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A. Did they commit to tender him a 2nd if Washington showed up in camp &
>>>>>> in this way allowing him to see the market because with a #1 tender he
>>>>>> never sees the market?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> B. The difference between a #1 & #2 is insignificant in a uncapped year
>>>>>> that they will sign him.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/19044/cbawatch-restricted-fre
>>>>>> e-
>>>>>> age
>>>>>> nts
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2010 Free Agency
>>>>>> Restricted Free Agency (4 Accrued Seasons); Draft Class of 2006
>>>>>> Tender offer & compensation Salary
>>>>>> 1) ROFR $1,176,000
>>>>>> 2) ROFR & Original Draft $1,176,000 (or 110 percent of last year's
>>>>>> compensation)
>>>>>> 3) ROFR & 2nd $1,759,000 (or 110 percent of last year's compensation)
>>>>>> 4) ROFR & 1st $2,521,000 (or 110 percent of last year's compensation)
>>>>>> 5) ROFR & 1st/3rd $3,168,000 (or 110 percent of last year's
>>>>>> compensation)
>>>>>> Restricted Free Agency (5 Accrued Seasons); Draft Class of 2005
>>>>>> 1) ROFR $1,226,000
>>>>>> 2) ROFR & Original Draft $1,226,000 (or 110 percent of last year's
>>>>>> compensation)
>>>>>> 3) ROFR & 2nd $1,809,000 (or 110 percent of last year's compensation)
>>>>>> 4) ROFR & 1st $2,621,000 (or 110 percent of last year's compensation)
>>>>>> 5) ROFR & 1st/3rd $3,268,000 (or 110 percent of last year's
>>>>>> compensation)
>>>>>> *ROFR: Right Of First Refusal
>>>>> John, I think this was all about Keels. I really think they want to make
>>>>> it easy for someone to offer Leon a contract. If he doesn't get a bite,
>>>>> who is Leon going to blame? The Jets. He wasn't worth a 2nd round
>>>>> choice? How is Keels going to explain his move to refuse the $4-5
>>>>> million while Loen gets less than $1.8. And, unless the CBA changes
>>>>> things, he is still an RFA next year two.
>>>>>
>>>>> If he gets an offer, we can match. If he signed it, then he has said
>>>>> what he is worth.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is some debate about ridiculous poison pills. The owners voted to
>>>>> end the practice. It will be part of the next CBA if there is a football
>>>>> league.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is possible no owner is going to offer one and risk the ire of other
>>>>> owners.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unlike Papa, I think losing TJ because he was not willing to negotiate
>>>>> downward with us but was with the Chiefs is fine. Why should we throw
>>>>> away millions (if ESPN was correct, it may be as much as $3.3 million).
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe we lose Leon too. But I want to see how this plays out.
>>>>>
>>>>> harlan
>>>> I agree on Washington but Jones was cheap insurance until we signed him.
>>>> He can still play football as well.
>>> He signed with the Chiefs for 2.8 million, just a fraction short of half
>>> as much as he wanted from the Jets.
>>>
>>> I disagree. Cheap TJ would not have been.
>>>
>>> TJ made a smart move. While he moves behind a weak OL, he will get more
>>> carries in KC than here and maybe a second year.
>>>
>>> H
>> H, $3MM for a starting RB that you could have traded in pre-season to
>> someone desperate. It looks like there is plan to use the $ on
>> Washington so at least unlike Martin we didn't go one season too far.
>
> This is getting old. Complete agreement again.
>
> h
I am glad saner people than me write in here.
:)
==============================================================================
TOPIC: ◆⊙◆ 2010 Cheap wholesale ED Hardy Long Sleeve, AF Long Sleeve, LV Long
Sleeve ect at http://www.rijing-trade.com <Paypal Payment>
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/2310431b5c4dbd9d?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 6:57 am
From: "www.fjrjtrade.com"
Cheap wholesale Long Sleeve
Cheap wholesale Armani Long Sleeve
Cheap wholesale G-STAR Long Sleeve
Cheap wholesale A&F Long Sleeve
Cheap wholesale Christan Audigier Long Sleeve
Cheap wholesale D&G Man Long Sleeve
Cheap wholesale Ecko Long Sleeve
Cheap wholesale ED Hardy Long Sleeve
Cheap wholesale Gucci Long Sleeve
Cheap wholesale Lacoste Long Sleeve
Cheap wholesale LV Long Sleeve
Cheap wholesale Nike Long Sleeve
Cheap wholesale Ralph Lauren POLO Long Sleeve
==============================================================================
TOPIC: PFT: Reports: Merlin Olsen dies at 69
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/9160b0cf9af6ea35?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 7:56 am
From: "Ray O'Hara"
"Johnctx" <jc@spamtx.net> wrote in message
news:XeWdnQuSl_AC0wTWnZ2dnUVZ_sgAAAAA@giganews.com...
> Tutor wrote:
>> On Mar 11, 12:54 pm, Rich - ® © <Rhe...@infi.net> wrote:
>>> Reports: Merlin Olsen dies at 69
>>>
>>> Posted by Michael David Smith on March 11, 2010 11:07 AM ET
>>> Merlin Olsen, the Pro Football Hall of Fame defensive tackle who
>>> played his entire 15-year career for the Los Angeles Rams, has died at
>>> the age of 69, according to reports.
>>>
>>> Howard Balzer of the St. Louis Globe-Democrat reports that Olsen died
>>> early this morning. The Cache Valley Daily, a newspaper based in
>>> Olsen's hometown of Logan, Utah, reports that Olsen was diagnosed with
>>> mesothelioma and had been undergoing several rounds of chemotherapy.
>>>
>>> Olsen played college football at Utah State, and as a senior in 1961
>>> he won the Outland Trophy as the nation's best lineman.
>>>
>>> In 1962 the Rams selected him with the third overall pick in the NFL
>>> draft and the Denver Broncos selected him with the second overall pick
>>> in the AFL draft. He chose the Rams after the rival teams from rival
>>> leagues engaged in a bidding war for his services.
>>>
>>> Olsen was worth the money. He was chosen as Rookie of the Year in
>>> 1962, and he was selected to the Pro Bowl in each of his first 14 NFL
>>> seasons. He retired after the 1976 season and was inducted into the
>>> Hall of Fame in 1982.
>>
>> RIP. Meso is a horrible disease... just horrible. Merlin was an
>> amazing lineman, a great analyst and had a decent stint on TV as a
>> part timer on Little House and the lead role on Father Murphy. Let's
>> not forget all those flower commercials too. In fact, that's the
>> first thing I thought of when reading the news of his death that the
>> flower industry should send his family enough to fill the chapel.
>
>
> Isn't it from asbestos exposure?
>
> I don't remember much of him playing other than being an ALL_pro
> carefully. I do remember him breaking his leg or tearing his knee up in a
> Pro-Bowl Game & wondered why they play that game.
I'm old enough to remember when the fearsome foursome were just that.
Olsen ,Jones, Lundy and Grier, and yeah they lived up to it.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 12 2010 8:28 am
From: "papa.carl44"
"Ray O'Hara" <raymond-ohara@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hndo7f$npk$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "Johnctx" <jc@spamtx.net> wrote in message
> news:XeWdnQuSl_AC0wTWnZ2dnUVZ_sgAAAAA@giganews.com...
>> Tutor wrote:
>>> On Mar 11, 12:54 pm, Rich - ® © <Rhe...@infi.net> wrote:
>>>> Reports: Merlin Olsen dies at 69
>>>>
>>>> Posted by Michael David Smith on March 11, 2010 11:07 AM ET
>>>> Merlin Olsen, the Pro Football Hall of Fame defensive tackle who
>>>> played his entire 15-year career for the Los Angeles Rams, has died at
>>>> the age of 69, according to reports.
>>>>
>>>> Howard Balzer of the St. Louis Globe-Democrat reports that Olsen died
>>>> early this morning. The Cache Valley Daily, a newspaper based in
>>>> Olsen's hometown of Logan, Utah, reports that Olsen was diagnosed with
>>>> mesothelioma and had been undergoing several rounds of chemotherapy.
>>>>
>>>> Olsen played college football at Utah State, and as a senior in 1961
>>>> he won the Outland Trophy as the nation's best lineman.
>>>>
>>>> In 1962 the Rams selected him with the third overall pick in the NFL
>>>> draft and the Denver Broncos selected him with the second overall pick
>>>> in the AFL draft. He chose the Rams after the rival teams from rival
>>>> leagues engaged in a bidding war for his services.
>>>>
>>>> Olsen was worth the money. He was chosen as Rookie of the Year in
>>>> 1962, and he was selected to the Pro Bowl in each of his first 14 NFL
>>>> seasons. He retired after the 1976 season and was inducted into the
>>>> Hall of Fame in 1982.
>>>
>>> RIP. Meso is a horrible disease... just horrible. Merlin was an
>>> amazing lineman, a great analyst and had a decent stint on TV as a
>>> part timer on Little House and the lead role on Father Murphy. Let's
>>> not forget all those flower commercials too. In fact, that's the
>>> first thing I thought of when reading the news of his death that the
>>> flower industry should send his family enough to fill the chapel.
>>
>>
>> Isn't it from asbestos exposure?
>>
>> I don't remember much of him playing other than being an ALL_pro
>> carefully. I do remember him breaking his leg or tearing his knee up in
>> a Pro-Bowl Game & wondered why they play that game.
>
>
> I'm old enough to remember when the fearsome foursome were just that.
> Olsen ,Jones, Lundy and Grier, and yeah they lived up to it.
Damn...your as old as me...maybe...I was already done playing in college
when the fearsome foursome came into being....that was real football back
then. There were very few penalties for D linemen.
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
Posts
All Comments
