Not sure why people are so down on AD. Other than some injury issues, he had a very solid rookie year, especially for a 19 year old. In fact, he's got the best Efficiency Rating among all rookies at 18.2. Lillard is second at 17.4.
Unless he's willing to sign for cheap, I would stay away from him. He's getting up in age and beginning his decline. He's also a one-dimensional player who can't play the run.
Also, you have to keep in mind that these GMs don't have the luxury we do to look 8-10 years down the line. They may not even have a job by the time they have to worry about the backend of these long contracts if they don't win now. The economics of the sport is what it is. All-star type players who are still young will get long contracts from somebody. So you have two options - you can either sit tight and never sign those players and just build from within and sign short-term deals, like the Rays or the Red Sox (this year); or you can go be like the Dodgers, Yankees, and Angels and go for it all. There're pros and cons to each approach, and you can win with either, with the right moves and a little luck.
Fernando wasn't under contract. The Dodgers offered him 300K and he rejected it. He was asking for 800K. The problem for him was that he had no leverage. The Dodgers own his rights and he doesn't have enough ML service to become a FA. So either he plays for the Dodgers or doesn't play in the Majors at all. That is different than NFL players holding out, where they're under contract, but want their current contracts restructured or voided in order to get a bigger deal.
Holding out means you're not even on the active roster and can't participate in team activities. Baseball players do not hold out because their contracts can't be changed. If they want to hold out, that's fine, but it accomplishes nothing.
They also didn't have black and international players or the type of athletes that exist today. Plus baseball players back then made less than the average American. So even if someone was really good at baseball, he may have pursued another profession which offered more financial stability. To say the talent pool in that era was worse than the talent pool today would be an understatement of epic scale.
and he shouldn't. A contract is a contract. both parties put their signatures on the dotted line. If Tex really feels that he's overpaid, give some of that money to charities. At least that will go to a good cause. Giving the Yankees back some of the money is meaningless because the Yankees don't need the money first of all and second, the Union would never allow such a thing. I understand the fan's frustration at these players who make millions of dollars to play a game, but unless you're the owner and it's your money, why care so much about what these people make?
Very true. Clemens is the epitome of ego and pride. He thinks he won because the jury didn't find him guilty, but in reality the trial hurt his broken image even more and like you said, made people despise him even more because of his arrogance.
That's not the first lucky play in SB history, nor will it be the last. Yes, it wasn't designed, but neither are a lot of plays. Manning still had to throw the ball, and Tyree still had to make an incredible catch. It also wasn't designed when the CB slipped and fell when Moss caught the go-ahead TD. Had the Giants lost the game, should that be used as an excuse? Absolutely not. There's no excuses in sports, whether you lose because there was a lucky play or because the ref made a bad call or because a key player is injured.
But why do those great plays have to be diminished to enhance Brady? Hasn't Brady also made plenty of great plays to pull out wins against other teams when it looked like the Pats may lose?
To me, every QB plays within a system. Some systems are better than others. I personally believe that QBs in general get too much credit in wins and too much blame in losses. It's not a one-man game. It doesn't matter how accurate the QB is if the receiver isn't where he's supposed to be. It's a "system" where every part needs to do their job in order to achieve success. The QB is reliant on his OL protecting him and his receivers running their routes correctly and being at the right spot at exactly the precise moment.
Like I said in the previous post, it's never one or the other. If it's all Brady, then you're saying Belichick is irrelevant and has no impact on the success of the team. If it's all system, then Matt Cassel should have a SB ring. And my point is that it's neither. It's a combination. Brady is a HOF QB and Belichick is a HOF coach. And it's because of that combination that the team is a perennial SB contender. There's not another combo in the league right now that can even be mentioned in the same breath as those two.
Your argument is null either because if the receivers are that good then the Pats would keep them in their prime years and not let them go until they're washed up. Was Jerry Rice the same player he was in with the Niners after he left? What about Ochocinco? He was a pro-bowl WR in Cincy but was a benchwarmer in New England.
And no one is discounting that the QB doesn't matter. It's a balance. All great QBs benefited in some ways from their coach, team, teammates, system, etc. It's never just one or the other.
Sorry, I don't know why Peyton Manning is even a choice. He wouldn't even be the first 10 QBs I'd pick to start a playoff game. I'd pick Eli before I'd pick Peyton. At least Eli has shown he can beat Brady in a game that matters before.
When did I ever say he's not a great QB? I would rank him in the top 3 greatest QBs of ALL TIME. So I'm not sure where you're getting from that I said he's not a great QB.
I'm pretty sure I said the last 6 years. Why are we bringing up WRs he had from a decade ago? Are Wes Welker, Randy Moss, Gronk, Brandon Lloyd, and Hernandez all scrubs? So what does it say about Brady that he can win with the Deion Branch's and David Givens' but can't win with All-Pros in Welker and Moss?
Absolutely not. Cassel is not even a legit NFL QB, which shows how great Belichick system is. That you can plug in one of the worst QBs in the league and still win 11 games.
Let's not make it seem like he's got nobody around him. There's only one Jerry Rice. So every other QB has had to make due without him. Brady in the past 6 years has had phenomenal offensive weapons at his disposal. Any other QB in this league would love to have the weapons Brady has this year. Two stud TE's, the best slow receiver in the game, and a speedy WR on the outside who stretches the defense in the vertical game.
I'm pretty sure Cassel never got the opportunity. If I remembered correctly they missed the playoffs that year despite winning 11 games. So we'll never know the answer to that since Cassel never got he chance to show how far he could take the team.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1243&dat=19820304&id=H9ozAAAAIB AJ&sjid=EIcDAAAAIBAJ&pg=2278,5371687
Sorry, I don't know why Peyton Manning is even a choice. He wouldn't even be the first 10 QBs I'd pick to start a playoff game. I'd pick Eli before I'd pick Peyton. At least Eli has shown he can beat Brady in a game that matters before.