Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

NFLPA encouraging agent collusion


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, kungfoodude said:

Correct. The NFLPA is probably the weakest union of all the major professional sports in the US. They have been for years.

Well....we can make fun of JR all we want and rightfully so but I would 100% believe that someone there didn't actually know what a pie chart was. If that person was Peyton Manning that wouldn't surprise me either. 
While a lot of the head of the players are smart people there are most definitely a lot of people involved in that who are not the brightest bulb we got shining here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Fox007 said:

Well....we can make fun of JR all we want and rightfully so but I would 100% believe that someone there didn't actually know what a pie chart was. If that person was Peyton Manning that wouldn't surprise me either. 
While a lot of the head of the players are smart people there are most definitely a lot of people involved in that who are not the brightest bulb we got shining here.

A lot of the challenges of gaining more of the upper hand in organized labor situations revolve around people acting in their own interests. If this country has proven anything, it is that large groups of people will act directly counter to their own interests for some head scratching reasons. 

I was at a utility last year where the operations personnel was unionized but they had no pension. It was in a fairly strong organized labor state so I was surprised to hear that. When I asked one of the full time plant employees how that had transpired, he said years ago the utility offered the option of a pension or to have a one time payout of $15k-20k or something like that. The ops union voted to take the money instead of have a pension. Sometimes it boggles the mind how you can't get people to do what is for the best.

And, in my personal experience, most people are very scared about losing their jobs and the uncertainty that brings. So they would rather take a shitty deal than have to go out and fend for themselves. Athletes are no different. 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

A lot of the challenges of gaining more of the upper hand in organized labor situations revolve around people acting in their own interests. If this country has proven anything, it is that large groups of people will act directly counter to their own interests for some head scratching reasons. 

I was at a utility last year where the operations personnel was unionized but they had no pension. It was in a fairly strong organized labor state so I was surprised to hear that. When I asked one of the full time plant employees how that had transpired, he said years ago the utility offered the option of a pension or to have a one time payout of $15k-20k or something like that. The ops union voted to take the money instead of have a pension. Sometimes it boggles the mind how you can't get people to do what is for the best.

And, in my personal experience, most people are very scared about losing their jobs and the uncertainty that brings. So they would rather take a shitty deal than have to go out and fend for themselves. Athletes are no different. 

A history professor I had would iterate the point in his lectures that humans rarely if ever  have acted based on the long term best interest and likely never will.  I never forgot that and see that point reinforced regularly.

Edited by Moo Daeng
  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Moo Daeng said:

A history professor I had would iterate the point in his lectures that humans will never act based on the long term best interest.  I never forgot that and see that point reinforced regulary.

We are going to have to if we want to progress in space construction projects and OFC any kind of Moon/Mars colonies. There are going to be a lot of science based goals(like Global Warming atm) coming up that will take generations to complete and the people starting them/being involved with them will never see those completed.

We do have to change that mindset.

  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Moo Daeng said:

A history professor I had would iterate the point in his lectures that humans rarely if ever  have acted based on the long term best interest and likely never will.  I never forgot that and see that point reinforced regularly.

The inability to think for the betterment of the group or think in the long term is perplexing. Even more so, you can have a discussion with these people about the right thing to do, have them fully appear to agree and be on board......and then they will still make a selfish, short sighted decision. 

It's insane. 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

A lot of the challenges of gaining more of the upper hand in organized labor situations revolve around people acting in their own interests. If this country has proven anything, it is that large groups of people will act directly counter to their own interests for some head scratching reasons. 

I was at a utility last year where the operations personnel was unionized but they had no pension. It was in a fairly strong organized labor state so I was surprised to hear that. When I asked one of the full time plant employees how that had transpired, he said years ago the utility offered the option of a pension or to have a one time payout of $15k-20k or something like that. The ops union voted to take the money instead of have a pension. Sometimes it boggles the mind how you can't get people to do what is for the best.

And, in my personal experience, most people are very scared about losing their jobs and the uncertainty that brings. So they would rather take a shitty deal than have to go out and fend for themselves. Athletes are no different. 

This is totally true and heartbreaking in situations like this one too:

I won't detail what happened to me but I got disabled while deployed and they tried to offer me 10% disability and a $20,000 pay out. I was like wtf is that poo hell no I need medical care, that non money dries up literally instantly 20k aint poo. So I denied that poo which OFC they don't tell service members they can actually do that but I already did my research. So then you have to go to Lackland in Texas in front of the medical evaluation board with the civilian lawyer. In my case they didn't even see me...they said it was obvious and I got my medical retirement...basically t hey just try to fug over any and everyone...I was still a kid when this happened so needless to say opened my eyes.

Had a friend who also had something happen to him and he took the 10% and $20k...needless to say it didn't/isn't working out so well for him. You don't get certain benefits until 30%+

I tried to tell him but for some reason that 20k seems to be the number that gets people and you damn sure know they know that.

  • Beer 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Fox007 said:

We are going to have to if we want to progress in space construction projects and OFC any kind of Moon/Mars colonies. There are going to be a lot of science based goals(like Global Warming atm) coming up that will take generations to complete and the people starting them/being involved with them will never see those completed.

We do have to change that mindset.

A significant evolution of humanity will have to happen to make us operate as a species for the overall betterment. I don't see that as likely unless there is some dramatic event that extinguishes the overwhelming majority of the race. Even then, we are more likely to revert to purely animal instincts than that.

We are too tribal and individualistic to accomplish that sort of thing in a collaborative manner. And not all our explorations have been solely for the good of all. NASA exists due to a decades long, global ideological war. 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Fox007 said:

This is totally true and heartbreaking in situations like this one too:

I won't detail what happened to me but I got disabled while deployed and they tried to offer me 10% disability and a $20,000 pay out. I was like wtf is that poo hell no I need medical care, that non money dries up literally instantly 20k aint poo. So I denied that poo which OFC they don't tell service members they can actually do that but I already did my research. So then you have to go to Lackland in Texas in front of the medical evaluation board with the civilian lawyer. In my case they didn't even see me...they said it was obvious and I got my medical retirement...basically t hey just try to fug over any and everyone...I was still a kid when this happened so needless to say opened my eyes.

Had a friend who also had something happen to him and he took the 10% and $20k...needless to say it didn't/isn't working out so well for him. You don't get certain benefits until 30%+

I tried to tell him but for some reason that 20k seems to be the number that gets people and you damn sure know they know that.

Not surprised at all. I had a buddy that was a cop in a NC city and he now has a permanent limp from a job related injury(blown out knee from chasing a suspect). They refused to give him a desk job, let him go and he had to sue to get any money. Even still, it was just $100k for a lifetime ailment. No medical, no partial retirement....nothing.

People just don't can't see beyond the one decision in front of them.

  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

We are too tribal and individualistic to accomplish that sort of thing in a collaborative manner. And not all our explorations have been solely for the good of all. NASA exists due to a decades long, global ideological war. 

Seems to me that tribal would be what would help actually. The tribe is humanity, if we come together as a species then that works out just fine.

In terms of the space program: yea but then why else would we be interested in that if not to save ourselves as living is a big reason to do things evolutionarily speaking. It would be dramatically different if we never had to worry about another human killing us....what would we have scienced up and then why?

You build the armor to stop the stick, you sharpen the stick because the other primate can kick your ass, etc. I mean would it be better if we were just huddled up picking ticks off our own backs still but not ever fight? There are  Bonobos  who lounge around and sex it up all day(it's ofc more nuanced than that but still lol)

It's an interesting topic for sure but typing probably isn't the best way to do it. Like so much of science comes from the fact that primates were fighting and killing each other before we even were a thing so when we came along we had the means to build poo and not just take a bigger primate dominating you. 

Edited by Fox007
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

I misread. My apologies 

 

No worries, I didn't see the response.

Quote

It's an interesting topic for sure but typing probably isn't the best way to do it. Like so much of science comes from the fact that primates were fighting and killing each other before we even were a thing so when we came along we had the means to build poo and not just take a bigger primate dominating you. 

But the above is terribly written.

I meant to put that typing out a discussion like that is not ideal, I'd rather talk. I genuinely ponder those things stated in the post that this came from, still an open discussion with myself and others as I continue to formulate my ideas around them.

 

  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fox007 said:

Seems to me that tribal would be what would help actually. The tribe is humanity, if we come together as a species then that works out just fine.

In terms of the space program: yea but then why else would we be interested in that if not to save ourselves as living is a big reason to do things evolutionarily speaking. It would be dramatically different if we never had to worry about another human killing us....what would we have scienced up and then why?

You build the armor to stop the stick, you sharpen the stick because the other primate can kick your ass, etc. I mean would it be better if we were just huddled up picking ticks off our own backs still but not ever fight? There are  Bonobos  who lounge around and sex it up all day(it's ofc more nuanced than that but still lol)

It's an interesting topic for sure but typing probably isn't the best way to do it. Like so much of science comes from the fact that primates were fighting and killing each other before we even were a thing so when we came along we had the means to build poo and not just take a bigger primate dominating you. 

The problem is that we are tribal and don't view humanity as "the tribe." It is your religion, ideology, race, politics, region, nationality, neighborhood, etc, etc. We make ourselves into these smaller and smaller groups to fight and struggle against ourselves.

It's a distraction from trying to move the human race forward. I'd personally be shocked if we were the dominant species on the planet in 10,000 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

The problem is that we are tribal and don't view humanity as "the tribe." It is your religion, ideology, race, politics, region, nationality, neighborhood, etc, etc. We make ourselves into these smaller and smaller groups to fight and struggle against ourselves.

It's a distraction from trying to move the human race forward. I'd personally be shocked if we were the dominant species on the planet in 10,000 years.

Well the whole way through the few have carried the many. When you think about how many people are derpy and clueless compared to the Einsteins, and the top Engineers and the top Teachers, and the Top etc. Most people just get carried by the deeds of the few.

I think it will just continue to be the few carrying the many until AI can carry those and keep them occupied(they already are starting: Netflix, YT, other apps) while the smartest and most capable just continue doing their thing. 

I am definitely more of a pro human optimist. I just understand that a lot of people just aren't born with much capabilities and others are hindered by poverty. Upping our base economic level is a must and it is easily the most educated the world has ever been. Just keep upping that education(hand in hand with economy) and you'll get more scientists and engineers and artists. You'll still have a lot of slag but it's always been that way.


Perhaps we will surpass that with genetic engineering or cybernetic enhancements which will for sure change everything.

  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...