Jordan Love won’t practice without a new deal. Update: Packers Make Love Highest Paid QB

[jgb]

3 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

everything you said will be spoken to if you listen. life is full of choices.

Yes, I saw you repeated 'study bitcoin' half a dozen times. Generally, making a point is how you make a point. So, state your case.

[Jimmy 2 Times]

[Barry McCockinner]

30 minutes ago, jgb said:

Yes, I saw you repeated 'study bitcoin' half a dozen times. Generally, making a point is how you make a point. So, state your case.

It's a deep subject. I've explained it on here in other threads and it mostly falls on deaf ears. Maybe I don't do a good job of explaining or maybe people don't want to understand. Maybe people don't take anything a guy named barry mccockinner on a jets forum says seriously. 

That said you're speaking directly at some of the core of what bitcoin fixes. If you're truly interested and willing to read, private message me an address to send a book and I'll send you a book. The only thing I would ask in return is that you give an honest critique after reading.

[Jetsfan80]

2 hours ago, BradSmith16fan said:

2 years around 100 mil extension for half a year of decent play to see if he could keep it up sure is a stupid idea right? No. Fact is he had a very mediocre first half of the season. What if the league figures him out or he reverts back to that.

What about the whole “QBs run everything” part of my posts are you disputing?  Because what I’m saying is Love wouldn’t take a dime or year in length off his contract that he doesn’t have to, and nor should he really.  

[jgb]

2 hours ago, Barry McCockinner said:

It's a deep subject. I've explained it on here in other threads and it mostly falls on deaf ears. Maybe I don't do a good job of explaining or maybe people don't want to understand. Maybe people don't take anything a guy named barry mccockinner on a jets forum says seriously. 

That said you're speaking directly at some of the core of what bitcoin fixes. If you're truly interested and willing to read, private message me an address to send a book and I'll send you a book. The only thing I would ask in return is that you give an honest critique after reading.

Or maybe they just disagree. Personally, I don't think Kensyian economics is "broken" just because it's imperfect. In my younger days I advocated a return to the gold standard, you can't spend what you don't have in gold reserves. But that has more and even worse problems than Kensyian models.

It's kind of like the old quote by Winston Churchill, which could also apply here, "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried."

That said, I am a fan of crypto and was an earlier adopter. But I do believe that the sect that believes it's close to replacing current exchange media are off by at least a few decades.

Anyway, thanks for the link over PM. I will check it out.

[BradSmith16fan]

3 hours ago, jgb said:

I mean it's a great idea in the sense that it would be an amazing coup if GB was able to convince him to take it.

The reaction you are getting is because Love would never agree to it and it might even offend him enough to make a breakup inevitable after this season. It almost certainly would've triggered a hold out, also.

Got it, imagine being in a position to be offended by $100 million.

[BradSmith16fan]

2 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

What about the whole “QBs run everything” part of my posts are you disputing?  Because what I’m saying is Love wouldn’t take a dime or year in length off his contract that he doesn’t have to, and nor should he really.  

An organization in the league has to take a stand at one point against the trade requests and holdouts for long term deals, even if qbs run the league which you're right about. Love then should realize that he really only showed flashes for half a year. Not saying not to negotiate for shorter term, just not as long. Do you think Stroud should get a long term contract now? He's better than Love in my opinion and I think he has a chance to be top 5 this year, if not already.

[Barry McCockinner]

1 hour ago, jgb said:

Or maybe they just disagree. Personally, I don't think Kensyian economics is "broken" just because it's imperfect. In my younger days I advocated a return to the gold standard, you can't spend what you don't have in gold reserves. But that has more and even worse problems than Kensyian models.

It's kind of like the old quote by Winston Churchill, which could also apply here, "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried."

That said, I am a fan of crypto and was an earlier adopter. But I do believe that the sect that believes it's close to replacing current exchange media are off by at least a few decades.

Anyway, thanks for the link over PM. I will check it out.

The book I'd like to send you also speaks to the argument of Austrian economics supposedly being more troublesome than Keynes. Basically, there's been a lot of misinformation taught and gaslighting about the period of the great depression and the world wars. 

But if your mind is set I'm not going to try and change it.

[Jet_Engine1]

10 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

The book I'd like to send you also speaks to the argument of Austrian economics supposedly being more troublesome than Keynes. Basically, there's been a lot of misinformation taught and gaslighting about the period of the great depression and the world wars. 

But if your mind is set I'm not going to try and change it.

 Keynes was also aware of the dangers of inflation. In The Economic Consequences of the Peace, he wrote:

"Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the Capitalist System was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose".

 

 

Hmm....

[Green Ghost]

12 minutes ago, Jet_Engine1 said:

 Keynes was also aware of the dangers of inflation. In The Economic Consequences of the Peace, he wrote:

"Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the Capitalist System was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose".

 

 

Hmm....

You have more layers than an onion.

[jgb]

40 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

The book I'd like to send you also speaks to the argument of Austrian economics supposedly being more troublesome than Keynes. Basically, there's been a lot of misinformation taught and gaslighting about the period of the great depression and the world wars. 

But if your mind is set I'm not going to try and change it.

Buddy I chew through books like coked-up Pac-Man. Ask @The Crusher about my first Mafia game. 😂 

Send over the title.

[jgb]

57 minutes ago, BradSmith16fan said:

Got it, imagine being in a position to be offended by $100 million.

If you think you’re worth double that? Yes, I can.

[jgb]

52 minutes ago, BradSmith16fan said:

An organization in the league has to take a stand at one point against the trade requests and holdouts for long term deals, even if qbs run the league which you're right about. Love then should realize that he really only showed flashes for half a year. Not saying not to negotiate for shorter term, just not as long. Do you think Stroud should get a long term contract now? He's better than Love in my opinion and I think he has a chance to be top 5 this year, if not already.

Everyone is a hard ass negotiator on the Internet.

[The Crusher]

21 minutes ago, jgb said:

Buddy I chew through books like coked-up Pac-Man. Ask @The Crusher about my first Mafia game. 😂 

Send over the title.

Books are one thing, but to learn mafia by reading a dozen or so games through in a day? That’s shits terrifying! You scary. 

[BradSmith16fan]

52 minutes ago, jgb said:

Everyone is a hard ass negotiator on the Internet.

Are you trying to say that if Jordan Love was in the room with the gm, he could use his nfl sized body to intimidate him into caving? If so, could the gm then be in the right to carry a non lethal defense weapon for that cause, and in turn Love could to do the same thing, thus making the body size difference irrelevant?

[Jetsfan80]

2 hours ago, BradSmith16fan said:

An organization in the league has to take a stand at one point against the trade requests and holdouts for long term deals, even if qbs run the league which you're right about. Love then should realize that he really only showed flashes for half a year. Not saying not to negotiate for shorter term, just not as long. Do you think Stroud should get a long term contract now? He's better than Love in my opinion and I think he has a chance to be top 5 this year, if not already.

The problem with your thinking is that the Packers "taking a stand" would result in a prolonged holdout from their QB (fines be damned!) followed by a trade demand, for which somewhere in the range of 5-10 teams would be lining up for Love's services. 

And I don't even think Love is all that good.  Yet....it doesn't matter.  The Packers certainly think he's good enough to run their franchise for the next several years, so they HAD to pay him market value, or else they'd have to start over with a new QB.

Young QB's who are deemed franchise guys are the most important employee in an NFL organization (Source:  Follow the money).  It's their market and we're all just living in it, and no owner out there truly has the balls to lowball their guy.  Even Jerry Jones will eventually cater to Dak's demands in all likelihood, or else someone out there will trade for him.

But yes to answer your question, Stroud >> Love in my book.  Stroud can't get an extension now, however, because he's in Year 2.  The earliest he can negotiate will be following Year 3....which he will.  In Love's case, this was Year 4, which was more than fair timing.

[rex-n-effect]

7 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

The problem with your thinking is that the Packers "taking a stand" would result in a prolonged holdout from their QB (fines be damned!) followed by a trade demand, for which somewhere in the range of 5-10 teams would be lining up for Love's services. 

And I don't even think Love is all that good.  Yet....it doesn't matter.  The Packers certainly think he's good enough to run their franchise for the next several years, so they HAD to pay him market value, or else they'd have to start over with a new QB.

Young QB's who are deemed franchise guys are the most important employee in an NFL organization (Source:  Follow the money).  It's their market and we're all just living in it, and no owner out there truly has the balls to lowball their guy.  Even Jerry Jones will eventually cater to Dak's demands in all likelihood, or else someone out there will trade for him.

But yes to answer your question, Stroud >> Love in my book.  Stroud can't get an extension now, however, because he's in Year 2.  The earliest he can negotiate will be following Year 3....which he will.  In Love's case, this was Year 4, which was more than fair timing.

Right. I don't think Love is worth what they agreed to pay right now, but if they think their four year investment was worth it, then they had to lock him up. Otherwise he plays a year and leaves for a team that wants to pay him as a top starter. 

[jgb]

7 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

The problem with your thinking is that the Packers "taking a stand" would result in a prolonged holdout from their QB (fines be damned!) followed by a trade demand, for which somewhere in the range of 5-10 teams would be lining up for Love's services. 

And I don't even think Love is all that good.  Yet....it doesn't matter.  The Packers certainly think he's good enough to run their franchise for the next several years, so they HAD to pay him market value, or else they'd have to start over with a new QB.

Young QB's who are deemed franchise guys are the most important employee in an NFL organization (Source:  Follow the money).  It's their market and we're all just living in it, and no owner out there truly has the balls to lowball their guy.  Even Jerry Jones will eventually cater to Dak's demands in all likelihood, or else someone out there will trade for him.

But yes to answer your question, Stroud >> Love in my book.  Stroud can't get an extension now, however, because he's in Year 2.  The earliest he can negotiate will be following Year 3....which he will.  In Love's case, this was Year 4, which was more than fair timing.

“I’d offer him half that as a take-it-or-leave-it and tell him to pound sand if he says no.”

-Tough guy Internet negotiators everywhere 

[jgb]

5 hours ago, The Crusher said:

Books are one thing, but to learn mafia by reading a dozen or so games through in a day? That’s sh*ts terrifying! You scary. 

[jgb]

7 hours ago, BradSmith16fan said:

An organization in the league has to take a stand at one point against the trade requests and holdouts for long term deals, even if qbs run the league which you're right about. Love then should realize that he really only showed flashes for half a year. Not saying not to negotiate for shorter term, just not as long. Do you think Stroud should get a long term contract now? He's better than Love in my opinion and I think he has a chance to be top 5 this year, if not already.

Like marriage counselors say to couples who fight all the time: “Do you want to be right or do you want to be happy?”

Sure one organization could do as you suggest and refuse all trade requests and demand every player complete the terms of his contract before entertaining extensions… if they want to become a pariah franchise that nobody wants to play for. They also would need to hit on basically every draft pick every year forever to account for all the guys constantly holding out, since no FA would sign with them unless they dramatically overpay which would defeat the whole exercise of taking this approach to begin with.

[Doggin94it]

12 hours ago, jgb said:

Or maybe they just disagree. Personally, I don't think Kensyian economics is "broken" just because it's imperfect. In my younger days I advocated a return to the gold standard, you can't spend what you don't have in gold reserves. But that has more and even worse problems than Kensyian models.

It's kind of like the old quote by Winston Churchill, which could also apply here, "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried."

That said, I am a fan of crypto and was an earlier adopter. But I do believe that the sect that believes it's close to replacing current exchange media are off by at least a few decades.

Anyway, thanks for the link over PM. I will check it out.

As a litigator, I'm a BIG fan of crypto. The number of bad actors criming on a publicly traceable ledger has been a joy

[jgb]

5 hours ago, Doggin94it said:

As a litigator, I'm a BIG fan of crypto. The number of bad actors criming on a publicly traceable ledger has been a joy

Yes and even if crypto was a vastly superior monetary system in all facets, the thing in the known universe with the most inertia is “vested interests.” And there ain’t no vested interests more dug in than the ones in our present monetary system. Those boys are well-heeled, unscrupulous, and they won’t go down without a fight, literally. They’d probably start a world war to prevent it.

[Bobby816]

8 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

The problem with your thinking is that the Packers "taking a stand" would result in a prolonged holdout from their QB (fines be damned!) followed by a trade demand, for which somewhere in the range of 5-10 teams would be lining up for Love's services. 

And I don't even think Love is all that good.  Yet....it doesn't matter.  The Packers certainly think he's good enough to run their franchise for the next several years, so they HAD to pay him market value, or else they'd have to start over with a new QB.

Young QB's who are deemed franchise guys are the most important employee in an NFL organization (Source:  Follow the money).  It's their market and we're all just living in it, and no owner out there truly has the balls to lowball their guy.  Even Jerry Jones will eventually cater to Dak's demands in all likelihood, or else someone out there will trade for him.

But yes to answer your question, Stroud >> Love in my book.  Stroud can't get an extension now, however, because he's in Year 2.  The earliest he can negotiate will be following Year 3....which he will.  In Love's case, this was Year 4, which was more than fair timing.

I wasn't sold on Love either. He did good though last year with relatively not a lot around him. I think his season this year will be very similar. But if they can get him a legit #1 WR... I think he can make that leap to top 10.

[Jet_Engine1]

2 hours ago, jgb said:

Those boys are well-heeled, unscrupulous, and they won’t go down without a fight, literally. They’d probably start a world war to prevent it.

[Rich Thornburgh]

Love is probably going to win MVP so there’s that

[Biggs]

On 8/19/2024 at 3:17 PM, Barry McCockinner said:

Unrestrained spending with no limits and the debt that comes with it will be more than enough. We already spend more on paying interest on debt than any other budget item. No nation retains the world reserve currency forever. The USD is on the downside of it's cycle.

Study bitcoin.

No human being lives forever.  What’s interesting about the USD is every time there is any indication that risk is off, the flight to safety number 1 asset is US treasuries forcing interest rates down and reducing our debt burden.   Bitcoin on the other hand is a risk on trade.   A risk on trade with no future earnings other than a rise in value based on human angst.  

We have more than enough natural resources and personal wealth that can be taxed to reduce the debt very quickly.   The government actually has taxing power.   The federal reserve has also actually reduced the money supply for over a year now.  

I do appreciate your honesty.  You are actually betting against the USA.   If more Bitcoin investors admitted that Americans might begin to understand that bitcoin investors are actually promoting the destruction of the USA and are investing in chaos that is nothing more than aid and comfort to our enemies.

[Barry McCockinner]

6 minutes ago, Biggs said:

No human being lives forever.  What’s interesting about the USD is every time there is any indication that risk is off, the flight to safety number 1 asset is US treasuries forcing interest rates down and reducing our debt burden.   Bitcoin on the other hand is a risk on trade.   A risk on trade with no future earnings other than a rise in value.  

We have more than enough natural resources and personal wealth that can be taxed to reduce the debt very quickly.   The government actually has taxing power.   The federal reserve has also actually reduced the money supply for over a year now.  

I do appreciate your honesty.  You are actually betting against the USA.   If more Bitcoin investors admitted that Americans might begin to understand that bitcoin investors are actually promoting the destruction of the USA and are investing in chaos that is nothing more than aid and comfort to our enemies.

If you pretended that the wealth of all the billionaires in the US was liquid and confiscated all of it you'd have enough to pay for the federal government for less than one year. fact check it. the only way the US gets out of it's debt spiral is to print, which it eventually will.

bitcoin soaks up the liquidity as money supply is increased which should be happening soon. inflation is a lagging indicator of that liquidity injection.

The USA can correct course by having a bitcoin strategic reserve. But they won't. I'm not betting against the USA, I'm protecting myself and my family from the endless currency debasement to infinity. the keynes scam demands it.

[Biggs]

8 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

If you pretended that the wealth of all the billionaires in the US was liquid and confiscated all of it you'd have enough to pay for the federal government for less than one year. fact check it. the only way the US gets out of it's debt spiral is to print, which it eventually will.

bitcoin soaks up the liquidity as money supply is increased which should be happening soon. inflation is a lagging indicator of that liquidity injection.

The USA can correct course by having a bitcoin strategic reserve. But they won't. I'm not betting against the USA, I'm protecting myself and my family from the endless currency debasement to infinity. the keynes scam demands it.

What are you talking about?  The Baby Boom generation is going to pass along 4 trillion to their heirs and/or the government in the next 10 years, wipping out either private debt through inheritance or public debt through taxation or some combination of both.   The population is also below replacement rate and is going to start failing in the next 25 years reducing the benifits government is paying out, reducing demand and inflation.   We may well be in a deflationary environment by 2050.  Just in time for todays Bircoin investors to retire.  

[Barry McCockinner]

15 minutes ago, Biggs said:

What are you talking about?  The Baby Boom generation is going to pass along 4 trillion to their heirs and/or the government in the next 10 years, wipping out either private debt through inheritance or public debt through taxation or some combination of both.   The population is also below replacement rate and is going to start failing in the next 25 years reducing the benifits government is paying out, reducing demand and inflation.   We may well be in a deflationary environment by 2050.  Just in time for todays Bircoin investors to retire.  

it costs more than 6 trillion per year to pay for the federal government. the biggest expense is now interest paid on debt.

we will never be in a deflationary environment on the fiat standard for an extended time period. there are very few dips in the long term chart and they don't ever last long. the Keynes scam doesn't work that way. the money supply has to continue trending up. they will print, always.

 

 

[Biggs]

11 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

it costs more than 6 trillion per year to pay for the federal government. the biggest expense is now interest paid on debt.

we will never be in a deflationary environment on the fiat standard for an extended time period. there are very few dips in the long term chart and they don't ever last long. the Keynes scam doesn't work that way. the money supply has to continue trending up. they will print, always.

 

 

A massive reduction of human population is coming in this century.

[bicketybam]

2 minutes ago, Biggs said:

A massive reduction of human population is coming in this century.

[Barry McCockinner]

29 minutes ago, Biggs said:

A massive reduction of human population is coming in this century.

If that happens, how does it impact the massive debt spiral and the keynes ponzi scheme?