LT2_3
-
Posts
686 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by LT2_3
-
-
That is is insane and should be stopped somehow. One thing they should is regulate the resale of tickets so the price either must be face value or have a maximum mark up. I live in Indiana and I thought there were some laws concerning ticket resale and pricing. 2001 was the only time I was able to secure tickets. I think though that that was not the initial release but it seemed like they were tickets released later. Do they still do multiple releases or is what it is when the day comes they release them and it's first come first serve?
It's one release and it's first come, first serve. Regulations regarding ticket resale are a legal thing that varies from state to state. Coming up with standardized rules is impossible. Actually, lawmakers prefer them being sold online without regulation than more being sold outside the stadium.
Watching the games on TV and seeing all the empty seats in and game that according to Ticket Master is sold out and knowing that it's because those tickets were not bought by a fan but someone who's just out to make a buck. It makes me sick and angry thinking about it. Most normal people are struggling financially these days and then if you want to go support your favorite team by attending a game you have virtually no shot at getting tickets at face value and have two options... pay through the nose and go anyway and help line the pockets of some broker, or sit at home and watch it on TV. Could be why the NFL Sunday ticket popularity has grown. Since most of us either can't afford the inflated ticket prices of after market sellers we figure Sunday Ticket is a better investment so we can watch all the games on our HDTVs. Which I'm sure the NFL network is pleased about.Not to nitpick, but there are rarely any empty seats. When there are empty seats, it usually has to do with really bad weather on gameday - that and the only time I can actually remember any was the New Years eve game that got switched to primetime at the last minute.
The games I'm targeting are the Packers monday night game at Soldier field in December (with Favre gone it will likely slow ticket sales to that game) and the Saints thursday game in December. Is it just me or is the NFL looking to stir up a rivalry between the Bears and the Saints since we met in the NFC Championship game? That was one of the last games last year as well.I would still suggest going to a ticketmaster location to buy your tickets at noon cst July 12th. It's a saturday, so I'd plan to be in line by 10am cst.
Find a location here: http://www.ticketmaster.com/h/stateselectt...m_retail_header
As for the popularity of GB tix, that will never decrease because the cheeseheads drive down to watch the game in person. In 2001, a buddy and I were offered $600 apiece and turned down the offer. I also think the prime-time games will sell out more quickly than 12:00 games.
-
I know this is slightly off topic but since we are approaching the date where they release the individual home game tickets. I've tried unsuccessfully the past few years. What seems to be happening is the brokers or individuals buy ups large chunks of tickes with no intention of going to the game but with the intent to make a killing selling the tickets on various sites where the prices end up being highly inflated.
I was wondering if anyone has a method that works. I've tried the whole Ticketmaster thing and by the time the page loaded I would the tickets would be gone. I do have something in my favor that I didn't have before and that's high speed internet, I'm thinking that having dial-up didn't help my chances.
One thing I am doing right now is going over the schedule and highlighting a few games that I'd like to see and then prioritize that list. That way when the day comes I can shoot directly for that game first and then proceede down the list.
Where are you getting online from? If you're in the chicagoland area, I'd suggest going to a ticketmaster outlet and getting them from there.
If you're not, you may be screwed. They give priority to credit card numbers with billing addresses in the chicagoland area.
Personally, I have a 2 pronged attack process. My buddy is going to stand in line at the ticketmaster the morning they go on sale, and I'm going to sit at home with 3 computers logged into ticketmaster at once trying to get tickets to different games. We'll be happy with any that we get.
-
You say his preference will not be one year, but don't you think that depends on his offers?
Some FAs simply take whatever they can get today, and not thing about tomorrow. Others will take the smaller deal today in order to be free to take a bigger deal tomorrow.
Not sure it is such a lock which way he would go.
Well obviously it depends on his offers. From what I've read, he's already visited with SOME teams and talked parameters a little bit, but he's waiting until after his workout.
The way I see it for different time periods regarding KJ signing a deal:
Now until June 28th - he's not signing nothing - unless he gets a great deal from someone he's already visited with that is willing to pay to keep him from working out.
June 29th - July 15thish - This is when he's going to look to sign a multiyear deal. Early enough that he can make a full TC. If he doesn't get those types of offers, he may wait until a RB gets injured in camp. I think it's at that point that he would consider a 1 year deal if that's all that's available.
My biggest thing against KJ signing a 1 year deal is that teams wouldn't want to sign him to a 1 year deal. Because contracts aren't guaranteed, teams have no reason to sign guys to one year deals. All they have to do is put in roster bonuses that don't get paid if they are released. That way the team literally has the option of what to do. The only time players want a longer deal is if it increases their guaranteed money - giving them more security. So in this case, I think a team would want at least a 3 year deal so they can keep the guy around for somewhat cheap if he pans out, and I think Jones would want the security of the signing bonus of a 3 year deal. Worst case scenario, if Jones signs a 3 year deal with a modest signing bonus and gets injured again, he could easily sit year 2 of a deal on IR. If he gets injured on a 1 year deal, he simply becomes a FA when his deal expires and probably doesn't get a salary that year because he isn't under contract.
I'm not against KJ signing a 1 yera deal with us, I just don't think it's likely because I don't think a front office would want a 1 year deal, and I don't think Jones would want one either.
-
The only point I would argue is whether KJ would or would not sign a 1 year deal.
You previously argued this is the dead time of the year for FA signings, so is there really that great of a difference between a signing today and in August? In fact, I would argue there could be a less likely chance of a 1yr deal in August. If a player is willing to wait until then, he may simply choose to wait for a team to suffer an injury, at which point the FA gains a bit of leverage. Maybe not much, but more than he had.
Reasons I think KJ "might" consider a one year deal.
(a) It sure does not seem like he has had many suitors thus far.
(
Some teams could be looking at him strickly as a backup/depth, but in Chicago, he would have the opportunity for more. While we just drafted Forte and like him, if we tell him competition is open, then he has an opportunity to prove himself and earn potentially a greater role here than most any other team can offer.© Even if the rookie starts, as it is a rookie, he can be promised that if he does well enough, can still have a significant role on the offense, ranther than simply sit on the bench.
(d) There is little interest in him today, but if he signs a one year deal, he will have the chance for a healthy season and some decent/good numbers, allowing him to re-enter FA next year in potentially a greater position. Any 3 year deal he gets today will be for minimal money, but if he can better establish himself in 2008, then he could find his way to a far better contract, rather than prove himself and be stuck in a deal he isn't happy w/ (ala Thomas Jones).
Not saying it is a sure thing, but I think there are absolutely reasons he could sign a 1 year deal w/ us, and sooner rather than later.
When it comes to KJ, his entire schedule is dependant on his workout scheduled for June 28th. Nothing is going to happen between now and then. That's when his negotiations will really start with ALL interested teams and his first preference won't be a 1 year deal.
-
I agree to an extent, but if we could sign a veteran who has good credentials "cheap" with an incentive laden contract based on playing time, a one year deal, what would it hurt? If Forte is the RB we hope he will be the veteran brought in would never reach his incentives and be a cheap insurance policy. If Forte gets injured, or does not perform like we hope and expect him to, then the veteran backup would be a valuable asset to the team.
Well, when we start talking about the type of contract we want these potential RBs to sign, we have to consider what they would be likely to accept and at what point in time.
The only RB out there that I would be really interested in would be K Jones - at this point in time. However, I don't think that he would want to sign a 1 yr deal - at least at this point in the offseason. If any of the guys currently available are STILL available in mid August, I could see them accepting a 1 yr deal at that point. However, the problem is that we would probably have to offer at least a 2 year deal at this point in the offseason.
I see a need for another RB unless we're planning on AP spelling Forte. I think that whatever plan they develop, they need to bring Forte on a bit slowly so he doesn't hit the proverbial "rookie wall" after having had 15-20 rushes per games for the first 12 games. That's what Indy did with Addai. They would alternate a larger number of carries with fewer early in his career. His carries went 7, 16, 3, 20, 13, bye, 11, 17, 18, 13, 13, 24, 16, 11, 8, 15, 21 for a grand total of 226 carries his rookie season and an average of 14 carries per game. He split carries with Rhodes with carries of 16, 14, 14, 15, 20, bye, 13, 3, 4, 14, 9, 15, 12, 8, 19, 2, 9 for 187 carries.
That's awesome for a rookie and I think a well planned distribution to bring him along slowly.
So, to get K Jones signed before TC, I think we would have to offer him a 3 year deal with maybe $4 mil in signing bonus, with salary escalators it he hits certain parameters based on games active for and rushing yards. It would be a base contract of 3 years $7 million or a max deal of 3 years $17 million. I think that's a contract that Jones would sign. It would also allow the team to release or trade him with tolerable consequences after 1 year if he's not that good and Forte is awesome. That would allow us to "rent" him for a year for $5 million - but allow the cap hits to be spread as 2.33 mil, 1.33 mil, and 1.33 mil if we only keep him for 1 year.
That sounds reasonable to me because I'm not too hip on AP having most of the carries early in the season to get Forte acclimated and prevent him burning out at the end of the season when we will need him for the playoffs.
-
Have to agree w/ Mongo. Man-law would be against words difficult to pronounce, or words which force others to look up/ask the meaning.
W/ that said, great call on the commercial twist. laughed my arce off w/ that one.
LOL - I'll try to keep that in mind. I guess I was still in my "writing for work" mode.
Quick joke: What do light beer and making love in a canoe have in common?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
They're both effing close to water.
-
You have violated man-law with the word "obfuscating". Please use dumbed down language in the future. LOL! I really don't care that Lovie said we won't add a back. If he meant it, then I have a problem.
Really? In my version of the man-law book, it says to use the right word in context.
On an aside though, it's a bit ironic that the whole "man-law" thing was started on a light beer commercial, but in my "man-law" book, real men don't drink light beer unless it's for medical reasons.
-
While there is not a ton of signings, there have been some. That OG from SD was signed not long ago, and I think many expect Bently to be signed before long.
I am not sure I see the point is coming out and saying we are not looking to add a RB, if that is not the case. What reason is there for spy games? You can just skip the question, and leave it alone. you can leave it open by saying you want to see what we have. While I can understand not coming out and saying you feel it is a dire need to sign a RB, I am not sure what the point is going the opposite direction either.
I agree that I can see us signing Brown. He likely will not be expensive. We have a solid relationship with him. If healthy, he is a solid addition. I can see us waiting a bit to see if a young player steps up, but as that is unlikely, can see him being offered a contract.
If you are talking about Olivea, it was reported that he agreed to terms with the Jets, but hasn't signed yet. People speculating about Bentley doesn't make it so either. I have to wonder how strong his leg is that had the staph infection. He may be healthy enough to play, but that doesn't mean he's going to play at his previously probowl level.
What's the point of obfuscating? Because it undermines negotiations. If Lovie says we aren't signing a RB, that puts us in the best bargaining position. If he ignores the question, the media will read into it that he didn't deny that they will sign someone and it will be out there weakening bargaining position. If he says we want to sign someone, he kills bargaining position.
-
How similar is this to the early years of Angelo in Chicago?
Think about it. For his first couple years, what FAs did he sign? As I recall, Clark was about it. He saved money for re-signing players and looked to the draft to add to the team. He didn't believe we were a SB contender, if after our 13 win season, IMHO. I am not saying re-building, but I would say he was in a building mode, and then later, started to add big money FAs as he began to feel we were a contender.
I see similar here. While many fans want to beleive we are a SB contender, I just do not see it. I don't think Angelo does either. I believe Angelo is building right now. He is reserving his money to re-sign our own, so we have them locked up when we do make a run. Further, he is going to allow the young players an opportunity to play, and thus develop. If they struggle, so what. We are not a contender, and can afford to give them some time. Players like Hester, Bennett, Forte and Williams all will play, and be allowed an opportunity to develop.
This has been Angelo's MO all along - being a draft driven team.
Now as for not signing another RB, that was Lovie's quote - not Angelo's. It's also smart for the HC not to undermine bargaining position. I would also add that in the article from the mothership, Mayer says this:
That’s true at running back, where second-round draft pick Matt Forte joins veteran Adrian Peterson, 2007 third-round pick Garrett Wolfe, P.J. Pope and Matt Lawrence. Even though the Bears recently waived Cedric Benson, they do not intend to sign a veteran free agent such as Shaun Alexander or Kevin Jones at this time.So while Lovie's quote indicates that they intend to not sign one at all, I think that's reading into it a bit just for something to talk about in the offseason.
Also, if anyone hasn't noticed, teams aren't signing players other than draft picks right now. This is the wait and see portion of the offseason. Front offices are on vacation and agents are trying to gauge the market.
The basic fact is that we aren't going to sign anyone over the next few weeks unless Kevin Jones rocks his workout when he finally has it. It also wouldn't surprise me if Rueben Brown signs with us right before TC. He's been very supportive of the franchise in the media when he didn't have to say anything at all.
-
League 3 for me
-
Where is the FF thread?
-
Johnson was pulled over for speeding in Gilbert, Arizona. According to the police, he was stopped by after driving forty miles per hour in a twenty-five mile per hour zone. He was also suspected of driving while impaired "to the slightest degree", but was released without being booked or charged. The Bears waived Johnson a few days after hearing the news, as general manager Jerry Angelo stated that he had no room for error left. [27] The incident would prove to be the final straw in his already tense relationship with the Bears' organization. The Bears ultimately released Johnson on June 25, claiming he "compromised the credibility" of the team.[28] Almost a week after Johnson was waived, the results from a blood test conducted on Johnson when he was pulled over confirmed his blood alcohol content was under the legal limit.
We're really arguing over semantics at this point I suppose. I think this is a case where we can both claim to be right. BTW - Wikipedia can be a good source for general knowledge stuff, but it's not written by professionals that worry about absolute accuracy - not that the media is either..................
Sgt. Andrew Duncan, a police spokesman, said Johnson was arrested for "DUI Impaired to the Slightest Degree" but was released without being booked or charged. -
If PacMan can find a suitor, I see no reason Benson can't. Pacman was traded for by Dallas, giving up (I think) a 4th round pick, and it was not even known at the time whether he would be allowed to play this year. Heck, it is still not known.
Top 10 picks, not to mention top 5, always seem to be given additional chances. Benson will get a contract w/ another team, though I do agree it is most likely to be a one year deal.
I'm not convinced he won't get picked up on waivers. His salary this year is 820k and 1.05 mil next year. That's cheap for even a backup RB. Also any team picking him up can release him before the season and take no cap hit at all. I really think that SOMEONE will pick him up on waivers if only so they can kick the tires during TC.
-
Ya and he also wasnt cut after that. After getting in trouble the team put him on notice they wont tolerate this kind of stuff and then they cut him for doing LESS than what Benson id because Tank didnt even get arrested.
Just to clarify, Tank WAS arrested. Also, he did a blood test and not a breathalyzer. The team released him after his arrest and before the results came in and the charges were dropped.
-
You are basically dead on LT2, from AP:
What does this comment by Rotoworld mean: Does that mean the Bears save more money if he is claimed?
Ummm yeah - I have to wonder if AP used me as their source - not from here but from my numbers published elsewhere. The Trib and Suntimes have been WAAAAYYYYY off on their numbers.
As for rotoworld, they don't know WTF they are talking about. They must have misunderstood something written somewhere.
Got any links to those stories?
-
Please correct me if I am misunderstanding this but; how is cutting a player and taking on a cap hit (meaning money that can not be allocated to a player but not actually spent) vs. paying a player his salary and benching him for the season a better option for the team or the salary cap for that matter? Does the cap hit = Benson's annual salary or is it an additional penatly against the Bears' current cap?
If they are equal than I would say that it is far more beneficial to the Bears to cut the player and eliminate the distration than paying him to ride the pine and having him around to be a distraction.
Please explain if I am misunderstanding how the cap works.
When players get up front money in the form of a signing bonus, the player gets all the money upfront, but the cap hit for it gets spread out equally over the term of the contract. So, if a player gets a $10 million signing bonus on a 5 year contract, their cap hit each year is their salary + 2 million in bonus amortization.
Now, if a player is released prematurely, any remaining unamortized bonus money has to be accounted for and accellerates to the cap year in which the player is released - unless it's after June 1st in which the current year's amortization applies, and the remainder hits the following year.
In Benson's case, we still have 2 years at 2.55 million to amortize. Against this year's cap, we will save his $810k salary for a net dead cap hit of roughly $1.7 million and a dead cap hit of $2.55 million next year.
The way I would explain it would be like leasing a car for 5 years, not liking the car after 3 years and returning it so you can't use it at all, but still having to pay 75% of the cost of keeping it.
-
But if he is picked up what does this mean? no cap hit?
No, him getting picked up changes nothing against our cap.
-
A lot of Personal attacks going on in this thread. Forum members do not like censorship so I am trying to refrain from doing so. Calling others raging alcoholics and Nazis is getting, IMO, very much out of line. Referrences to "Were you an intern to one of O.J.'s defense lawyers?" is kind of borderline.
There is no reason this should get out of hand. Just stop the personal attacks. It was a good thread when it started.
OK - I changed my comment from "Nazi" to "Are you of an extremely right wing politcal group that doesn't believe in civil rights?"
Better?
-
[/b]
Wow are you a raging alcoholic?
A raging alcoholic? Naw, not a raging one.
btw - I don't appreciate the personal attack. Isn't that against the rules? Don't you know better? Should you be banned from the board for breaking the rules?
-
Huh??? If you're innocent you should refuse it?
If you've only had one drink and think that you (and everyone around you too) are sober, yes you should refuse.
Read more here about how they are inherently inaccurate: http://www.drunkdriving-california.net/blo...cohol_test.html
An all too common misconception, and also the main cause of erroneous blood-alcohol readings, is that the person being tested is average in all of the physiological qualities which affect the results of the test. Acquiring a precise level of alcohol content in the blood is determined based entirely on a list of certain scientific assumptions. More often than not, these assumptions are false, producing inaccurate readings of the individual’s blood sample. An individual tested is seldom “average” in any one of the biological traits assumed to be typical of an individual.One false assumption is regarding the relation between alcohol in the breath and in the blood such that the ratio in an “average” individual is 1:2100. All breath testing machines use this ratio when analyzing and comparing the results of breath and blood samples. In essence, the accuracy of the results obtained depends upon the accuracy of the original supposition. In reality, the blood-to-breath ratio can range anywhere from 1:1300 to 1:3000. Consequently, an individual with a ratio of 1:1700 and a real blood-alcohol level of .08 would produce a reading of .10 with a “precise” breath testing machine.
Here's another one that talks about how the machines can often be inaccurate against how they are supposed to work: http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/InTheNews...1090949560.html
Experts have argued that the machine’s thermometers, which must be absolutely accurate for accurate readings, weren’t properly maintained, were inaccurate, and therefore led to false readings. To reduce this problem, the state adopted regulations requiring periodic verification of the machines’ thermometers. However, the state hasn’t followed its own rules for many years, if ever. One prosecutor complained that “the rules have become our own worst enemy.”However, a new state law now specifically prohibits alcohol breath test readings from being barred from court just because they might be invalid or incorrect. The law makes it easier to get questionable, possibly inaccurate, breath-test readings admitted into court.
Apparently, prosecutors want to increase their conviction rates, regardless of the guilt or innocence of the citizens suspected of driving while under the influence of alcohol.
So yeah. If you've even had only one beer, you should refuse to take a BAC test.
-
Yeah, if my job was on the line I'd lie my butt off too! Just like briggs lied after his accident. The only difference is that briggs didn't wrap another car around a pole and run 5 weeks later. I'm really getting sick of this crap from these stars saying they are right. An innocent man would have taken the blood test and proved his innocence.
Obviously you have never discussed this with an attorney. Every attorney I've ever spoken with on the subject says to refuse the BAC test even if you only had 1 drink and it was hours ago. Breathilyzers are notoriously inaccurate and blood samples can be corrupted too. They say that in EVERY circumstance, you should refuse and take the statutory suspension.
I suppose that in your world, that only celebrities should take it everytime because celebrities vs. the cops is a spectator sport. The actual interests of the people involved must be irrelevant.
-
Let's see here. At texas he was arrested for possession of mary jane, and breaking and entering. Then the boating ordeal. Then the speeding (gta style) at 2-3 in the morning. Then running a red light almost hitting a pedestrian at 3-4 in the morning.
To me sounds like pretty damn good police work and pretty stupid of a professional athlete! Were you an intern to one of O.J.'s defense lawyers?
Edit .......... Wow. Just wow. Are you of an extremely right wing politcal group that doesn't believe in civil rights?
-
I don't understand how you can say there is a clear pattern of harassment. Where is the pattern? How can you be so sure they were in the wrong?
If Benson is such a moron, as you have stated, then wouldn't it be more likely that he was in the wrong, and this is just a pattern on his behalf?
I can see and understand how this might not change someone's opinion, but to say there is a pattern of harassment is just ridiculous until proven with facts. As it stands now, this is two incidents with one person. Put those incidents with all the other stuff about Benson since he's been in Chicago, and THAT is a pattern.
Jason, the field sobriety test is on video tape this time. The officer says he failed, and Benson's attorney said he did very well on it.
At the least, it sounds like a pattern of Police taking a guy in for any old reason once pulled over because field sobriety tests are so ridulously subjective. I would even believe that the Police aren't treating Benson differently than anyone else, but that doesn't make it right either.
It reminds me of several stories I've heard from people where they were taken down to the station for a breathilyzer when they hadn't been drinking. One was a designated driver with an attitude, the second was a bartender that reeked of alcohol because it was on his clothes, and the third was a guy with a stuttering problem. The standard for the police to bring someone in for testing has gotten out of hand because it has surpassed speed traps for generating local income for police departments. One thing I read online lately regarding BUIs is: "If you have spent a long day in the sun and on the water, chances are you may appear to the officer as being under the influence. Your red eyes, wobbly gait, and lightheadedness from dehydration can all be mistaken for alcohol consumption."
I'm not suggesting that Benson will be joining MENSA any time soon, but it's still within the realm of possibility that he's not in the wrong for anything other than not having the sense to keep from getting behind the wheel of a car at that time of night even if he's legally sober.
-
HEY LT2_3
Question: What are the cap implications of dumping Benson right now or later in June?
I've never been a fan of his and I'd like to see the team move on. He's a repeat offender, problem child and over all dick. With Forte and possibly bringing in a vet via FA, he's expendable now.
Sorry to say, another first round bust for JA. You can never know for sure how these character problem guys are going to turn out as pros, and I was all for picking Benson when they did, but I was wrong and so was Jerry.
Time to move on.
There is no difference based on when he's released or traded at this point.
Either way, we still owe for $2.55 mil per year over then next two years for his unprorated signing bonus. For this year's cap hit we would subtract his $820k salary this year for a net cap loss of $1.725 million cap hit, but next year would be a pure $2.55 mil dead space cap hit for him.
From a numbers perspective, we should give him one more year to make it or not. These legal issues are a distraction, but that doesn't change the numbers. We'd be much better off paying the extra $820k to keep him and see how he does than save the $820 and spend even more than that replacing him at this point. But that's JMHO.
best strategy for buying single game tickets
in Bearstalk
Posted
As DBDB pointed out, a few hundred empty seats spread out over the stadium probably looks no different on TV than the folks in line to buy beer. BF2K's point was about how upset he gets when he sees all those empty seats on TV. That really never occurs unless the weather is really bad - and even then, it's the season ticket holders that don't feel like braving a subzero windchill and not the tickets sold by a broker.
There ARE alot of guys outside the stadium selling tickets, but as Madlith pointed out, you're taking a chance on fake tickets that way.
I also wouldn't blame all the professional ticketbrokers either. I know guys with several sets of season tickets. One guy has 3 different pairs of tickets. He sells them to his friends at face value +10% most of the time, but he sells 2 pair above value for hot games to cover the cost of ALL the tickets. There are games late in the season where no one is interested and he has empty seats because nobody really wants to sit in the brutal cold.