Pierre Thomas is the Saints best back & a true fan favorite

SAINT_MICHAEL · 05-29-2010, 03:42 AM

Originally Posted by HintOfLogic

The point being.... I got pissed that everyone started getting vocal and became negotiators in regards to Sharper's return and at what cost. Everyone thought he wanted too much.

He DID want too much. That was the point. He was in a contract year and asked for TOO MUCH MONEY. How dare fans point that out!!!!!!

Originally Posted by HintOfLogic

First off, we are an unarguably better team with Sharper. I am not the type to get directly critical about dollar amounts. I wanted... needed Sharper back. I could give a f*** at what cost it took.

We are unarguably a better team with Bush too. And he is not in a contract year. Yet you choose to drag him into conversations that have nothing to do with his contract status. I won't point out the folly of saying pay Sharper whatever he wants then to go and moan about Bush's contract. My 2 year old can see that. Instead, i will ask you this. For all your whining about it, what in terms of players we could not sign, salary cap restrictions, lost seats, closure of your favorite hot dog stand at the Dome, or any other made up reaaon youcan come up with has Reggie's contract cost us? Give me a solid reason why you gripe about it ALL THE TIME.

Originally Posted by HintOfLogic

and you can spare me the "what the FO thinks who just won a Superbowl, vs. what you think... so you must be wrong" cr@p

I'm going to try and make a subtle point here, I hope I am artistic enough. The crux of my issue with your posts is your attitude about being convinced you are right and insulting of those that disagree with you. I never said the front office was right because they won a SB. Instead, you have repeatedly said they are wrong. How? Because they are keeping Bush at the salary they are when they could choose not to. You can disagree with this and you may be right. But you have used words like "ignorance" to describe those that do not throw their hands up and shout with you "OVERPAID". I pointed out that the FO is among those that disagree. Big difference you choose to overlook.

Originally Posted by HintOfLogic

I dropped in to remind people how silly (and hypocritical) it is to talk chump change about our best defensive player when Benson is just funneling money to Reggie's account.

No, you dropped in to moan about Reggie's contract like you always do. Nothing more.

Originally Posted by HintOfLogic

You can't just tell me that Bush's contract is pre-arranged so we can't care / comment.... yet, Sharper is in negotiation so it's fair to talk CHEAP!.... because to me, that's exactly what you're saying. It's not limited to that and you know this.... Just like Grant, sh!t changes. Also, you can't tell me that we know that there hasn't been silent agreements and restructuring behind closed doors with Bush to come back for less.... it'd be in both's best interest and in both's best interest to remain discrete.

Look at it this way. First, you have to take off your Bush hater glasses for a few seconds. At the end of the NFL season, the FO has to make a descision about every player on their roster. Some are under contract for the next year already, so the descision is as easy as "yes I want to keep that guy under his current deal or no I don't". Brees, Vilma, Grant, and Bush were all guys that fit this. After that, they move on to the guys (like Sharper) that are not under contract and are free agents. This is not a yes or no. It requires negotiation. So what you were doing with your Bush vs Sharper contract ragging is referred to as "comparing apples to oranges".

Originally Posted by HintOfLogic

but in all, my jab at the Sharper dollars debate was fueled by the frustration that set me off at how quick the B&G nation could turn on a player like Sharper!!!!!

So, judging the current market status and saying a guy (again looking for a contract-not a guy under a deal) is not worth the franchise offer he wants and believing he should sign for less is turning on a player? Even when things happened exactly as those people you say turned on him said they would? Your turnng on Bush is a far bigger crime.

05-29-2010, 03:42 AM	#11
SAINT_MICHAEL 100th Post Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 446	Re: Pierre Thomas is the Saints best back & a true fan favorite Originally Posted by HintOfLogic The point being.... I got pissed that everyone started getting vocal and became negotiators in regards to Sharper's return and at what cost. Everyone thought he wanted too much. He DID want too much. That was the point. He was in a contract year and asked for TOO MUCH MONEY. How dare fans point that out!!!!!! Originally Posted by HintOfLogic First off, we are an unarguably better team with Sharper. I am not the type to get directly critical about dollar amounts. I wanted... needed Sharper back. I could give a f* at what cost it took. We are unarguably a better team with Bush too. And he is not in a contract year. Yet you choose to drag him into conversations that have nothing to do with his contract status. I won't point out the folly of saying pay Sharper whatever he wants then to go and moan about Bush's contract. My 2 year old can see that. Instead, i will ask you this. For all your whining about it, what in terms of players we could not sign, salary cap restrictions, lost seats, closure of your favorite hot dog stand at the Dome, or any other made up reaaon youcan come up with has Reggie's contract cost us? Give me a solid reason why you gripe about it ALL THE TIME. Originally Posted by HintOfLogic and you can spare me the "what the FO thinks who just won a Superbowl, vs. what you think... so you must be wrong" cr@p I'm going to try and make a subtle point here, I hope I am artistic enough. The crux of my issue with your posts is your attitude about being convinced you are right and insulting of those that disagree with you. I never said the front office was right because they won a SB. Instead, you have repeatedly said they are wrong. How? Because they are keeping Bush at the salary they are when they could choose not to. You can disagree with this and you may be right. But you have used words like "ignorance" to describe those that do not throw their hands up and shout with you "OVERPAID". I pointed out that the FO is among those that disagree. Big difference you choose to overlook. Originally Posted by HintOfLogic I dropped in to remind people how silly (and hypocritical) it is to talk chump change about our best defensive player when Benson is just funneling money to Reggie's account. No, you dropped in to moan about Reggie's contract like you always do. Nothing more. Originally Posted by HintOfLogic You can't just tell me that Bush's contract is pre-arranged so we can't care / comment.... yet, Sharper is in negotiation so it's fair to talk CHEAP!.... because to me, that's exactly what you're saying. It's not limited to that and you know this.... Just like Grant, sh!t changes. Also, you can't tell me that we know that there hasn't been silent agreements and restructuring behind closed doors with Bush to come back for less.... it'd be in both's best interest and in both's best interest to remain discrete. Look at it this way. First, you have to take off your Bush hater glasses for a few seconds. At the end of the NFL season, the FO has to make a descision about every player on their roster. Some are under contract for the next year already, so the descision is as easy as "yes I want to keep that guy under his current deal or no I don't". Brees, Vilma, Grant, and Bush were all guys that fit this. After that, they move on to the guys (like Sharper) that are not under contract and are free agents. This is not a yes or no. It requires negotiation. So what you were doing with your Bush vs Sharper contract ragging is referred to as "comparing apples to oranges". Originally Posted by HintOfLogic** but in all, my jab at the Sharper dollars debate was fueled by the frustration that set me off at how quick the B&G nation could turn on a player like Sharper!!!!! So, judging the current market status and saying a guy (again looking for a contract-not a guy under a deal) is not worth the franchise offer he wants and believing he should sign for less is turning on a player? Even when things happened exactly as those people you say turned on him said they would? Your turnng on Bush is a far bigger crime.
SAINT_MICHAEL 100th Post Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 446