<< <i>If this sounds a lot like slavery... that's because it was.
No, it wasn't. Not even close. What it was, was a restricted market run by rich owners, operated like a country club, where membership had to be approved by all the other members. >>
It really was slavery.
They could not leave their plantation and could not offer their services to the highest bidder. The slaveowners didn't often take the whip to them but they controlled what they were paid and which plantation they worked on.
They were chattel -- pure and simple. They were well-paid slaves but slaves nonetheless.
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the PSA 10 collector he didn't exist.
I recall some years ago singer George Michael sued CBS/Columbia records and used the "professional slavery" argument to break his recording contract but it didn't convince the Court, iirc. There are certainly degress of slavery on a professional level but none of them should be used as an analogy to actual slavery. Ballplayers could leave the club once their contract was up. Obviously actual slaves had no such option.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Scroll down about 1/3 from the top. Maybe between 30-40% from the top, there are quite a few maps (right under the one with the earthquake).
LOL, they are all college football coaches. What does that say about the importance of sports, and college athletics in this country? This shows you why pro athletes are paid so much money.
Maybe we've gotten so poor in other areas (general education, k-12, science, etc) we have to make up for it through sports? In the 50's, when athletes were far more grounded in reality, there was more equality elsewhere and higher standards.
"RG3 would get mauled, and not last 1/2 of a season" = 100000 % TRue.
RG3,Adrian Peterson,all the MLB pitchers and all the other current athletes would have to retire in the old days after tearing a ACL or needing tommy john surgery.
no doubt the modern athletes are bigger,faster and fine tuned then the old days. but it only takes one injury even in practice or a non-contact injury and it would be over. RG wouldnt even made the nfl as he needed "modern repairs" to his knees prior to being drafted. AP's injury would have been the end. strasburg would be retired.
there is no doubt that the old athletes are more durable and could last longer.
<< <i>Ballplayers could leave the club once their contract was up. Obviously actual slaves had no such option. >>
You really don't seem to understand.
That was the entire point of the reserve clause -- to keep hem in bondage forever. Their contract was never "up". They were owned lock, stock and barrel by the owners. In perpetual servitude to the team that owned their contract. The contract was always renewed automatically. There was no free agency.
They had two options: 1) quit the game and walk away. 2) be sold and traded like a commodity with little or no input into their fate.
Babe Ruth was sold to the Yankess to finance Harry Frazee's Broadway shows -nuthin to do with baseball. There are documented cases of players been traded for race horses. Players were routinely offered lower contracts than what they'd previously made even after good years or winning the pennant.
Only the union and free agency changed this. Before that they were just well-paid slaves.
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the PSA 10 collector he didn't exist.
<< <i>Ballplayers could leave the club once their contract was up. Obviously actual slaves had no such option. >>
You really don't seem to understand.
That was the entire point of the reserve clause -- to keep hem in bondage forever. Their contract was never "up". They were owned lock, stock and barrel by the owners. In perpetual servitude to the team that owned their contract. The contract was always renewed automatically. There was no free agency.
They had two options: 1) quit the game and walk away. 2) be sold and traded like a commodity with little or no input into their fate.
Babe Ruth was sold to the Yankess to finance Harry Frazee's Broadway shows -nuthin to do with baseball. There are documented cases of players been traded for race horses. Players were routine offered lower contracts than what they'd previously made even after good years of winning the pennant.
Only the union and free agency changed this. Before that they were just well-paid slaves. >>
I understand perfectly. And you can spin it any way you like, but equating professional athletes, whether or not they are bound to their teams by contractual obligation, with actual slaves in the literal definition of the word, is ridiculous and insulting. If you don't understand why, I can't really explain it to you.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>I understand perfectly. And you can spin it any way you like, but equating professional athletes, whether or not they are bound to their teams by contractual obligation, with actual slaves in the literal definition of the word, is ridiculous and insulting. If you don't understand why, I can't really explain it to you. >>
No you don't understand. And need to get educated. You didn't even understand the reserve clause. You thought they could just play out their contract and move on. If you don't even get that -- you probably don't understand a lot more about the issue.
Curt Flood called himself a "well-paid slave", it is a well-known quote by him, and he was not ashamed to admit it. So if it's not insulting for him to make the analogy then it should not be insulting to you. He sacrificed his career so that others would not have to endure the slavery he'd experienced.
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the PSA 10 collector he didn't exist.
Curt Flood used that term but it was obviously hyperbole to dramatize the circumstances. Even under the reserve caluse, a player could simply walk away from the game upon the expiration of his contract (contracts most certainly did expire--and were either renewed by the team or a player released or traded otherwise), rather than continue playing professional baseball for the same team, if they chose to do so. Of course, they might have had to find other means for gainful employment and would not have had the ability to simply sign with another team, but they were free to walk away from the game at any time. A slave doesn't have the ability to simply walk away from the plantation to find a new career path.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>I understand perfectly. And you can spin it any way you like, but equating professional athletes, whether or not they are bound to their teams by contractual obligation, with actual slaves in the literal definition of the word, is ridiculous and insulting. If you don't understand why, I can't really explain it to you. >>
No you don't understand. And need to get educated. You didn't even understand the reserve clause. You thought they could just play out their contract and move on. If you don't even get that -- you probably don't understand a lot more about the issue.
Curt Flood called himself a "well-paid slave", it is a well-known quote by him, and he was not ashamed to admit it. So if it's not insulting for him to make the analogy then it should not be insulting to you. He sacrificed his career so that others would not have to endure the slavery he'd experienced. >>
Please tell me that you can differentiate between Curt Flood's use of the word slave and this....
1831 Nat Turner, an enslaved African American preacher, leads the most significant slave uprising in American history. He and his band of followers launch a short, bloody, rebellion in Southampton County, Virginia. The militia quells the rebellion, and Turner is eventually hanged. As a consequence, Virginia institutes much stricter slave laws.
No one is disagreeing that what MLB did to Flood and others was harsh...but slavery? That was just his way of making a point. Not actual slavery. I can't believe this is even up for debate.
<< <i>"RG3 would get mauled, and not last 1/2 of a season" = 100000 % TRue. >>
Why do you think this is the case?
<< <i>RG3,Adrian Peterson,all the MLB pitchers and all the other current athletes would have to retire in the old days after tearing a ACL or needing tommy john surgery. >>
So you're suggesting that players of bygone eras wouldn't have to retire if they tore an ACL or needed Tommy John surgery? I'm not sure what this point means?
<< <i>no doubt the modern athletes are bigger,faster and fine tuned then the old days. but it only takes one injury even in practice or a non-contact injury and it would be over. RG wouldnt even made the nfl as he needed "modern repairs" to his knees prior to being drafted. AP's injury would have been the end. strasburg would be retired. >>
Again, no different from any athlete in eras gone by in which these injuries would have happened.
<< <i>there is no doubt that the old athletes are more durable and could last longer. >>
So your point (?) is that old athletes could play through an ACL tear? I'm not sure what the basis of this argument is.
<< <i>Your right about Lambert but that work in the offseason comment was more geared toward players from the early sixties before football started rivaling baseball in popularity. The RG3 discussion kind of went of on a tangent anyhow, my only point was he couldn't be the same type if QB as he is today due to those same rule differences you mentioned. That has nothing to do with his ability he would simply get hit way to much then. Players would head hunt him and look to MAUL him and the rule differences you mentioned would allow that. Greats from then would adjust to the style of play now and vice versa. I just liked that style better you obviously prefer nowadays no harm no foul. Also your comment about transporting Lambert to today and RG3 to then well in my mind you'd have to adjust each player to the era and that eras advantages so Lambert gains 25 to 35 pounds of muscle and RG3 slims down a bit. He ain't that big now for a QB so back then he'd probably be lighter. Just my opinion is all.
Plus if RG3 was a QB back in the seventies he'd be on TV selling cigarettes not those five dollar foot longs! C'mon man you gotta give me that one. He would have more than likely trained the same way Lambert, joe Greene, Harris and every one else did. >>
People seem to be glossing over or simply ignoring TheMick6's main point. Had RG3, Kap, etc (ie mobile QB) played back then; the training techniques, healthy lifestyles, surgical procedures, etc simply didn't exist. The league didn't protect the QBs nor penalize for unnecessary roughness, in fact, they actually encouraged violent hits. A player wasn't down if a knee briefly touched the ground or stopped forward progress. He had to literally be tackled and completely stopped. Then throw in the fact DBs could constantly make contact with WRs while never getting flagged, it was just a completely different game. Additionally, if someone tore their ACL (which was probably medically diagnosed as a messed up knee back then), their career was over. Remember, the surgery Tommy John had in 1974 was experimental and eventually became a medical breakthrough.
Long story short, if you put the 2012 version of those QBs under center in the 50s and 60s, they would be absolutely considered giants among boys. However, if you could envision what they would be like without modern technology and were equals of their peers, I have no doubt they would scramble once and never, ever want to do it again.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
I think this thread is a perfect example of the original topic; "Wow ... how times have changed!"
In the "good ole days" Andy Taylor and Barney Fife would have just graciously said; "Okey Dokie" and left Floyd's Barber Shop ... after getting sucked into a never ending debate like this one.
It's literally impossible to compare players of different eras due to the dramatic differences in training and nutrition. While its likely that players like Wilson and RG3 would suffer in older eras due to their shorter statures, I have no doubt Kaepernick would have been able to compete at a very high level, as he can throw as well as anyone, as well as run. RG3's career due to his injuries would have been over in the older eras, but its entirely possible that highly mobile quarterbacks would have revolutionized the game. As they say, you can't train speed, and both Wilson and Kaep are very fast runners. There's nothing to suggest that they wouldn't have revolutionized the position back then instead of having to wait until today.
Conversely, it's entirely likely that players of those earlier eras would have suffered greatly in today's game. Without the threat of a big hit looming, how intimidating would a player like Butkus Jack Tatum have been in today's NFL? It doesn't matter that today's benefits of training and nutrition would make for them, their specialty was in hitting guys, and hitting them hard. I have no doubt that they would be above average players today, there's nothing to suggest they'd be the dominant forces they were in their day.
In the end it's all speculation, with no way whatsoever of knowing how one would fare in another time, but suggesting a QB would scramble once and 'never do it again' is blatantly ignorant and impossible to suggest.
<< <i>I dont think players today know what real pressure is. Just an opinion of course. Hard to feel bad for a pro athelete that has a contract that states he gets his money no matter what. >>
Boy!! doesn't that fit (MY Angels) and the other team this year....$400 mill and not a dam thing to show for it!!
RGIII's stature? He is 6'2" and 217 pounds. Average size of a linebacker in 1980? 6' 2" and 228 pounds. The average size numbers decrease the further back you go. In other words, RG3 is the size of a linebacker by 1980 standards.
The players union, which was the gateway to the large sums of money the players are now paid, was funded by...ball cards. We have cards to blame for all of this. That is all.
<< <i>Probably politically incorrect to say this but I'm never running for offer so what the say hey....
The players were better off on the plantation. They were well taken care of and not put under the stress of players today. Travel was easier to manage, and life was simpler.
If this sounds a lot like slavery... that's because it was. >>
Did you eat a lot of paint chips when you were a kid?
Comments
<< <i>If this sounds a lot like slavery... that's because it was.
No, it wasn't. Not even close. What it was, was a restricted market run by rich owners, operated like a country club, where membership had to be approved by all the other members. >>
It really was slavery.
They could not leave their plantation and could not offer their services to the highest bidder.
The slaveowners didn't often take the whip to them but they controlled what they were paid
and which plantation they worked on.
They were chattel -- pure and simple. They were well-paid slaves but slaves nonetheless.
DaveB in St.Louis
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
It's a list of the highest paid public employees in the country.
Highest Paid Public Employees
Scroll down about 1/3 from the top. Maybe between 30-40% from the top, there are quite a few maps (right under the one with the earthquake).
LOL, they are all college football coaches. What does that say about the importance of sports, and college athletics in this country? This shows you why pro athletes are paid so much money.
Maybe we've gotten so poor in other areas (general education, k-12, science, etc) we have to make up for it through sports? In the 50's, when athletes were far more grounded in reality, there was more equality elsewhere and higher standards.
RG3,Adrian Peterson,all the MLB pitchers and all the other current athletes would have to retire in the old days after tearing a ACL or needing tommy john surgery.
no doubt the modern athletes are bigger,faster and fine tuned then the old days. but it only takes one injury even in practice or a non-contact injury and it would be over. RG wouldnt even made the nfl as he needed "modern repairs" to his knees prior to being drafted. AP's injury would have been the end. strasburg would be retired.
there is no doubt that the old athletes are more durable and could last longer.
<< <i>Ballplayers could leave the club once their contract was up. Obviously actual slaves had no such option. >>
You really don't seem to understand.
That was the entire point of the reserve clause -- to keep hem in bondage forever.
Their contract was never "up". They were owned lock, stock and barrel by the
owners. In perpetual servitude to the team that owned their contract. The contract
was always renewed automatically. There was no free agency.
They had two options: 1) quit the game and walk away. 2) be sold and traded like a commodity with little
or no input into their fate.
Babe Ruth was sold to the Yankess to finance Harry Frazee's Broadway shows -nuthin
to do with baseball. There are documented cases of players been traded for race horses.
Players were routinely offered lower contracts than what they'd previously made even after
good years or winning the pennant.
Only the union and free agency changed this. Before that they were just well-paid slaves.
DaveB in St.Louis
<< <i>
<< <i>Ballplayers could leave the club once their contract was up. Obviously actual slaves had no such option. >>
You really don't seem to understand.
That was the entire point of the reserve clause -- to keep hem in bondage forever.
Their contract was never "up". They were owned lock, stock and barrel by the
owners. In perpetual servitude to the team that owned their contract. The contract
was always renewed automatically. There was no free agency.
They had two options: 1) quit the game and walk away. 2) be sold and traded like a commodity with little
or no input into their fate.
Babe Ruth was sold to the Yankess to finance Harry Frazee's Broadway shows -nuthin
to do with baseball. There are documented cases of players been traded for race horses.
Players were routine offered lower contracts than what they'd previously made even after
good years of winning the pennant.
Only the union and free agency changed this. Before that they were just well-paid slaves. >>
I understand perfectly. And you can spin it any way you like, but equating professional athletes, whether or not they are bound to their teams by contractual obligation, with actual slaves in the literal definition of the word, is ridiculous and insulting. If you don't understand why, I can't really explain it to you.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>I understand perfectly. And you can spin it any way you like, but equating professional athletes, whether or not they are bound to their teams by contractual obligation, with actual slaves in the literal definition of the word, is ridiculous and insulting. If you don't understand why, I can't really explain it to you. >>
No you don't understand. And need to get educated.
You didn't even understand the reserve clause. You
thought they could just play out their contract and move on.
If you don't even get that -- you probably don't understand
a lot more about the issue.
Curt Flood called himself a "well-paid slave", it is a well-known quote by him,
and he was not ashamed to admit it. So if it's not insulting for him to make the
analogy then it should not be insulting to you. He sacrificed his career so that
others would not have to endure the slavery he'd experienced.
DaveB in St.Louis
Curt Flood used that term but it was obviously hyperbole to dramatize the circumstances. Even under the reserve caluse, a player could simply walk away from the game upon the expiration of his contract (contracts most certainly did expire--and were either renewed by the team or a player released or traded otherwise), rather than continue playing professional baseball for the same team, if they chose to do so. Of course, they might have had to find other means for gainful employment and would not have had the ability to simply sign with another team, but they were free to walk away from the game at any time. A slave doesn't have the ability to simply walk away from the plantation to find a new career path.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>
<< <i>I understand perfectly. And you can spin it any way you like, but equating professional athletes, whether or not they are bound to their teams by contractual obligation, with actual slaves in the literal definition of the word, is ridiculous and insulting. If you don't understand why, I can't really explain it to you. >>
No you don't understand. And need to get educated.
You didn't even understand the reserve clause. You
thought they could just play out their contract and move on.
If you don't even get that -- you probably don't understand
a lot more about the issue.
Curt Flood called himself a "well-paid slave", it is a well-known quote by him,
and he was not ashamed to admit it. So if it's not insulting for him to make the
analogy then it should not be insulting to you. He sacrificed his career so that
others would not have to endure the slavery he'd experienced. >>
Please tell me that you can differentiate between Curt Flood's use of the word slave and this....
1831 Nat Turner, an enslaved African American preacher, leads the most significant slave uprising in American history. He and his band of followers launch a short, bloody, rebellion in Southampton County, Virginia. The militia quells the rebellion, and Turner is eventually hanged. As a consequence, Virginia institutes much stricter slave laws.
No one is disagreeing that what MLB did to Flood and others was harsh...but slavery? That was just his way of making a point. Not actual slavery. I can't believe this is even up for debate.
<< <i>"RG3 would get mauled, and not last 1/2 of a season" = 100000 % TRue. >>
Why do you think this is the case?
<< <i>RG3,Adrian Peterson,all the MLB pitchers and all the other current athletes would have to retire in the old days after tearing a ACL or needing tommy john surgery. >>
So you're suggesting that players of bygone eras wouldn't have to retire if they tore an ACL or needed Tommy John surgery? I'm not sure what this point means?
<< <i>no doubt the modern athletes are bigger,faster and fine tuned then the old days. but it only takes one injury even in practice or a non-contact injury and it would be over. RG wouldnt even made the nfl as he needed "modern repairs" to his knees prior to being drafted. AP's injury would have been the end. strasburg would be retired. >>
Again, no different from any athlete in eras gone by in which these injuries would have happened.
<< <i>there is no doubt that the old athletes are more durable and could last longer. >>
So your point (?) is that old athletes could play through an ACL tear? I'm not sure what the basis of this argument is.
<< <i>Your right about Lambert but that work in the offseason comment was more geared toward players from the early sixties before football started rivaling baseball in popularity. The RG3 discussion kind of went of on a tangent anyhow, my only point was he couldn't be the same type if QB as he is today due to those same rule differences you mentioned. That has nothing to do with his ability he would simply get hit way to much then. Players would head hunt him and look to MAUL him and the rule differences you mentioned would allow that. Greats from then would adjust to the style of play now and vice versa. I just liked that style better you obviously prefer nowadays no harm no foul. Also your comment about transporting Lambert to today and RG3 to then well in my mind you'd have to adjust each player to the era and that eras advantages so Lambert gains 25 to 35 pounds of muscle and RG3 slims down a bit. He ain't that big now for a QB so back then he'd probably be lighter. Just my opinion is all.
Plus if RG3 was a QB back in the seventies he'd be on TV selling cigarettes not those five dollar foot longs! C'mon man you gotta give me that one. He would have more than likely trained the same way Lambert, joe Greene, Harris and every one else did. >>
People seem to be glossing over or simply ignoring TheMick6's main point. Had RG3, Kap, etc (ie mobile QB) played back then; the training techniques, healthy lifestyles, surgical procedures, etc simply didn't exist. The league didn't protect the QBs nor penalize for unnecessary roughness, in fact, they actually encouraged violent hits. A player wasn't down if a knee briefly touched the ground or stopped forward progress. He had to literally be tackled and completely stopped. Then throw in the fact DBs could constantly make contact with WRs while never getting flagged, it was just a completely different game. Additionally, if someone tore their ACL (which was probably medically diagnosed as a messed up knee back then), their career was over. Remember, the surgery Tommy John had in 1974 was experimental and eventually became a medical breakthrough.
Long story short, if you put the 2012 version of those QBs under center in the 50s and 60s, they would be absolutely considered giants among boys. However, if you could envision what they would be like without modern technology and were equals of their peers, I have no doubt they would scramble once and never, ever want to do it again.
In the "good ole days" Andy Taylor and Barney Fife would have just graciously said; "Okey Dokie" and left Floyd's Barber Shop ... after getting sucked into a never ending debate like this one.
- Opie
Conversely, it's entirely likely that players of those earlier eras would have suffered greatly in today's game. Without the threat of a big hit looming, how intimidating would a player like Butkus Jack Tatum have been in today's NFL? It doesn't matter that today's benefits of training and nutrition would make for them, their specialty was in hitting guys, and hitting them hard. I have no doubt that they would be above average players today, there's nothing to suggest they'd be the dominant forces they were in their day.
In the end it's all speculation, with no way whatsoever of knowing how one would fare in another time, but suggesting a QB would scramble once and 'never do it again' is blatantly ignorant and impossible to suggest.
<< <i>I dont think players today know what real pressure is. Just an opinion of course. Hard to feel bad for a pro athelete that has a contract that states he gets his money no matter what. >>
Boy!! doesn't that fit (MY Angels) and the other team this year....$400 mill and not a dam thing to show for it!!
<< <i>Probably politically incorrect to say this but I'm never running for offer so what the say hey....
The players were better off on the plantation. They were well taken care of and not put under
the stress of players today. Travel was easier to manage, and life was simpler.
If this sounds a lot like slavery... that's because it was. >>
Did you eat a lot of paint chips when you were a kid?