[News] Late For Work 5/23: Ray Lewis Explains How Pro Athletes Go Broke

[Moderator 3]

58 minutes ago, Ravenous_Ravens said:

Good point R Lewis is making. Funny it's not the NFL trying to change things and make a difference though. Sure seems like they had this whole thing planned out from a very long time ago.

If most players go broke after their careers, they cannot help themselves very much and when they deal with the side effects of football careers, they cannot get the help they need and are left fending for themselves. Worst off, the NFL is not even held fully accountable, at least until recently. IMHO it is a joke they were let off so easy when you look at the evidence. Sure they have to pay some, but they still made more money than they ever paid out and still come out ahead. The scam continues.

Why is it people feel it is acceptable for a multi-billion dollar industry to get away with withholding vital information from it's employees only to financially gain off of their misery? They sure operate a lot like big tobacco companies.

Actually, these things are addressed each year at the rookie symposium and many teams also offer financial counseling, especially to rookies.

[rmcjacket23]

35 minutes ago, RRRRRavens said:

I wonder how many fumbles per carry qualify a ball carrier as a fumbler? Is anyone aware of some sort of average for all ball carriers?

In addition, based on that same website, I did a little quick analysis (using some arbitrary measurements). I basically looked at every RB over the last five years who had at least 160 carries in that season. Again, kind of an arbitrary barometer I picked, but I figured a 10 carry per game average was a sufficient measurement. Here are the average rates for those players for the last five seasons:

2015: 1.0%

2014: 0.7%

2013: 1.0%

2012: 1.1%

2011: 1.0%

So it looks like a 1.0% fumble rate is about average for the league's highest ball carriers, so I'd say, in general, a rate higher than that would be somewhat concerning. Obviously the higher the amount of carries the more fumbles you'd expect.

It seems a bit high, but a guy getting 300 carries a season you'd probably expect to have somewhere around 3-4 fumbles in a year.

Edited May 23, 2016 by rmcjacket23

[RRRRRavens]

  34 minutes ago, RRRRRavens said:

I wonder how many fumbles per carry qualify a ball carrier as a fumbler? Is anyone aware of some sort of average for all ball carriers?

In addition, based on that same website, I did a little quick analysis (using some arbitrary measurements). I basically looked at every RB over the last five years who had over 160 carries in that season. Again, kind of an arbitrary barometer I picked, but I figured a 10 carry per game average was a sufficient measurement. Here are the average rates for those players for the last five seasons:

2015: 1.0%

2014: 0.7%

2013: 1.0%

2012: 1.1%

2011: 1.0%

So it looks like a 1.0% fumble rate is about average for the league's highest ball carriers, so I'd say, in general, a rate higher than that would be somewhat concerning. Obviously the higher the amount of carries the more fumbles you'd expect.

It seems a bit high, but a guy getting 300 carries a season you'd probably expect to have somewhere around 3-4 fumbles in a year.

Thanks for your research. Sounds about right. I know that WHEN a fumble occurs seems to affect perception just as it does with a failed place kick or dropped pass (we Ravens fans still recall those past events of years gone by)

[WNC-Raven]

  3 hours ago, WNC-Raven said:

Wait and see what happens when they expand the playoffs and it becomes common to see 7-9 or 6-10 teams in the post season. That may be the moment their greed hits a tipping point and regular season games all of a sudden don't mean as much.

That's a bit of a stretch, considering they're only going to add one team on each side.

Note that in most cases where a 7-9 team makes the playoffs, its as a division winner, not as a wildcard team, and they're only looking to add one wildcard team.

If the NFL added one additional wildcard team on each side, in the last ten years, here would be the records of those teams....

11-5 - one instance

10-6 - six instances

9-7 - seven instances

8-8 - six instances

So the sweet spot range of record for adding an additional playoff team would be between an 8-10 win team. In the last ten years, 70% of the teams that finished 7th in their conference had a winning record, and 100% of them finished at least at .500. 

 

I hope your right. Maybe the recent years of having such poor records in a few divisions is fresh on my mind. Having 3 wildcard teams and 4 division winners is almost like having 2 teams from every division play in the postseason. Or let's say hypothetically the Browns catch up to the rest of the AFCN, All 4 teams from a single division could be in the playoffs? That to me would make it look watered down. I am only concerned because I care about this game.

[Crusader]

Sounds to me Ray might have a new job working with rookies.