User talk:OaklandAthleticsfan

Chargers

That's a weird situation...they had 75 and cut 21, so it's 54. I also counted up all the active players and got 54. Do you remember anyone on there getting suspended? My only other thought is that Hardwick might have gone to Reserve/PUP, but I saw reports disputing that. Pats1 ^T/C 01:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rian Wallace

If you could stop making false edits, that would just be fantastic. The NFLPA database proves he is under contract with the Redskins, which proves he did not receive an injury settlement. Why can't you just be an adult, admit you were mistaken and let the correct edit stand?►Chris Nelson^Holla! 21:25, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is not my opinion, it is a fact. The NFLPA database is the official source of players under contract with NFL teams. It doesn't matter, Pats1 will just revert you and if you revert him you'll violate WP:3RR.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 21:26, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How ironic...like you haven't already reverted the 3RR rule? --OaklandAthleticsfan (talk) 21:27, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I've reverted three times. Count it. I'll wait.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 21:28, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you've already reverted 3RR since you've reverted Pats1 once and me three times. Good job.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 21:29, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You've reverted my edit three times. --OaklandAthleticsfan (talk) 21:30, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm aware. Three reverts are allowed. Four are not. Read the policy.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 21:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OA, let me explain this to you. Chris and I have no lives. We have or will have some sort of "real" job relating to this material at one point or another. I have spent thousands of hours of my life sitting here and working with the NFLPA database for years; I am well aware that it is indeed an official source that the NFLPA makes available from their records, although it is only a fraction of what records they have. Every NFL contract that a player (and team, and agent) signs has six copies: white goes to the league office, yellow goes to the player, green goes to the team, blue goes to the NFL management council, pink goes to the agent, and most importantly in this case, gold goes to the NFLPA. The NFLPA then enters all of the contract information (years, bonuses, etc., etc.) into their databases; only registered agents can access these "full" contract reports. However, the NFLPA makes available the basic data of these contracts - name, draft information, and base salaries of the current contract - to non-agent users of their website (me, you, anyone) and these numbers automatically update as the actual contracts in their database are updated/changed/added. For example, when Rian Wallace was signed, the copy of his contract that was sent to the NFLPA was uploaded in to their database within a few days, which means at about the same time his "free" info was also uploaded, meaning I can search for "Wallace" on the Redskins and get the base salary information in his contract. Likewise, I work with someone who maintains PatsCap.com, and we have in the past used the NFLPA database to notice triggered escalators in players' contracts that have, well, escalated their base salaries, and we sent this along to a Boston media member, who in some form or another uses the NFLPA database to report contract info to the public. Anyway, Wallace likely did "agree" to an injury settlement when he was waived/injured, and that's why the media reported that. However, injury settlements don't because official (i.e. making the player a free agent) until that player is healthy; IIRC, Wallace had a neck injury, and therefore his recovery is probably going to take a little while, and he won't "officially" exercise his IS until he is healthy. In fact, Matt Shelton of the Patriots was waived/injured in August 2006 and wasn't released w/ an injury settlement until December 2006 - and the media (or even Patriots.com, which erroneously kept him on their roster until they noticed he was gone sometime after the season) didn't report this in December; the only way we knew about it was either by checking NFLPA or by checking Pro Football Weekly's transaction wire, which, believe it or not, is the only "official" one available on the internet (that I know of). I won't get into all that, but Chris and I use that clarify different moves that were misreported by the media or PR departments (one popular one is Active/PUPs at the beginning of training camp; almost all of them are reported as Active/PUP by media and PR - like Rodney Harrison this year - but in fact many are Active/NF-Inj. or Active/NF-Ill.; Harrison was NF-Inj. I believe, which sometimes means a failed conditioning run at the start of camp.) So, back to my point, when Wallace receives an injury settlement and is granted his release, NFLPA will let us know about it; he will no longer be in their active player salary database, since he is a free agent and his contract on file with the NFLPA would have him as being released on October 17, or December 2, or whenever it actually happens. Pats1 ^T/C 01:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar

		The Running Man Barnstar
		for your work on NFL roster pages - -' The Spook (TALK) _{(Share the Love with Barnstars)} 19:30, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Wow"

It happens..... especially on those big additions... I'm human... no need for snide comments. JustSomeRandomGuy32 (talk) 00:33, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Wikiproject NFL Award
		I, Iamawesome800, hereby award OaklandAthleticsfan the WikiProject NFL Award for his/her valued contributions to WikiProject NFL. Awarded awarded 03:47, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Baseball #'s

I was just wondering. Are u getting the info from mlb.com, and are you just randomly checking it for updates?-DANO- (talk) 01:12, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Johnson

Thanks for the fix on the move for Jim Johnson. I wrote most of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (baseball players), so there's no excuse for me screwing it up. :P caknuck _° resolves to be more caknuck-y 21:40, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Baltimore Orioles roster

Where is your source on the recent uniform changes cuz I can't find them Ositadinma (talk) 01:15, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus Castillo

Why did you change his page? Shouldn't the article use the name as it is on the mlb.com rosters? Spanneraol (talk) 01:15, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The middle initial is mlb.com's way to differentiate between two or more players with the same name.--OaklandAthleticsfan (talk) 05:41, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Manny to dodgers = no deal

NO DEAL

8:30pm: Ken Gurnick and Barry M. Bloom of MLB.com have a quote from Boras himself: "I'm still working on it, but it's yet to be finalized."

8:25pm: ESPN.com's Jayson Stark writes that "obstacles still remain to completing the contract."

8:24pm: ESPN.com has now removed the story from the front page.

8:16pm: MLBTR just received this e-mail from Senior Editor of Yahoo! Sports, Steve Henson:

Tim Brown of Yahoo! Sports just spoke to Scott Boras and a Dodger front-office official. Both said no agreement has been reached. Ned Colletti and Boras did speak today, but no real progress was made.

--Steve Henson

NO DEAL JuliusNero (talk) 02:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a reminder

Just a reminder to remain civil in your edit summaries per this edit. While the editor you reverted was wrong, he was acting in good faith, and your edit summary was unnecessary. Thanks. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In another edit summary the SAME guy told me to not be anal retentive so I think he deserved it.--OaklandAthleticsfan (talk) 20:39, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Texas Rangers

Source for Gobble edit. Can't find it Ositadinma (talk) 22:55, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strasburg and Listach's numbers

Hi. I undid your edit at Template:Washington Nationals roster‎ but hit enter by accident before I could write an edit summary. Anyway, the numbers that the template has have been confirmed [1] Cheers --Patrick (talk) 02:28, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Has User:1995hoo been pissing you off with the Strasburg #37 edits when he knows he is wrong. I know I am. Ositadinma (talk) 20:55, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]