The ultimate answer should be the Beatles but their total dominance of pop culture causes way too many people to judge them on songs like 'Ticket to Ride' and 'I Want to Hold Your Hand' before actually listening to an album.
Except multiple boarders already stated their indifference to the Beatles.
I doubt any band creating music prior to 1990 wins this. There are enough youngsters on the board who don't listen to old skool music, which is why David Bowie and the Talking Heads are close, but still far off. It's nearly impossible we agree one act/band is great, even with such a small community. I think LCD is as close as we'll get, unless people want to admit they love Michael Jackson and Prince.
I post a bunch, I get shit on because I haven't been to Sasquatch in 2 years. I'm busy when people are in town, I get shit on for not making time. I make time and meet 3 awesome people, nobody says a word. I porpoisely don't post for a few weeks to spare everybody from hearing about my house, come back talking about something entirely separate, and get shit on because wonk is apparently infallible.
Clearly it's time to delete and just creep the music threads. You elitist fuck have really ruined the board.
So replacements are worse than regulars. Good point. We all agree. Who is at fault?
I totally agree that the overall blame should lie on the league refs for thinking they were bigger than the game.
While the replacements have struggled, I also feel they are being unfairly put under a very large microscope by many people in the media, as well as the coaches & the players - and any mistake they make, no matter the size, will be blown completely out of proportion. It's basically no-win scenario for the replacements. The league refs acted like assholes and the replacements now have to deal with the fallout. - and that's sad.
I could have saved myself about 30 paragraphs by just writing that.
Does anyone who follows the negotiations (or lack there of) know the deal with retirement benefits? I thought that was the deciding factor of the lockout, the refs never got retirement benefits, but wanted them. My friend swears the refs always had retirement benefits, and the league is trying to take them away. He also smokes a ton of weed, and rarely has any idea of what he's talking about, but I don't feel like doing anymore research on the differences between what the NFL is offering, and what the refs are demanding. I do know the NFL offered the refs a comparable increase in salary they offered the minimum wage NFL players, and I still think the NFL refs are fucks for demanding anything, but maybe I'll be a bit less opinionated if anyone can settle this discrepancy.
I did some more research, and I see the NFL is trying to replace the referee pension with a 401K plan, which is basically replacing the guaranteed income for retirement with an plan designed to invest what they are already earning. I'm not an expert on retirement, but this doesn't seem too far fetched for referees making six Dr. Garbanzoures for part-time work. Referees can make more than their current pension if they control their 401K like us regular folk, and it should be more lucrative. The regulars are already grandfathered on their pension, so it doesn't affect any of them.
The real issue appears to be the NFL is trying to hire more referees, so they can choose the best based on performance. If you suck (which many do), the NFL will choose to give work to the refs who suck less. Then your 401K isn't as lucrative because you are a terrible ref getting less work. Sounds like a good plan moving forward, which is obviously why the regular refs are balking at the proposal. They want their money regardless of their worth. Again, fuck them.