ChiefsPlanet - Football Football's Future If the Players Win by Roger Goodell

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)

- Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)

- -

Football's Future If the Players Win by Roger Goodell (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=244358)

Quote:

Originally Posted by BCD (Post 7592530)

Would they have decerified had they knew the Owners werent going to lock them out?

They decertified so they could file their law suit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dante84 (Post 7592521)

The owners opted out first.

Furthermore, if someone cocks back their arm to punch you, you had better take action to avoid getting your nose broken.

No, nj2 is right.

When the players reached the conclusion that the owners weren't going to negotiate in good faith, they decertified before the deadline, and the owners locked out later that evening.

However, had the players waited for the deadline to pass, they would not have been able to decertify for at least a month, so they had to be proactive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simplex3 (Post 7592535)

Prove someone else needs it.

It can be argued that the burden of proof is on the side that is fucking everything up. If the players were striking and demanding more money and saying that the owners can afford to pay them more money, the burden of proof would be on them. But the owners are locking out the players and saying the owners need more money because it's just so gosh darn hard to make a profit as an NFL owner.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2 (Post 7592540)

They decertified so they could file their law suit.

BECAUSE THE ****ING OWNERS LOCKED THEM OUT.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirk digler (Post 7592537)

1. Yes

2. Yes. I supported the Wisconsin unions when they tried to block collective bargaining.

The reason why I support the owners it is with the belief that the players want to dramatically alter the game where it is no longer competitive except for large market teams.

The players didn't want to alter anything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirk digler (Post 7592537)

The reason why I support the owners it is with the belief that the players want to dramatically alter the game where it is no longer competitive except for large market teams.

How in the world is it possible to make this conclusion from the facts as they exist today?

They want the same CBA that has been in effect for 5 years. Why have you not been complaining since 2006 about the horrors of the current contract. To me other than the rookie pay scale its been fine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BCD (Post 7592247)

No. Anyone can 'Own' an NFL franchise. Not many can play football at the level of an NFL player.

Spoken like someone who's never tried to run an organization.

Tell me, if anyone can do it why isn't everyone doing it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simplex3 (Post 7592558)

Spoken like someone who's never tried to run an organization.

Tell me, if anyone can do it why isn't everyone doing it?

:rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by patteeu (Post 7592457)

How can JD and Amnorix possibly enjoy a patriot's game now that Drew Bledsoe and Ty Law are gone? NFL fans root for uniforms. The players in the uniforms come and go. If the Patriots trade Tom Brady and Matt Light to the Chiefs for Matt Cassel and Branden Albert, do you think JD and Amnorix are going to switch allegiance to the Chiefs or are they going to stick with their hometown team and hope they can recover from such a questionable trade?

Pat the issue isn't a question or player vs laundry. The point is that without the superior athletes putting out a superior product the NFL wouldn't be what it is today.

Which is why no one gives a shit about arena football, or NFL Europe, or the UFL. Not because the owners aren't as good, but because the players aren't as good.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simplex3 (Post 7592558)

Spoken like someone who's never tried to run an organization.

Tell me, if anyone can do it why isn't everyone doing it?

Well, not everybody inherited an NFL team from their daddy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simplex3 (Post 7592535)

Prove someone else needs it.

Do you have any idea, at all, about how collective bargaining works in professional sports?

Quote:

Originally Posted by BCD (Post 7592387)

If it were a sudden change, I would care. Its the same as using replacement players. Do not want.

I didn't want to go to work today. It happened anyway.

If the owners put on scab players and never rehired a single guy from today's NFL rosters you'd be back in two years or less. I'd bet money on it.

With that said: 85% of the players on a roster today would be back in the NFL in less than two years, even if the new deal sucked compared to the last deal. Athletes aren't generally known for their financial prowess.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirk digler (Post 7592537)

I'd be interested to hear why you think the PLAYERS want to dramatically alter the game when all they wanted to do was keep the status quo.

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 7592523)

It's been reported numerous times that the newer owners want to change how the revenue sharing system works.

They want to take a number of things off the table, that will reduce the the share substantially.

It's also the primary reason that owners opted out of the CBA and are looking for a larger share of those profits.

Large market owners want bigger profits, and small market owners know that they won't be able to compete unless thay retain some of that money.

That is true and I can understand why considering the small market teams can't compete with the rich teams like the Cowboys.

Quote:

You’ve heard all about the $9 billion that the league rakes in annually. Surely there must be a profit in there somewhere? Of course there is. Teams like the Cowboys, Redskins and Patriots are making so much money it’s not even funny anymore.

But while high-revenue teams are raking in the cash by the truckload, low-revenue franchises make only a small profit - if they’re lucky - and are probably even losing money. And the situation can only get worse – by design.

The way the current labor deal is structured, the following hypothetical example is happening in real life all the time. Say the Cowboys sell the naming rights to Cowboys Stadium for $32 million. Good news for the Cowboys, because they get to pocket all of that money. Bad news for the other teams, because those 32 million count towards the Total League Revenue as defined by the CBA, against which the salary cap is calculated. Effectively, this means that the salary floor for each team just went up by an additional $1 million, because the salary cap and salary floor is determined by the revenues generated by all teams, including the high-revenue teams.

If you’re a low-revenue team like the Buffalo Bills or Jacksonville Jaguars, you don’t like that one little bit, because where the Cowboys just made money, you’re expenses just went up, and there’s nothing you can do about it. Think about that for a minute: every time Jerry Jones has a great idea and increases his revenues, the expenses for all other teams go up. How crazy is that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by BCD (Post 7592247)

No. Anyone can 'Own' an NFL franchise. Not many can play football at the level of an NFL player.

Its clear to me now that I should have added "IF YOU HAVE THE FUNDS TO DO SO"

:shake: