ChiefsPlanet
Page 13 of 26 « First 39101112 13 1415161723 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Football Football's Future If the Players Win by Roger Goodell (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=244358)

Chiefnj2 04-26-2011 12:50 PM
Let the big name players win. I'm sure KC will be able to compete just fine in an open market with Jones, Snyder and Kraft.

DJ's left nut 04-26-2011 12:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bugeater (Post 7591378)
Well gee Roger, maybe your ****ing owners shouldn't have opted out of the old CBA and started this shit.
Yeah, that should about cover it.

This is like that skinny kid talking shit to the fat aussie, getting his ass kicked and then whining about it.

The owners decided to whip their dicks out but the courts have thus far been unimpressed. I'm not inclined to listen to their little stooge whine when things haven't gone the way they hoped it would.

Simplex3 04-26-2011 12:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCD (Post 7592568)
:rolleyes:
Well written and thoughtful reply. Is it indicative of how you'd run a multi-billion dollar organization?

Chiefnj2 04-26-2011 12:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kysirsoze (Post 7592637)
Because they had to decertify or be forced to wait at least a month. That would have weakened the players position. The owners refused to negotiate in good faith and at the 11th hour put forth a proposal that was still cutting money from the players with no justification.
It's a negotiation. You give, you get. The owners made a major concession of no 18 game season, plus other benefits. Make a counter offer.

patteeu 04-26-2011 12:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brock (Post 7592575)
Well, not everybody inherited an NFL team from their daddy.
Why doesn't a collection of billionaires create an alternative league to overtake the NFL? It's been tried at least 5 or 6 times and it's always failed (or at best, resulted in getting a few teams merged into the NFL).

Simplex3 04-26-2011 12:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brock (Post 7592575)
Well, not everybody inherited an NFL team from their daddy.
How many of the owners got in that way?

kysirsoze 04-26-2011 12:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplex3 (Post 7592628)
There is no burden of proof. The owners own the teams. They don't have to prove anything, not to players and not to fans. It's their ball and they can take it home and end the game if they want to.

I'm not saying that would be wise, but they can.
as I said...

Quote:
Originally Posted by kysirsoze (Post 7592619)
Of course the owners don't have to open their books. That's their right. It's also the right of the players to demand that they open their books if the owners wish to negotiate an agreement that takes money out of the players pocket.

They both exercised their rights, and now the courts are handling the fallout. So far it looks like the players made the smart play.

If I'm arrested, it is my right to remain silent. That doesn't mean it is smart for me to do so regardless of the situation.

patteeu 04-26-2011 12:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplex3 (Post 7592581)
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.
You must be trolling. But at least you're trolling with the truth. ;)

kysirsoze 04-26-2011 12:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiefnj2 (Post 7592644)
It's a negotiation. You give, you get. The owners made a major concession of no 18 game season, plus other benefits. Make a counter offer.
Too little, too late. The owners were in no position to go to court, but they played chicken with the players anyway. Their bad.

Simplex3 04-26-2011 12:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCD (Post 7592590)
Its clear to me now that I should have added "IF YOU HAVE THE FUNDS TO DO SO"


:shake:
If you had the funds to do so you'd most likely be the Bills. Damn near bankrupt and looking to find some municipality stupid enough to fund you in order to get you to move there.

milkman 04-26-2011 12:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplex3 (Post 7592615)
And as a fan of a small market team you're siding with the players?
I think when all evidence suggests that the NFL is making unprecedented profits, if the owners ask for a larger share of those profits because they are losing money, then the players are right to ask for proof.

patteeu 04-26-2011 12:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royal Fanatic (Post 7592584)
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.
That was the position of the union. The union has been decertified by it's members. The current initiatives are aimed at destroying anything that might run afoul of anti-trust laws. They're effectively fighting for a future that includes teams and players acting independently from one another at the moment.

patteeu 04-26-2011 12:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyV13 (Post 7592594)
Pat, there are actually many reasons why the owners should open their books:
Yes, there may be legal reasons for which they will now be forced to open their books, but there was no reason for them to do so as a part of the collective bargaining process. If the players' union wanted open books, they could have negotiated that issue.

milkman 04-26-2011 12:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiefnj2 (Post 7592626)
The owners requested an additional extension to the talks. The owners conceded a half dozen important items in their last offer to the players, hours before the union decertified.
No, actually, it was an hour before the deadline, and the owners didn't really concede much.

Their proposal would have cut the salry cap by billions over the course of the proposed contract, and they only conceded to table discussion of an expanded schedule for a year.

Brock 04-26-2011 01:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu (Post 7592672)
Yes, there may be legal reasons for which they will now be forced to open their books, but there was no reason for them to do so as a part of the collective bargaining process. If the players' union wanted open books, they could have negotiated that issue.
The owners wouldn't have ever agreed to that. You know it for a certainty.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:34 PM.
Page 13 of 26 « First 39101112 13 1415161723 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.