Bring on the Hartford Colonials. I'm ready!
NFL Offseason 2011 - The Longest Yard?
- Thread starter the 4th hanson bro
- Start date
- Status
Well, supposedly it's being upped to 90%. With that said, there were glaring loopholes with the salary floor, that teams such as Tampa Bay readily took advantage of.
To quote:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704224004574489773943949070.html
-Jamman
Just as an update for those keeping score at home, after four days of talks that were described as "productive," negotiations between the players and the NFL have fallen apart again, with sources from both sides reporting that discussions are trending "backwards."
You know, this is the time of year when I normally begin steeling myself for 16 consecutive steel-toed kicks to the balls by the Bears.
Now, I don't know whether to do that or not because it's less and less likely that there will even be a goddamn season.
You know, this is the time of year when I normally begin steeling myself for 16 consecutive steel-toed kicks to the balls by the Bears.
Now, I don't know whether to do that or not because it's less and less likely that there will even be a goddamn season.
Just as an update for those keeping score at home, after four days of talks that were described as "productive," negotiations between the players and the NFL have fallen apart again, with sources from both sides reporting that discussions are trending "backwards."
You know, this is the time of year when I normally begin steeling myself for 16 consecutive steel-toed kicks to the balls by the Bears.
Now, I don't know whether to do that or not because it's less and less likely that there will even be a goddamn season.
You know, this is the time of year when I normally begin steeling myself for 16 consecutive steel-toed kicks to the balls by the Bears.
Now, I don't know whether to do that or not because it's less and less likely that there will even be a goddamn season.
For the most part, I've been leaning more towards the players' side, but the reports of some of their newest money demands (such as demanding a portion of the revenue for non-football related events in stadiums such as concerts) are just getting silly. It's reached a point where I almost have to wonder if the two sides are just fucking with each other now.
My wife and I get amped up every Sunday to watch the Pats. We look forward to it all week and enjoy the time together. I'm gonna be bummed if we start losing games here.
Aren't training camps supposed to begin in 2-3 weeks?
Even if they get a deal done at the 11th hour, the quality of play is gonna be crappy at first with lots of injuries.
And Timby, I own some steel-toes boots for when I visit construction sites. I'll gladly fill the testacle kicking task for you.
Aren't training camps supposed to begin in 2-3 weeks?
Even if they get a deal done at the 11th hour, the quality of play is gonna be crappy at first with lots of injuries.
And Timby, I own some steel-toes boots for when I visit construction sites. I'll gladly fill the testacle kicking task for you.
Should probably practice, just so you don't lose the calluses. Maybe just prepare for 10 or so kicks to the nuts this season? Gives you more time for the Cubs to get in their kicks, i guess...
It's the revenue share. That's the entire sticking point. The players are fine with 48 / 52 (majority to the owners), but the owners are trying to hose them on everything else. Goodell was fine with 48 / 52 when he was negotiating directly with DeMaurice Smith, but then the owners dropped a stinkbomb this week when they returned to their demand of $500 million off the top of all revenues before anything enters the revenue pool. Anonymous sources within the players' organization (most likely Smith speaking off the record) say that the tone of the talks has now returned to what it was before the lockout even began.
You're absolutely right, the sides are fucking with each other. It's basically a power play, on both sides, to see who will cry "uncle" first. The problem is that 32 billionaires (well, 31, plus the publicly owned Green Bay Packers) are much better prepared to withstand this game of chicken than the players are.
Roger Goodell is John Hammond, and DeMaurice Smith is Dennis Nedry.
Apparently the financial issues have been agreed upon, but the current sticking point is the owners' insistence that a team can select three free-agent players for whom they have the right of first refusal -- basically, an unrestricted free agent can negotiate with another team, but the signing team has to notify the player's original team of the terms of the deal, and the original team has the right to match it.
Sounds like the owners want to implement restricted free agency like the NHL used to have. Or, it's the franchise tag on steroids.
Sounds like the owners want to implement restricted free agency like the NHL used to have. Or, it's the franchise tag on steroids.
Honestly, if that's the sticking point, I'd probably concede it. At least for players below a certain age. In some ways, it's better than the franchise tag, since the player at least gets a signing bonus (and, actually, the fully negotiated amount of money). IIRC, Basketball's restricted free agency system operates similarly to this.
If anything, this seems bad for the owners, since it might lead to bidding wars.
If anything, this seems bad for the owners, since it might lead to bidding wars.
Not familiar with the NHL rules, but I believe the NFL already has restricted free agency in one form or another. After 4 years of service is restricted, after 6, unrestricted?
Aren't the owners also pushing for 3 franchise style tags on players as well? I've heard that from various sports media.
As a fan, I have no problem with this. I'm a Pats fan, and if not for the franchise tag, Mankins woulda been gone. But as a player, I can see why they don't like it. Yeah you get great money for that one year, but blow out a knee along the way, and say goodbye to that multi-year deal you're playing for.
The owners have dropped the "right of first refusal" demand for this year's free agents.
Have you noticed that the owners seem to be crumbling like a house of cards on a lot of issues recently? There's a reason for it. The players unveiled their secret weapon on Wednesday: A sack of money under the mattress.
I wish I could have been in the room when Foxworth dropped his dick on the negotiating table and said "suck it" like that.
Have you noticed that the owners seem to be crumbling like a house of cards on a lot of issues recently? There's a reason for it. The players unveiled their secret weapon on Wednesday: A sack of money under the mattress.
I wish I could have been in the room when Foxworth dropped his dick on the negotiating table and said "suck it" like that.
Yeah, I'd be interested to find out when they bought the policy. $200,000 per player times 2,000 players means that's a $400 million insurance policy. The NFLPA was definitely in a position to afford it, of course; it had $200 million in the bank around the beginning of March. And in any event, it definitely screwed up the owners' "we have more money than you, so we can wait this thing out longer than you" strategy.
Although it would be perversely hilarious if the networks funded that $400 million. I think the owners would call in airstrikes if they learned the networks made "what if there's no football" deals with both sides.
Although it would be perversely hilarious if the networks funded that $400 million. I think the owners would call in airstrikes if they learned the networks made "what if there's no football" deals with both sides.
ProFootballTalk.com says:
Sounds good, though I wouldn't be surprised if there's an opt-out clause somewhere in the new CBA.
Mort's generally full of shit, though. There are two things that, right now, I don't see happening:
1. NFLPA re-certifying as a union before the owners vote on a deal
2. A new CBA signed in the next 6 days
Something that needs to happen is a resolution / settlement in the 2011 TV revenue (that is, lockout insurance) case, because there's no way the owners settle Brady without knowing where half the season's revenue is coming from. The legacy fund (benefits for retired players) is still an outstanding issue, too, and I'm not entirely sure that Judge Nelson will approve a settlement between the NFL and NFLPA that punts on that elephant in the room.
I could easily be wrong, but it seems like a lot of this optimism is just shit being fed from the league side to a media desperate for some good news. While I believe the parties are close to a deal, I remain confident this is going to stretch out another week or two before the lockout actually ends.
1. NFLPA re-certifying as a union before the owners vote on a deal
2. A new CBA signed in the next 6 days
Something that needs to happen is a resolution / settlement in the 2011 TV revenue (that is, lockout insurance) case, because there's no way the owners settle Brady without knowing where half the season's revenue is coming from. The legacy fund (benefits for retired players) is still an outstanding issue, too, and I'm not entirely sure that Judge Nelson will approve a settlement between the NFL and NFLPA that punts on that elephant in the room.
I could easily be wrong, but it seems like a lot of this optimism is just shit being fed from the league side to a media desperate for some good news. While I believe the parties are close to a deal, I remain confident this is going to stretch out another week or two before the lockout actually ends.
Last edited:
Well, whenever the lockout ends, the wife and I have a date in the Dreadowlands whenever the Pats go to NJ. I sat through that playoff game last winter with a couple of Jets fans giving us the business, and I'd love to return the favor.
Or so we swore to each other on the broken down train home from Gillette.
Or so we swore to each other on the broken down train home from Gillette.
- Status
