Mr. WEO Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 Looks like the players just had a very belated "hey.....wait a minute" bent over the sink The league's television contracts for the 2011 season provide for the networks to pay the league even though there would be no games during a lockout. The union argues that this agreement was made to the detriment of the players and is, in fact, a weapon to be used against the players in the lockout. Gee, you think so? The union is asking Burbank to order the league to put all TV money in an escrow instead of distributing it to the owners during the lockout. This would, obviously, produce significant leverage for the union. Now? Yeah, good luck with that, Mr. Foxworth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyal2dagame Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 the players better start to understand that they are not partners in the league but are employees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 the players better start to understand that they are not partners in the league but are employees. Sure, but there is no league without the players... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthICE Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 the players better start to understand that they are not partners in the league but are employees. EXACTLY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthICE Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 Sure, but there is no league without the players... Sure there is. Goddell has already hinted they are going to use replacement players. Look the League is going to go on in some form or fashon, with or without the current players. the NFLPA better cut the bull ****, they can't win this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berndogg Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 Sure, but there is no league without the players... Yea, but if there's no league it hurts the players a lot more than the owners. The owners are billionaires with several other business ventures that already have more money than they could ever spend in 10 lifetimes and will continue to make money doing other things. This is obviously the most extreme example, but how high on Paul Allen's list of priorities do you think the Seahwaks are? I know a few players have other businesses, but the VAST majority of them will not find another profession that will pay them millions, or even hundreds of thousands for that matter. And some of them are living way beyond their means and are paycheck to paycheck as is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 Sure, but there is no league without the players... theres no wegmans without cashiers.... doesnt mean they arent employees too..... i get that players are a lot harder to come by at the highest level then a cashier, but I dont think the skill set of the elite players really lends itself to any other jobs of comparable pay either. they are employees, they have rights, but when it comes down to it, they are not partners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattsox Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 It might work out in the Bills case! Bills could be competitive with the replacement players, everyone on the same level. and could be Superbowl bound come 2011, can't wait for the lockout Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthICE Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 Yea, but if there's no league it hurts the players a lot more than the owners. The owners are billionaires with several other business ventures that already have more money than they could ever spend in 10 lifetimes and will continue to make money doing other things. This is obviously the most extreme example, but how high on Paul Allen's list of priorities do you think the Seahwaks are? I know a few players have other businesses, but the VAST majority of them will not find another profession that will pay them millions, or even hundreds of thousands for that matter. And some of them are living way beyond their means and are paycheck to paycheck as is. Exactly. Look for massive bankruptcy's if a lockout happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 The players got lucky last time. Very lucky. The owners aren't going to be accommodating this time around and they hold a great big pile of chips. I'm certainly not siding with billionaires over the millionaires, but reality is about to bite them hard. Unless they have a very, very impressive PR campaign planned, they better start giving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disco Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 It might work out in the Bills case! Bills could be competitive with the replacement players, everyone on the same level. and could be Superbowl bound come 2011, can't wait for the lockout hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 hilarious. Yeah, watch the Bills win the Scrub SB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tuzmd77 Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 Yeah, watch the Bills win the Scrub SB. Not sure that if the current team crossed the picket line en masse that they'd be favored to win the scrub super bowl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 The players got lucky last time. Very lucky. The owners aren't going to be accommodating this time around and they hold a great big pile of chips. I'm certainly not siding with billionaires over the millionaires, but reality is about to bite them hard. Unless they have a very, very impressive PR campaign planned, they better start giving. Players--> Bent over the table Owners--> Broomstick with no vaseline No doubt as to who is gonna be hurtin' more... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 the players better start to understand that they are not partners in the league but are employees. Don't employees usually form unions? All in all it amazes me how many people side with the owners over the players. In most labor negotiations I tend to side with labor over management and with football it amazes me how people side with the billionaires over the millionaires who actually put their bodies on the line week in and week out. I think both sides are being very hard headed letting this go farther then it had to. I think that both sides need to start deep negotiations now while they still have a year to come to a agreement. Owners feel like players salaries are increasing too fast and too many franchises are loosing money. While the players feel like their deals are already not guaranteed and that a cap didn't stop the rise in salaries. Its all about a compromise that needs to be reach unfortunately both sides feel the other side is replaceable and wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 theres no wegmans without cashiers.... doesnt mean they arent employees too..... i get that players are a lot harder to come by at the highest level then a cashier, but I dont think the skill set of the elite players really lends itself to any other jobs of comparable pay either. they are employees, they have rights, but when it comes down to it, they are not partners. For the last time people you can't compare the real world to the NFL at all. In the NFL the players are the only ones in the world that can do what they do at the level to which they do it. Comparing them to cashiers at a grocery store is not an apt comparison at all. If you want to make a comparison to the real world (Which you shouldn't) it would be like if Intel's engineers had a labor union and they were the only people capable of designing they computer chips they used. Intel owns the equipment they use and the retail apparatus they use to market and make money off the chips they use. While the engineers are the only ones capable of doing what they do they need Intel to be able to do it and generate the money from what they make. They need each other the owners can't replace the players and get the same ratings BUT the players have to realize they have no leverage in this situation either. They need the league to make the big money and the league needs them to put on the best product that makes the most money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 It might work out in the Bills case! Bills could be competitive with the replacement players, everyone on the same level. and could be Superbowl bound come 2011, can't wait for the lockout Wouldn't it be wicked awesome if we could, like, get Keanu Reeves to play QB1 for us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 I pay to see the best football in the world. That doesn't exist without these players, but unless they have a secret plan to form an independent league for 2011, it doesn't exist without the owners, either. It only exists in 2011 if they get together and strike a deal, and the details of that deal don't really concern me; the players are well paid and the owners make good profits. Separate from that, as long as there's revenue sharing and/or a salary cap that assures the teams will be on equal footing, I don't care. I don't care if the players share 99% of the revenue evenly team-by-team or 1%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOKBILLS Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 Yeah, watch the Bills win the Scrub SB. I'll take it!!!... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 For the last time people you can't compare the real world to the NFL at all. In the NFL the players are the only ones in the world that can do what they do at the level to which they do it. Comparing them to cashiers at a grocery store is not an apt comparison at all. If you want to make a comparison to the real world (Which you shouldn't) it would be like if Intel's engineers had a labor union and they were the only people capable of designing they computer chips they used. Intel owns the equipment they use and the retail apparatus they use to market and make money off the chips they use. While the engineers are the only ones capable of doing what they do they need Intel to be able to do it and generate the money from what they make. They need each other the owners can't replace the players and get the same ratings BUT the players have to realize they have no leverage in this situation either. They need the league to make the big money and the league needs them to put on the best product that makes the most money. yea i get that you cant, and in most cases thats in the players favor, in this one it works against them. they are almost entirely disposable in a labor issue like this. my point that they are employees and not partners is understated by the cashier example. the fine line that the average nfl player from the fringe nfl player is very small -- hence a team like buffalo can bring in guys off the street and still operate at 7-9, 6-10... against the nfl elite. look at the team a few years ago, several players off the street, several already out of the game already. it proved melvin fowler can be snapping the ball to jp losman and sell out a stadium, while throwing the ball to a peerless price 5 years removed from success. hell, a guy like fred jackson a few years ago would be exactly the type of player that is coming in to replace these guys. The quality might drop from NFL to SEC, but thats not near the disaster of dropping from NFL player to unemployed. the players have NO ALTERNATIVE source of income. Outside a select few all are very ill prepared for a situation like this if it were to go to war. Intels owner would be screwed if all its programmers left, ralph would not. theres a reason contracts arent guaranteed, and its because players are, as blunt as it sounds, disposable to the owners in this league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts