Would you watch replacement players?

[silvermike]

It seems that the current talk is for a lockout in 2011, not a strike - can management bring in scabs during a lockout?

[Spiderweb]

Scabs were not used in the 82 strike ( don't get me started on Rosie Leaks fumble in Tampa keeping us out of the playoffs that year)..........

 

 

Me neither, I was at that game.....The Bills were down to about Tampa's 18-19 yard line, and ran Leaks into the middle to setup a field goal attempt to win the game. Then the cretin.....FUMBLED !!!!

 

Guy behind me started laughing and razzing me........we ended up throwing a few shot at each other until a friend I went to the game with got between us and broke it up. Ah, the days of my youth.

[The Senator]

Hell yeah.

 

The more people watch replacement players, the sooner the real players sign a reasonable deal and get back on the field.

ditto - it was the replacement players that caused gene upshaw and the nflpa to cry 'uncle' in '87.

 

but i do understand that some will want to support the strike - after all, guys like jason peters need to eat too...

 

-In Philadelphia, a strong union town, only 4,074 watched the "Spare Bears" clobber the home team 35-3 on October 4. Furthermore, many fans joined the striking Eagles to berate both squads as they entered the stadium.

-A "crowd" of 4,919 assembled the second week in Detroit, another union stronghold.

-29,745 at the Superdome chanted "Stay on strike" as their new Saints team took a 27-0 halftime lead against the Los Angeles Rams in the first week.

-The largest attendance each week was: Week 1 – 38,494 in Denver; Week 2 – 61,230 in Denver (Monday night), Week 3 – 60,415 in Dallas (Monday night).

-Average attendance increased after the first week but was nowhere near pre-strike levels: Week 1 – 16,949; Week 2 – 27,627; Week 3 – 26,063. Almost all clubs offered ticket holders refunds for replacement games.

 

The replacement players, who earned $4,000 a week, fit no particular profile.

 

link

[reddogblitz]

Week 3 – 60,415 in Dallas (Monday night).

link

 

I did and would. I was at that game! I sold programs at the Cowboy games back then back when the Cowboys were a team a fan could be proud of. The saddest thing I saw on this strike was at one game the school teachers came out picketing in sympathy. I thought, next time you (the teachers) are in negotiations, how many of these guys will come out to support you?

 

I'm all for labor, but when your union has negotiated a $310,000 starting minimum salary, they've done their job! To me when I saw them picketing, my impression was that they were spoiled babies who don't even know how the real world operates.

 

As a side note, it is my understanding the Bills purposefully didn't sign any good players because Buffalo is a big union town and they didn't want to piss off the fans. Same with a lot of other northern union cities.

[zazie]

Losman vs. Vick = entertaining football.

[PromoTheRobot]

I'm old enough to remember how bad replacement football games were. The Bills especially. Did Ralph Wilson find these guys hanging around on street corners? They could have put chimps in Bills uniforms and it would not have looked any worse.

 

PTR

[The Dean]

No

[billsfan89]

I did and would. I was at that game! I sold programs at the Cowboy games back then back when the Cowboys were a team a fan could be proud of. The saddest thing I saw on this strike was at one game the school teachers came out picketing in sympathy. I thought, next time you (the teachers) are in negotiations, how many of these guys will come out to support you?

 

I'm all for labor, but when your union has negotiated a $310,000 starting minimum salary, they've done their job! To me when I saw them picketing, my impression was that they were spoiled babies who don't even know how the real world operates.

 

As a side note, it is my understanding the Bills purposefully didn't sign any good players because Buffalo is a big union town and they didn't want to piss off the fans. Same with a lot of other northern union cities.

 

The best argument I have ever heard for the inflated salaries of Pro Athletes in a real world setting is if you had some sort of talent and some guy made 150 thousand dollars profit (A day) off what you and only you were able to do is it right for that guy to only pay you 100k a year. Sure 100k a year is nice and you can live in a very nice style but why should that guy be making tens of millions of dollars a year off of what you do and he only pays you a fraction of the profits.

 

Its the players wanting their piece of the pie. Why should the Billionaires line their pockets while the guys who put their blood sweat and tears into the game get the short end of the stick. I will always support a labor union in sports as long as they make a reasonable attempt to negotiate a contract. The NHLPA was so loved during the lockout because they not only tried to get a cap at the last minute but agreed to a 24% roll back in salaries to try and facilitate the process.

 

Like I said the players in the NFL will get my support but the owners know most fans will watch the Replacements (Once again not the movie). And a lot of players will cross the picket line as well. Football players are raised as solders from day 1 they rarely have a philosophy of going against the team or the company so strikes just aren't in their nature (Unlike Baseball players).

 

I personally don't think there will be a lock out or replacement games The NFLPA will realize they don't have the hammer they think and once again players will cross the line. So the NFLPA will agree to concessions like a cap and a cap that is less likely to increase every year. The NFLPA will also agree to a rookie salary structure. The owners will give them some of what they want but the owners will ultimately end up winning.

[generaLee83]

There is a lot of speculation about the possibility of a lockout in the 2011 season. I have no doubt that the owners would consider replacement players. (They used replacements in 1982 and 1987) Now I am too young to remember the replacement players so I didn't see the games nor was I old enough to make a decision to watch or not watch them.

 

Would you watch replacement games? I for one wouldn't want to see replacement games. I tend to side with labor over management in labor disputes so I would take the players side (Unless they are being unreasonable but even than I still wouldn't watch the replacement games).

 

Wait a minute..................

 

The current Bills team aren't a bunch of replacement players?

 

Fu_k me.

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

we probably have a better chance at winning in a "replacement league" than the actual NFL....

[VJ91]

...There is a lot of speculation about the possibility of a lockout in the 2011 season. I have no doubt that the owners would consider replacement players. (They used replacements in 1982 and 1987) Now I am too young to remember...

 

If you are "too young to remember" facts about the NFL, at least look them up. There were no "replacement" players used in the NFL in 1982. Every team went out on strike, period. I was not too young to remember the fact that the Bills were still a very good football team in 1982. They played on Monday Night Football at home against the Vikings and beat them to raise their record to 2-0-0, and we were really pumped about the possibilities that season.

 

Then the strike struck, and there was no football at all for about 5 or 6 weeks! The Bills did not come out very good after the strike, and struggled to a 4-5-0 record, missing the playoffs and ending the Chuck Knox era as he quit and went to Seattle after that stupid strike-shortened season.

 

In 1987, replacement players were used for 3 games toward the beginning of that season. The Bills fake players were able to win one of those 3, and the Bills almost made the playoffs with a 7-8-0 record.

 

To answer your question, of course I would not watch any "replacement" games in 2011 if the owners were idiotic enough to try that again.

[VJ91]

If the Jason Peters of the World had to settle for making only 1-2 Million per it would be a MUCH BETTER World.

 

Why should the Jason Peters' of the world "settle" for one penny less then the NFL owners of the world are willing to pay them? Would you ever tell your boss not to give you a raise because you think you should "settle" for less money due to you earning too much?

 

There is absolutely nothing, especially in today's depressed state of our economy, stopping the 32 owners from deciding that $310,000 is the most any NFL player will make, instead of the least! If the players walked, most of the NFL owners would probably save money overall in their billionaire worlds by shutting down their NFL franchises anyway!!

 

Don't hate Peters, hate the Eagles owner for paying him what his agent demanded.

[billsfan89]

If you are "too young to remember" facts about the NFL, at least look them up. There were no "replacement" players used in the NFL in 1982. Every team went out on strike, period. I was not too young to remember the fact that the Bills were still a very good football team in 1982. They played on Monday Night Football at home against the Vikings and beat them to raise their record to 2-0-0, and we were really pumped about the possibilities that season.

 

Then the strike struck, and there was no football at all for about 5 or 6 weeks! The Bills did not come out very good after the strike, and struggled to a 4-5-0 record, missing the playoffs and ending the Chuck Knox era as he quit and went to Seattle after that stupid strike-shortened season.

 

In 1987, replacement players were used for 3 games toward the beginning of that season. The Bills fake players were able to win one of those 3, and the Bills almost made the playoffs with a 7-8-0 record.

 

To answer your question, of course I would not watch any "replacement" games in 2011 if the owners were idiotic enough to try that again.

 

Ok you don't have to be nasty about it many people already pointed out and caught me on the fact that there weren't replacement players in 1982. Sorry I made a mistake it happens I should have looked it up (I usually look up most of the facts in my posts but sometimes you just get lazy) but I didn't.

 

As far as did the replacements work the owners got what they wanted they proved that a lot of the players would cross the line in 1987 and the players quickly turned in an agreement and started playing. Since than the NFLPA has only been able to get little gains (With the exception of the last CBA they did better than they usually do) in their fight against the owners.

[Flbillsfan#1]

The best argument I have ever heard for the inflated salaries of Pro Athletes in a real world setting is if you had some sort of talent and some guy made 150 thousand dollars profit (A day) off what you and only you were able to do is it right for that guy to only pay you 100k a year. Sure 100k a year is nice and you can live in a very nice style but why should that guy be making tens of millions of dollars a year off of what you do and he only pays you a fraction of the profits.

 

Its the players wanting their piece of the pie. Why should the Billionaires line their pockets while the guys who put their blood sweat and tears into the game get the short end of the stick. I will always support a labor union in sports as long as they make a reasonable attempt to negotiate a contract. The NHLPA was so loved during the lockout because they not only tried to get a cap at the last minute but agreed to a 24% roll back in salaries to try and facilitate the process.

 

Like I said the players in the NFL will get my support but the owners know most fans will watch the Replacements (Once again not the movie). And a lot of players will cross the picket line as well. Football players are raised as solders from day 1 they rarely have a philosophy of going against the team or the company so strikes just aren't in their nature (Unlike Baseball players).

 

I personally don't think there will be a lock out or replacement games The NFLPA will realize they don't have the hammer they think and once again players will cross the line. So the NFLPA will agree to concessions like a cap and a cap that is less likely to increase every year. The NFLPA will also agree to a rookie salary structure. The owners will give them some of what they want but the owners will ultimately end up winning.

That is a false argument however. They can always get another football player, maybe not as good a player but a replacement never the less. Your senario requires a skill no one else has that is not the case with football. The owners will always make their money but the fans are paying a lot more than they should have to because of the money the players make.

[billsfan89]

Why should the Jason Peters' of the world "settle" for one penny less then the NFL owners of the world are willing to pay them? Would you ever tell your boss not to give you a raise because you think you should "settle" for less money due to you earning too much?

 

There is absolutely nothing, especially in today's depressed state of our economy, stopping the 32 owners from deciding that $310,000 is the most any NFL player will make, instead of the least! If the players walked, most of the NFL owners would probably save money overall in their billionaire worlds by shutting down their NFL franchises anyway!!

 

Don't hate Peters, hate the Eagles owner for paying him what his agent demanded.

 

To quote Steven Colbert "The free market has spoken" Yet its a capped league so is it really a free market? I guess my point is the owners and the owners alone have the power to set the salary structure. I just don't get why the owners can't police themselves sometimes and call the players bluffs. Perfect example was the Anderson Varejao situation in the NBA the Cleveland Cavs gave a guy whose best numbers were 8 points and 8 rebounds a game 50 million Dollars for 6 years with incentives.

 

Who was going to give that player 30 million dollars over 4 years let alone 6 years at 50. If the Cavs said hey Lebron wants you so we will give you 4 years 28 million what team would have matched that. The 6 years 50 million was probably the agents first really stupid high offer that he would negotiate down from but when the Cavs accepted even the agent must have been like you are kidding right?

 

Stupid spending by the owners is what kills leagues and forces a salary cap. The NHL needed a salary cap because Bobby Holik (A guy who never scored 30 goals in his life) was getting a 40 million dollar contract.

 

The NFL owners need to realize they get a good deal most of the contracts in the league contain little guaranteed money (Most if any of it gets paid off in the first 2 years) and they have an easily manipulated cap as well as big time revenue sharing thanks to fat TV contracts.

[billsfan89]

That is a false argument however. They can always get another football player, maybe not as good a player but a replacement never the less. Your senario requires a skill no one else has that is not the case with football. The owners will always make their money but the fans are paying a lot more than they should have to because of the money the players make.

 

But over time if a leagues quality goes down the tubes because of lesser players playing than the owners lose money because the value of the league and the franchises goes down. Also if another football league emerges that is willing to pay for good talent (AFL and to a much lesser extent USFL) than the competition further hurts the value of the NFL. And the fans will always be paying up the ass its just as much the owners wanting to maximize profits as it is the players getting their share of the revenue.

[Mr. WEO]

Everyone here will watch scab NFL Bills football. Anyone who says otherwise is simply full of shiiiitt.

 

There will be no other league to entice locked out or striking players away from the NFL. There have been at least 5 and they are all defunct. A new one is set to fold soon.

 

A significant number of the owners make the majority of their money through their ownership of an NFL team (count Ralphie tops among them). Given what they get now, there will be no public sympathy for players who strike or locked out. Fans are for teams, not players.

[Flbillsfan#1]

But over time if a leagues quality goes down the tubes because of lesser players playing than the owners lose money because the value of the league and the franchises goes down. Also if another football league emerges that is willing to pay for good talent (AFL and to a much lesser extent USFL) than the competition further hurts the value of the NFL. And the fans will always be paying up the ass its just as much the owners wanting to maximize profits as it is the players getting their share of the revenue.

A new league to compete with the NFL will NEVER happen. The players will ultimately come to an agreement with the NFL. I predict a Rookie salary cap & an 18 game season.

[Canadian Bills Fan]

Only if Dan Heller was the QB. Wait nvm he was second string.

[naj377]

If we sign Shane Falco.....CHAMPIONSHIP

i have season tickets for the second year in a row and let me just say half the time i feel like im watching replacement players now.. i love the bills and i have as much hope as the next bills fan but sometimes our players play like complete sh-- and it reflects DJ