http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/30/AR2011013004628.html
League and union agree to 24 hour extension:
http://www.nfl.com/
I'm sure that will give them enough time to iron out everything that they haven't been able to take care of over the last 2 months.
having only 2 owners of the 32 teams at that meeting says only one thing--not even close.
thats what I call dedication.
Quote from: Sgt PSN on March 03, 2011, 05:51:11 PM
I'm sure that will give them enough time to iron out everything that they haven't been able to take care of over the last 2 months.
yeah i dont get a 24 hour extension at this point......a 24 hour extension to a drop dead date for missing regular season games i could see....but this early in the process?....worthless
the union is forced to put in their decertification if a new labor agreement is not met
the 24 hr extension just allows them to not have to, and move to another extension--probably 2 weeks to see if they can pull it off
they can decertify in five minutes if they want to...or they can decertify in two weeks...extensions have no bearing on their decertification whatsoever
if they extend for another two weeks then ill kind of believe that they could possibly be serious about getting a new deal...but a 24 extension means nothing
i kinda think they will get it done this month or early next...im not saying its the main reason to get it done but they cannot want a draft to take place during a work stoppage it would just crush the draft balloon and all the excitement inside of it
I just hope - mostly for the Eagles sake - that they get the CBA done before the draft. I'd rather the Eagles go after a guy like Nmandi at CB than to draft a young guy. They sign a starter at CB then they can use their picks at other spots. Not to mention, unless they're blown away with an offer for Kolb, they're better off just holding onto him next season because what's the use of getting draft picks (for next season) after the draft is over.
apparently a week long extension is a done deal and that should lead to a new cba
hooray! go rich funholes!
so a lockout is most likely a mere 12 hours away, and your new york giants have sent an email to all their sth offering additional psl's between $7,500 and $25,000. its amazing how fast a sth waiting list dwindles down when the biggest crock in the history of sports business comes into play.
Quote from: SD on March 04, 2011, 08:03:32 AM
I just hope - mostly for the Eagles sake - that they get the CBA done before the draft. I'd rather the Eagles go after a guy like Nmandi at CB than to draft a young guy. They sign a starter at CB then they can use their picks at other spots. Not to mention, unless they're blown away with an offer for Kolb, they're better off just holding onto him next season because what's the use of getting draft picks (for next season) after the draft is over.
Word. This is the ONLY reason I give a damn about this labor deal getting done right now. Gotta be free to
rip somebody off for, trade Kolb before the draft. To hell with 2012 picks...
if its real feva you have the greatest avatar ever
Do people still have avatars/signatures turned on? I don't even know what my signature is on this board but it has to be like 6 years old.
well i dont come here for the posts...
I have avatars turned on but sigs are off.
I turned all that crap off a long time ago. Pages load a lot faster without it, and none of it has any bearing whatsoever on our "discussions."
You're all missing out on all the fun.
Looks like they may have reached an agreement on the rookie wage scale
4-yr deals then UFA for all 1st-rd picks (no more 6-yr deals for #1-16 and 5-yr deals for #17-32)
3-yr deals then RFA for everyone else (no more 4-yr and 5-yr deals)
plus limits on signing bonuses for everyone
Joe Banner is in a frothy rage over the year limits.
So... Banner, Inc. will be extending their scrubs after 8 games now??
Quote from: EagleFeva on March 09, 2011, 11:35:47 PM
So... Banner, Inc. will be extending their scrubs after 8 hours now??
Probably. Anything to get around the rules.
remember when everyone use to think banner was a cap genius...god that used to piss me off
Well, he actually is. The Eagles did a lot of crazy shtein to consistently have one of the highest payrolls and one of the most comfortable cap situations at the same time.
As for these negotiations in general, two things could happen which would make a deal very easy. Of course, neither of the two are likely to happen at all:
1. The owners/Goodell realize that the fans really do not want an 18-game season and love the season the way it is currently structured. Season ticket holders may prefer an extra real home game to an extra preseason game, but owners would just increase ticket prices accordingly anyway, so it's a wash.
2. The players realize that the last deal had a lot of financial concessions to keep the game alive for the short term but that more money has to go the owners' way in this deal for it to ever get done.
But in the mean time, don't let reality get in the way of some "negotiations," you fargers.
he does nothing nobody else didnt/couldnt do...to think that he was smarter than anyone else regarding the cap is such a swirly lolipop thing it was ridiculous...the only difference btwn him now and then is that people hate him now so they arent being blinded homers like they were ten years ago...when is the last time you heard cap genius and banner...2002?
that's because everybody copied his shtein. so he wasn't the only one doing it anymore.
shtein with giving huge unattainable bonuses that pushed the next years cap was something nobody else realized you could do until he did it.
i hate the dude with a burning passion, but i'm pretty sure his rep for being a cap guru is deserved.
Quote from: SunMo on March 10, 2011, 09:01:44 AM
that's because everybody copied his shtein. so he wasn't the only one doing it anymore.
shtein with giving huge unattainable bonuses that pushed the next years cap was something nobody else realized you could do until he did it.
i hate the dude with a burning passion, but i'm pretty sure his rep for being a cap guru is deserved.
I dislike Banner as well but you're right in that he was the first one to exploit the loophole in the cap that other teams emulated. Sure he's a nerdy Orodonker CPA who shouldn't be team president but he deserves credit where it's due.
Speaking of Banner:
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagles/20110310_Sources__Eagles__Banner_involved_in_developing_rookie_wage-scale_plan.html
He knows the Eagles are trading Kolb for a top 10 pick, so that makes sense.
Quote from: SunMo on March 10, 2011, 09:01:44 AM
that's because everybody copied his shtein. so he wasn't the only one doing it anymore.
shtein with giving huge unattainable bonuses that pushed the next years cap was something nobody else realized you could do until he did it.
i hate the dude with a burning passion, but i'm pretty sure his rep for being a cap guru is deserved.
even if he was the first...any cpa in the country could have figured out to do that...its not like he was john nash coming up with formulas that would change the worlds economy
im sure there are tons of cap guys who came up with other strategies first that have been used by others...but they arent geniuses they are just doing their job...dan snyder figured out a way to sign any player he wanted no matter how far over the cap he was....omg hes a genius!
i have no doubt banner is good at his job...hes just not the genius that he has portrayed himself as...hes probably better than some gm's who try and double as cap guys but hes no different than any other capologist in the league
He was at the forefront of it, igy. Like Mo mentioned - he led, they followed
i hate that i am put in the position of defending joe banner
goddamn igy
even if he cured cancer it still won them exactly 0 super bowls
farg you, joe banner
Quote from: SunMo on March 10, 2011, 10:21:28 AM
i hate that i am put in the position of defending joe banner
goddamn igy
you arent defending him (unless you truly think hes a genius) you just think hes smarter than he is...which is what he wants
i think hes done a good job i just dont buy into the genius talk and thats hes the smartest guy in the room
theres guys all over sports that do the same things hes done he just likes to spin his stuff as something different...for some reason people used to buy into it...thats really the genius of it
I wouldn't classify a guy like Joe Banner as a genius, Norman Einstein on the other hand...now that guy was smart.
Quote from: MDS on March 10, 2011, 10:57:12 AM
even if he cured cancer it still won them exactly 0 super bowls
farg you, joe banner
Joe knows there's no money in a cure.
If only someone had created a Joe Banner thread.
yeah cause then you could yell at the people in that thread yelling about banner.
Banner is a huge douchebag. We know this. The only other thing about him that is universally accepted is his mastery of the salary cap loopholes. Well, most of us, anyway.
I'd agree with IGY that Banner coming up with making bogus not likely to be earned incentives to push cap money into the next year is something others would have eventually come up with. But, there were many other areas that he was way ahead of the curve. That so many teams were in cap jail in the earlier years of the cap, sometimes taking several years to get out while the Eagles were very well positioned shows Banners ability. He excelled in how to manipulate Deion charges/credits and apparently had a good plan to maximize comp picks by staggering the years in which they let high priced vets go and attained others.
Cap management is extremely complex and it's not like all capologists basically knew most of the same stuff. There's a huge difference in ability. It wasn't uncommon for a team to have to ask the league to clarify something they couldn't understand and there were instances in which the NFL gave an answer that later turned out to be wrong because even the league couldn't get it right.
And if there is any doubt about Banner's genius, consider when they paid Westbrook's $3 million bonus twice, as a pretext for then writing 60 pages of the most complex NFL contract ever. So much so that it boggled Westbrooks mind to the extent he became predisposed to concussions, allowing the team due to cut him, avoiding the balloon payments in the following years. You don't see Dan Snyder coming up with that shtein.
League year could start before CBA is reached (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/10/league-year-could-start-long-before-new-cba-is-reached/)
This is HUGE for the Eagles, as it would allow them to trade Kolb for draft picks THIS year.
Quote from: Eagaholic on March 11, 2011, 01:56:22 AM
I'd agree with IGY that Banner coming up with making bogus not likely to be earned incentives to push cap money into the next year is something others would have eventually come up with.
This is Havas' entire argument and its like saying that if Einstein hadn't proven the Theory of Relativity then someone else would so Einstein shouldn't really get any credit for being smart. Sure, someone else would have figured it out, but Einstein did it first. Gotta give credit where it's due and when it comes to managing a cap, Banner was ahead of his peers. Now when it comes to placing a $ value on certain positions, Joe is dumber than a bucket of shrimp. He knows dollars and cents not x's and o's and if Lurie ever limits him to doing the books and leaving football decisions to football people, then the Eagles will be far better off.
i dont not give him credit for coming up with it (if he indeed did) i just dont think it makes him any smarter than anyone else
just like i dont think the skins are smarter than anyone else because they found a way to sign monster free agents even when they are way over the cap and everyone in the world said they wouldnt be able to sign anyone
btw this is a great piece today from HOF domo
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagles/20110311_Paul_Domowitch__Judge_Doty__NFL_owners__best_incentive_to_settle.html
Quote from: SunMo on March 10, 2011, 10:21:28 AM
i hate that i am put in the position of defending joe banner
goddamn igy
:-D :-D :-D
Quote from: ice grillin you on March 11, 2011, 12:41:14 PM
just like i dont think the skins are smarter than anyone else because they found a way to sign monster free agents even when they are way over the cap and everyone in the world said they wouldnt be able to sign anyone
That was only because they were lucky the league increased the cap much more than had been expected previously with the new CBA. Even so, they still had to cut at least 3 or 4 starters to get under the cap which set the team back talent wise so they really didn't "get away with it." They mortgaged sucking in the future to be able to suck in the present.
Looks like it's on
QuoteJohn Mara says union wasn't serious about negotiating
Posted by Mike Florio on March 11, 2011, 5:51 PM EST
NFL LABOR FOOTBALL
In a rapid-fire press conference outside the offices of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service in Washington, Giants co-owner John Mara bluntly but respectfully accused the union of failing to proceed in good faith during the recent stretch of bargaining.
"This obviously is a very disappointing day for all of us," Mara said. "I've been here for the better part of two weeks now. And essentially during that two-week period the union's position on the core economic issues has not changed, one iota. Their position has basically been 'take it or leave it,' and they've in effect they've been at the same position since last September.
"We made an offer to them today to basically split the difference between the two sides. We made that approximately at 12 o'clock, and at 4 o'clock they came back and said that it was insufficent and they apparently have decided to decertify.
"One thing that became painfully apparent to me during this period was that their objective was to go the litigation route. I think that they believe that that gives them the best leverage. I never really got the feeling during the past two weeks that they were serious about negotiating, and it's unfortunate because that's not what collective bargaining is all about. I think eventually we'll be back at the table, but unfortunately now we're going to have to go through this process now, where we're in court."
The fact that an offer was made at noon and a response came only four hours later suggests one of two realities. First, the union may have intentionally delayed responding in order to back the owners into a corner late in the day. Second, the union may have seriously considered the offer, possibly with plenty of tension and disagreement in the room.
If it's the latter, look for cracks to quickly emerge among the players, some of whom may be regretting the decision not to accept the offer — or to continue to talk.
That said, talking may continue. But the offer made today may not be back on the table any time soon.
I for one hope we lose a season and it goes on so long the owners and players get poor and the lawyers get super rich, like the vultures that feed on the decaying animals that kill each other fighting. I know, not much chance of that, or at least the owners going broke.
The owners are farged now. Good. More power to the players.
If true, this could be surprising
QuoteSource: Free agency could start at midnight
Posted by Mike Florio on March 11, 2011, 6:31 PM EST
Image (2) NFL_asomugha_250-thumb-250x185-13551.jpg for post 77686
As the league scrambles to process the meaning of the union's decision to decertify, a high-level source with one team tells PFT that the league is preparing for the possibility that free agency could begin soon.
As in at midnight.
Per the source, the league is bracing for the possibility of a ruling from Judge David Doty that would force the doors to remain open, compelling the league to allow player movement and trades as soon as 12:01 a.m. Saturday.
That would be awesome if true. As a fan I don't really care much about the grudge match between the players and the owners. There are minor things I'm in favor of like keeping a 16 game schedule and a rookie wage pool because I don't believe an unproven player should make that much. I don't know how they'd make that work though without a CBA and cap in place. I guess it could be like last offseason for now.
Jeff Mclane:
QuoteA high-ranking league source just told me that he didn't expect there to be free agency at midnight.
I'd rather see a quote from Todd than McLane but ok.
Just talked to my source and yes in fact they sent their jv team to the brownsville tourney and the varsity to the sharyland one
Not cool
The owners can go to hell. Rotten bastiches, how much is enough? For sitting on your ass and shuffling paper? Bunch of thieving capitalist shteinheels.
youll all be happy to know that joe banner has an opinion on this
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagles/20110312_Eagles_president_Joe_Banner_is_frustrated_with_NFL_stalemate.html
Good article by Don Banks. Pretty much nails as far as I'm concerned.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/don_banks/03/11/nfl.labor.front.ap/
Quote from: Eagaholic on March 12, 2011, 12:45:26 PM
Good article by Don Banks. Pretty much nails as far as I'm concerned.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/don_banks/03/11/nfl.labor.front.ap/
QuoteTransparency has been the big topic of the week in these negotiations, so here's some for you, in news flash form: What the league and its players are both trying to protect is as much of the NFL's $9.3 billion of revenue as possible. Nothing more. Nothing less. We all like money, so on some level we can relate to that. But we also like our football, and that's the part both sides seem more than willing to play with, even at the risk of doing harm to the game and to those people who watch it and make it so wildly popular.
And no matter what they say, or how much they spin, both sides are willing to take that risk and possibly inflict that damage because of the obscene amount of money that's at stake. They do so even while talking ever so respectfully about the NFL and the fans who have exalted it to such a special and cherished place in our society.
Ah...what damage? What is Banks talking about? A work stoppage will somehow damage
the game itself? The fans will be hurt? Are you f'n joking?
The rich people who make all the money off these games will be fine, and so will the fans. No one is going to actually suffer without this particular version of entertainment. Some stadium workers and the like will suffer, of course, but the little guys are always the ones to get farged, that's nothing new.
Far as I can tell, all that will happen is some games won't be played and when they sort shtein out, they'll play games again, and the fans will continue to pay whatever the NFL charges.
The Eagles didn't have a problem taking my season ticket money.
This just crossed my computer at work...
QuoteLetter to Eagles season ticket holders from owner Jeffrey Lurie and president Joe Banner.
In light of the events that occurred yesterday, we wanted to take this opportunity to update you on the status of the Collective Bargaining Agreement and how it affects the Philadelphia Eagles. As we are sure you are aware, the contract between the league and the labor union representing the players has expired, the union decertified and we have entered into a lockout.
However, the NFL remains committed to collective bargaining and the federal mediation process until an agreement is reached - an agreement that is good for the long-term health of the league. We believe that a deal will get done.
We want you to know our focus is on preparation for the 2011 season and we are going to continue to do everything we can to strengthen our football team. We will be ready to take advantage of all opportunities within league rules to help reach our ultimate goal. We are also excited about the upcoming 2011 draft on April 28-30 and our preparation for that has been in the works for a long time.
Regardless of what transpires throughout this offseason, our commitment to winning a Super Bowl remains the number one priority throughout our entire organization. We are also committed to keeping an open line of communication with you and our entire fan base throughout these labor discussions. We plan on hosting several events throughout the off season that our fans can enjoy. Our annual Draft Party will take place on April 28 at Lincoln Financial Field.
We greatly appreciate your continued support.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey Lurie and Joe Banner
barf...
so its lurie AND banner now?
has it always been this way? cause in times like this lurie used to kind of stand up and put himself above everyone else in the organization.
Nauseating.
Quote from: Eagaholic on March 11, 2011, 05:28:02 PM
Quote from: ice grillin you on March 11, 2011, 12:41:14 PM
just like i dont think the skins are smarter than anyone else because they found a way to sign monster free agents even when they are way over the cap and everyone in the world said they wouldnt be able to sign anyone
That was only because they were lucky the league increased the cap much more than had been expected previously with the new CBA. Even so, they still had to cut at least 3 or 4 starters to get under the cap which set the team back talent wise so they really didn't "get away with it." They mortgaged sucking in the future to be able to suck in the present.
they done been doing it since 1997
Hate on the billionaire owners all you want, but the NFLPA and its awful leader De Smith are much more to blame for this situation. After the fact they absolutely lied about the proposals they'd received.
Read more if you like (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/12/the-nflpa-statement-on-issues-preventing-a-new-cba/).
You simply can't be well-informed about this entire situation and still think that the NFL and the owners are more to blame than the players' association.
I'm well enough informed to know that the guys who are literally killing themselves to play the game deserve better than the owners are willing to give up. They apparently aren't making enough billiions to compensate for all that hard work they do in meeting rooms and limosines.
remember no cba expired here...the owners opted out of a deal that was making them billions of dollars because they wanted to make a billion and one dollars...it literally was the most healthy sports business in the history of the world and the old men made it all go away for no other reason than pure unadulterated greed
Calling the owners greedy is hardly a problem for people like FF, who believe in greed as a good thing to be encouraged and celebrated.
The owners of the 10-15 most successful teams are greedy. The owners of the bottom 5-7 are misers but are also fighting for attendance. Contraction would be the absolutely the worst thing for the players, but if they squeeze every last speck out of the owners, it is very possible.
And yes, the owners opted out of a deal that they never liked all along and was unsustainable top to bottom.
But don't let little things like facts let you stop fighting against THE MAN.
Owners = Republicans
Players = Democrats
They're all at fault but I chose to side with the lesser of two evils, which is the players.
I don't side with either of them. I just want to watch some football. Whatever voluntary agreement the two sides work out is their own business. I hope everyone gets as much as they can.
Quote from: FastFreddie on March 13, 2011, 11:55:16 AMAnd yes, the owners opted out of a deal that they never liked all along and was unsustainable top to bottom.
A deal they signed onto, speaking of facts.
I guess it's alright for owners to sign deals they don't like and then opt out of them whenever they want? Kinda like banks.
Players and homeowners, they must stick to their contracts though.
You're not dealing in the real, brother.
FF is that fat houswife from branson who thinks the next scratch off she buys will be finally win her the money she thinks she deserves
you are awful
Quote from: FastFreddie on March 13, 2011, 11:55:16 AM
And yes, the owners opted out of a deal that they never liked all along and was unsustainable top to bottom.
do you actully believe the stuff you write?
O come on, igy, even you must be able to see that the owners just weren't getting enough income against the risks they were taking, and all that hard work they were doing.
the owners arent refusing to open their books because they are losing money thats for sure
option a: they won't come clean with the players because they are hiding profits as expenses
option b: see above
The players are supposed to trust the owners? Ha.
Sometimes, you guys are simply too easy.
(http://www.unique-southamerica-travel-experience.com/images/fly-fishing-copia.jpg)
Quote from: Diomedes on March 12, 2011, 01:14:58 PM
Quote from: Eagaholic on March 12, 2011, 12:45:26 PM
Good article by Don Banks. Pretty much nails as far as I'm concerned.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/don_banks/03/11/nfl.labor.front.ap/
QuoteTransparency has been the big topic of the week in these negotiations, so here's some for you, in news flash form: What the league and its players are both trying to protect is as much of the NFL's $9.3 billion of revenue as possible. Nothing more. Nothing less. We all like money, so on some level we can relate to that. But we also like our football, and that's the part both sides seem more than willing to play with, even at the risk of doing harm to the game and to those people who watch it and make it so wildly popular.
And no matter what they say, or how much they spin, both sides are willing to take that risk and possibly inflict that damage because of the obscene amount of money that's at stake. They do so even while talking ever so respectfully about the NFL and the fans who have exalted it to such a special and cherished place in our society.
Ah...what damage? What is Banks talking about? A work stoppage will somehow damage the game itself? The fans will be hurt? Are you f'n joking?
The rich people who make all the money off these games will be fine, and so will the fans. No one is going to actually suffer without this particular version of entertainment. Some stadium workers and the like will suffer, of course, but the little guys are always the ones to get farged, that's nothing new.
Far as I can tell, all that will happen is some games won't be played and when they sort shtein out, they'll play games again, and the fans will continue to pay whatever the NFL charges.
It could hurt the financial bottom line quite a bit if they somehow are stupid enough to let the lockout go well into or through the season. Especially if the players prevail in court cases. The NFL would lose billions and the effect of a meteorically rising profit margin is unknown.
The general point of the article though that I completely agree with is that owners and payers are both to blame. You can argue it might be one side a little more than the other but I for one am not getting sucked into an idiotic good guys v bad guys blame game. They are all to blame, but not nearly as much as we fans who continue to just take it and go back for more.
Really, I don't care who's right, but the Eagles better be able to trade Kolbsy for a 2011 1st rounder and there better be a full 16 game season with the actual players next year.
Quote from: ice grillin you on March 12, 2011, 11:45:49 PM
Quote from: Eagaholic on March 11, 2011, 05:28:02 PM
Quote from: ice grillin you on March 11, 2011, 12:41:14 PM
just like i dont think the skins are smarter than anyone else because they found a way to sign monster free agents even when they are way over the cap and everyone in the world said they wouldnt be able to sign anyone
That was only because they were lucky the league increased the cap much more than had been expected previously with the new CBA. Even so, they still had to cut at least 3 or 4 starters to get under the cap which set the team back talent wise so they really didn't "get away with it." They mortgaged sucking in the future to be able to suck in the present.
they done been doing it since 1997
If you mean they've been sucking since 1997, it was a lot longer before then. If you mean they have been getting away with huge spending, it was around 2003 they tried to keep themselves atop the NFL spending charts. in the few years before then they below the league average is salary spending.
Quote from: Eagaholic on March 13, 2011, 06:20:38 PMIt could hurt the financial bottom line quite a bit if they somehow are stupid enough to let the lockout go well into or through the season. Especially if the players prevail in court cases. The NFL would lose billions and the effect of a meteorically rising profit margin is unknown.
The general point of the article though that I completely agree with is that owners and payers are both to blame. You can argue it might be one side a little more than the other but I for one am not getting sucked into an idiotic good guys v bad guys blame game. They are all to blame, but not nearly as much as we fans who continue to just take it and go back for more.
a.) Hurting the NFL's finances is not hurting the game.
b.) I like the idiotic blame game. for the record, I think the owners are thieving bastiches who risk little or nothing and don't earn even a fraction of their income wereas the players risk their lives, sacrifice quality of life in later years (if they don't all actually shorten their lives), and bust their asses to do it. In case y'all haven't noticed, I think we should eat the rich with bullets.
c.) I like the idea of the fans as the true villains...so after we cut all the whining billionaires throats, we can drown anyone who owns season tickets in their blood
also, I would like to see Banner choke to death on a rapecock
Quote from: Diomedes on March 13, 2011, 07:01:04 PM
Quote from: Eagaholic on March 13, 2011, 06:20:38 PMIt could hurt the financial bottom line quite a bit if they somehow are stupid enough to let the lockout go well into or through the season. Especially if the players prevail in court cases. The NFL would lose billions and the effect of a meteorically rising profit margin is unknown.
The general point of the article though that I completely agree with is that owners and payers are both to blame. You can argue it might be one side a little more than the other but I for one am not getting sucked into an idiotic good guys v bad guys blame game. They are all to blame, but not nearly as much as we fans who continue to just take it and go back for more.
a.) Hurting the NFL's finances is not hurting the game.
b.) I like the idiotic blame game. for the record, I think the owners are thieving bastiches who risk little or nothing and don't earn even a fraction of their income wereas the players risk their lives, sacrifice quality of life in later years (if they don't all actually shorten their lives), and bust their asses to do it. In case y'all haven't noticed, I think we should eat the rich with bullets.
c.) I like the idea of the fans as the true villains...so after we cut all the whining billionaires throats, we can drown anyone who owns season tickets in their blood
The players also can make millions, have fame and get the red carpet treatment, get all the bitches and have a choice to go into another profession of choice if they don't want the risks of playing football.
As far as rounding up all the owners and season ticket holders and drowning them in their own blood, I would like to sell tickets to this event and would be willing to give 40% of the gate receipts to the families as long as I own sole broadcasting and concession rights.
a practice squad guy gets no bitches, and the league would be nothing without fresh meat from guys like that...so I don't buy the players-are-all-rich-rock-stars-with-options argument.
Regarding your proposal for Richie Rich and their Enablers Bloodbath, we can do business provided you grant me a no-bid contract to build the guillotines, racks, and other implements of entertainment, and of course, dig the (shallow) graves.
Done. Btw, what do we do with the lawyers in all this? As always, they seem to be getting away unscathed.
I say we let them be if we know what's good for us, but I'm just the ship's carpenter, Captain, so I'll go along with your orders.
Peter King (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/03/14/labor/index.html):
QuoteI think I don't want to hear either side say another word about how much they care about the fans. Meaningless prattle. The owners care about the fans turning in their season-ticket money. The players care about the fans not thinking they're greedy carpetbaggers. The fans don't want to hear anything other than, "We've got a new labor deal.''
Amen.
NLFPA "orders" college players not to attend next month's draft (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft2011/news/story?id=6216135)
QuoteThe NFL Players Association is putting into place a plan that would prevent each top college prospect from attending next month's draft in New York, according to multiple league sources. The NFLPA already has contacted 17 top prospects that ordinarily would have received an invitation to attend the draft and informed them not to go.
I get that these kids will eventually be part of the union, so maybe it's in their best interest to toe the line right now. But at the same time, this seems to be a very childish thing for the NFLPA to do. You only get drafted once and every college player dreams of hearing his name called, walking across the stage and holding up his team's jersey. If anything, the NFL should probably just cancel the draft until everything is worked out. Teams can't sign their draft picks until a new cba is agreed on, can they?
They can't even talk to their draft picks.
Pretty much everything after, "Congratulations on being an Eagle..." is illegal.
All the more reason to just postpone the draft until this ish is settled. And really, these kids entering the draft are the ones getting hosed because they've got no paycheck coming in and unlike NFL players and owners, have no money to fall back on. And the "union" is putting them in a tough situation here by telling them not to attend the draft. What do they do? Attend the draft and risk pissing off a union that will one day represent them and their best interests? Or stay home and possibily piss off the guy who is going to sign your paychecks?
probably less than one percent of drafted players attend the draft...how is this even remotely an issue
and how are drafted players getting screwed more than anyone else...they wone be getting paychecks the day before the draft and they wont be getting paychecks the day after the draft....nothing changes for them
Pretty sure that they get paid when they sign their contracts. Granted, that sometimes takes several months of negotiating with the top picks in the draft, but your later round guys and udfa's usually sign fairly quick to get their $40k bonus.
yeah they get money as soon as they sign but they arent making anything now and they wont be making anything until they are allowed to sign
how is that worse than the guys who are already getting checks that just stopped
Mostly because the guys who have been getting checks should have a little in reserve, especially since they've known it was a possibility for at least 1 year. Kids coming out of college on the other hand probably don't have much to fall back on.
I'm not saying they won't get by, but they are easily in a tougher spot than billionaire owners and millionaire athletes who have already been paid.
With all the rumors and speculation around gov't paychecks being frozen, who would be impacted worse, you or some kid right out of college who just started?
they will either go to back to college and work out with good trainers in good facilities or they will go back to doing whatever they did before they were in college...living with ma dooks working out at their high school and splittin appetizers at applebees with their boys on the weekends..in other words they wont be impacted in the least...cant lose what you dont got
the exception could be some kid who has taken out some big loan and used the cake to purchase some big ticket items expecting to pay it off with his nfl contract....but even that will be covered by his agent in most cases
Quote from: Sgt PSN on March 14, 2011, 02:44:59 PMBut at the same time, this seems to be a very childish thing for the NFLPA to do.
It is childish, but they are making the judgement that it's within their best interest, and they are probably correct. They are trying to get all the leverage against the NFL that they can, in an attempt to drive the owners to the table. This is probably the first of many childish stunts.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/15/adrian-peterson-slavery-nfl_n_836090.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/15/adrian-peterson-slavery-nfl_n_836090.html)
Has there ever been a dumber comment by an athlete?
Seems like somebody says that every five to ten years.
True, and yes, there have been dumber comments by athletes. Jocks says stupid shtein all the time because, news flash, they are among the dumbest motherfargers on the planet.
Besides, he's got a point. I'd use the word 'gladiators' rather than 'slave,' but he's onto something with his line of thinking. The players risk their lives and should they not be killed or maimed while playing the game, their long term health is guaranteed to be adversely affected. Sure, they get more money than most of us do in return for their services, but what they get is always a tiny fraction of what the Owner makes. Kinda like the way we get paid and the way the CEO gets paid.
We do the work, they get the money.
Yay Jerruh
Quote
Jim Trotter of SI.com gives a behind the scenes glimpse into one of the reasons why the negotiations between NFL owners and players broke down.
Mediator George Cohen began the session by giving each owner an opportunity to speak. Jerry Jones, never one to pass up center stage, tried to lighten the mood by talking of his upbringing and the business acumen that led to his purchase of the Cowboys 22 years ago. The tenor changed when he began discussing how two years of negotiations had failed to bring the sides closer. What he said next, with arched eyebrows, helped steer the situation past the point of no return.
"I don't think we've got your attention," Jones said to the players, several of whom recounted the incident. "You clearly don't understand what we're saying, and we're not hearing what you're saying. So I guess we're going to have to show you to get your attention."
Jones tapped his fists together for emphasis—the players interpreted it as a sign that a lockout was coming—then stood and walked toward the door. As he reached the end of the table, Panthers owner Jerry Richardson, another labor hawk, began to rise, but Robert Kraft of the Patriots, who was sitting next to him, put a hand on Richardson's forearm and kept him from going.
If Jones's intention was to intimidate the players, he failed. "I think everybody in the room thought it was overly dramatic, almost hilarious," one player said. "It was like a Jerry Maguire moment. You know, 'I'm leaving. Who's coming with me?' I know it didn't scare any of us."
somehow i dont think a billionaire threatening to roll out of a negotiation would carry much weight
if i were the players id bring conrad dobler and andre waters widow to the next bargining table
Quote from: Diomedes on March 15, 2011, 10:44:33 PM
True, and yes, there have been dumber comments by athletes. Jocks says stupid shtein all the time because, news flash, they are among the dumbest motherfargers on the planet.
Besides, he's got a point. I'd use the word 'gladiators' rather than 'slave,' but he's onto something with his line of thinking. The players risk their lives and should they not be killed or maimed while playing the game, their long term health is guaranteed to be adversely affected. Sure, they get more money than most of us do in return for their services, but what they get is always a tiny fraction of what the Owner makes. Kinda like the way we get paid and the way the CEO gets paid.
We do the work, they get the money.
so wait, slaves and gladiators got paid ? got free educations to go to college thanks to their skills? had a choice to do what they did ?
Yeah Dio I think you are a little off-base on this one. These athletes may not be among the most brilliant men in the world, but they are afforded many opportunities that most people would kill for. Not to mention there are tons of jobs where people risk their lives and serious injury and don't get paid a fraction of what these guys do.
Dio's extra salty when it comes to the rich and it's clouding his judgement. I'm far from being on the owner's side, but the more this drags on the more I realize I'm not on either side. And that pisses me off because now I'm starting to look at the NFL the same way I look at our political system; I hate it.
I have hard time feeling sympathetic for millionaires and billionaires arguing over money. The people I do feel sorry for are the guys on the practice squads and special teams players who bust their asses twice as hard as the "stars" all year long and do so for maybe a few hundred thousand if they're lucky. I feel for college kids entering the draft who have been working hard to reach the NFL only to find out there might not be any practices or games in the near future. I feel bad for the employees of the teams that work behind the scenes and are looking at potential layoffs or pay cuts. And I feel bad for the poor schlubs who work the gates and concession stands to help make a few extra bucks. If there's no season, there's definitely no need for their services. Guess they'll have to pick up a paper route or something.
i will almost always side with players because without them sports doesnt exist...theres tons of people who can run a business whereas only a handful of people in the world can play pro sports...they are so much more important than the owners its not even funny...that said there are times when im split such as in hockey a few years ago when the viability of the league was in question
however i dont think it would be possible to have a situation that leans players more than this current one...you have a sport where the players are literally putting their lives on the line and are the lowest paid pro athletes...they have no guaranteed contracts nor do they have 100% free agency...again the only pro athletes that dont
finally factor in that the sport prints its own money...the tv contracts are obscene and are only getting larger
shtein i think a 50/50 split of revenues is insane if im a player...i dont even know why they agree to that
If you put a gun to my head and told me to pick a side, I'd pick the players. Kind of like how I'd pick Democrats over Republicans given the same scenerio. I don't have a problem with how much athletes make and I don't think they should be paid any less than 50%. But at the same time, I do have a problem when someone like AP comes out and says that he's treated like a slave. Warren Sapp said it a few years back as well. Ever notice that it's always the more well known and well paid players who say this stuff? But you never hear those types of things coming from the 53rd guy on the roster making 200k.
Do the players have legitimate gripes? Of course they do. But that doesn't take away from the fact that they live a very priviledged life that the majority of their fans will never get to experience.
i dont buy into the comparison to the regular person...they arent regular people...they have a skill that no one else in the world does and that skill generates mountains of money so naturally they are going to live a more privledged life than you or i...altho im not sure id call a lot of ex players lives privledged...being crippled doesnt sound like much fun to me
Larry Flynt says, fuhhh yaouuuu
i read that one of the things that blew everything up last Friday is that the Owners wanted the salary cap to be a fixed number throughout the CBA. So while the owners renegotiated the TV deal the players would be getting paid the same amount. What scumbags.
kind of the same thing is why they opted out of the deal in the first place....they were shocked by how much the tv deals exploded (especially the direct tv one)...so instead of being happy that everyone would be making gobs more money down the road they were upset that they werent getting a larger % of this new money....so basically they wanted a larger cut of the larger cut
There are a lot of highly paid colossal douchebags at the center of this problem:
Owners
Lawyers
Big-ticket Players
Executives
Those who are the most hurt by this:
Lower-tier and league minimum players
Lower/Middle Class fans
It's all a hell of a lot of bullshtein.
BTW, my real take is that the more I find out about ex-players' health problems, the more I think that the game has a shelf-life in general. It is a hell of a lot of fun to watch but ultimately inhuman. Both sides should try to get as much money as they can now, because I think that the game will eventually be illegal. No joke.
that thought has has crossed my mind more than once
same here..hopefully not in our lifetimes though
kevin burnett is the farging man
You guys watch too much Demolition Man.
Quote from: FastFreddie on March 18, 2011, 12:22:31 PM
There are a lot of highly paid colossal douchebags at the center of this problem:
Owners
Lawyers
Big-ticket Players
Executives
Those who are the most hurt by this:
Lower-tier and league minimum players
Lower/Middle Class fans
It's all a hell of a lot of bullshtein.
BTW, my real take is that the more I find out about ex-players' health problems, the more I think that the game has a shelf-life in general. It is a hell of a lot of fun to watch but ultimately inhuman. Both sides should try to get as much money as they can now, because I think that the game will eventually be illegal. No joke.
And every employee of the NFL and its stadiums...behind the scenes.
Quote from: Sgt PSN on March 18, 2011, 01:10:33 PM
You guys watch too much Demolition Man.
You shall accompany me to... Taco Bell.
Be well.
:=) (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/18/michael-strahan-owners-have-leverage-some-players-are-panicking/):
Quote"You're panicking if you're a guy who is living paycheck to paycheck," Strahan told Sean Jensen of the Chicago Sun-Times. "You have to remember, every guy [in the NFL] doesn't make millions. Then you have to remember, some of those guys making millions still live paycheck to paycheck. If you're an owner, you have leverage. That's where players can get weak, when they start missing checks. That's when it's going to get scary for a lot of people. Trust me."
Nice.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/Vikings-punter-Kluwe-gets-creative-in-describing?urn=nfl-wp363
(http://mit.zenfs.com/209/2011/03/yahoo_kluwe1.jpg)
That's pretty awesome. His simple translation of the Commish's letter to the players is great too.
Quote from: Sgt PSN on March 19, 2011, 03:25:15 PM
That's pretty awesome. His simple translation of the Commish's letter to the players is great too.
Yes, and yes.
(http://mit.zenfs.com/209/2011/03/yahoo_kluwe2.jpg)
nice summary by PFT (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/28/ten-things-to-know-right-now-about-the-labor-situation-3/)
farg the farging fargers.
I tried, I really did, but that is too many words.
F the owners.
Farg all of them, owners and players alike, in every hole.
Lockout lifted
owners are requesting an immediate stay pending appeal.
quick, trade Kolb in the next 7 minutes
Owners can't be happy, which makes me smile.
Lawyers suck.
No. People suck. Lawyers can be fairly awesome and it's better to have them than not.
You suck.
Quote from: SunMo on April 25, 2011, 06:15:08 PM
owners are requesting an immediate stay pending appeal.
quick, trade Kolb in the next 7 minutes
No joke. Make this happen.
I have 10 years of school, including a PhD, and 15 years of experience and I make a small fraction of the 53rd man on every roster.
Cry me a farging river players. Get it fixed, then go have you brains pounded to mush for my entertainment bitches!
And yet, the 53rd man on the roster works harder and risks more than any owner or front office man, not to mention self-important overeducated elitist snots.
Not that I know any of those.
Quote from: rjs246 on April 25, 2011, 07:13:56 PM
Quote from: SunMo on April 25, 2011, 06:15:08 PM
owners are requesting an immediate stay pending appeal.
quick, trade Kolb in the next 7 minutes
No joke. Make this happen.
everything ive read says they have little to no chance of getting a stay
Quote from: Diomedes on April 25, 2011, 11:32:48 PM
And yet, the 53rd man on the roster works harder and risks more than any owner or front office man, not to mention self-important overeducated elitist snots.
Not that I know any of those.
Agree with this part, too. Both sides are douchebags. But don't tell me a guy making millions a year is living paycheck to paycheck and expect sympathy. Plenty of people live on less than 365K a year and do OK.
And while I'll admit I had a lot of advantages growing up, I bust my ass to get where I'm at and I'm not going to be embarrassed about it.
why are players douchebags...they are the foundation of a 10 billion dollar a year industry that is at its all time strongest and they got locked out...they would be content with the deal as is however if the owners wanna lock them out and ask them to give billions back then if im the players im like farg it its on now....we want MORE than we are getting now
I am glad to see the owners getting their noses rubbed in their own shtein.
Players were allowed back into team facilities this morning. Not 1 Eagle has showed up as of 9am.
Dedication.
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 26, 2011, 05:18:21 AM
Quote from: rjs246 on April 25, 2011, 07:13:56 PM
Quote from: SunMo on April 25, 2011, 06:15:08 PM
owners are requesting an immediate stay pending appeal.
quick, trade Kolb in the next 7 minutes
No joke. Make this happen.
everything ive read says they have little to no chance of getting a stay
And we pray...
Quote from: EagleFeva on April 26, 2011, 09:16:55 AM
Players were allowed back into team facilities this morning. Not 1 Eagle has showed up as of 9am.
Dedication.
Players from several teams showed up at their respective practive/workout facilities this morning only to still be locked out and had to call someone to come let them in. And then once they got inside, were told that strength and conditioning coaches had been given the day off. So even though players are now allowed inside, owners are still being petty bitches and finding ways to keep players from actually working.
Yeah Jamar Chaney tweeted that he is at his normal workout facility in Jersey.
No matter what happens, the Eagles still aren't going to be able to trade Kolb by draft time Thursday. That is all I care about. I couldn't give a shtein less about which group of millionaires is or isn't in the right.
taterskin Robert Henson tweeted the following:
"I just had first taste of rejection from the taterskins staff,and found out their jobs are being threatened if they help us"
Danny boy!
Did any other season ticket people get the email from the Eagles yet?
Good God. I'll summarize:
Wahhhhhhhhhh...
eagles should be happy now because they can collect all their season ticket money in june again
Quote from: Rome on April 26, 2011, 02:07:32 PM
Did any other season ticket people get the email from the Eagles yet?
Good God. I'll summarize:
Wahhhhhhhhhh...
Copy and paste, please.
QuoteDear Sucker,
As you may have heard, Judge Nelson issued a ruling granting the players a preliminary injunction. The League has filed an appeal in the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals which, in part, includes direction as to whether the lockout is lifted during this time period or if the lockout will continue.
The League remains committed to finding a solution through collective bargaining. We thought it would be helpful to share the article below that Commissioner Goodell wrote in this morning's Wall Street Journal.
As always, we appreciate your continued support.
The Philadelphia Eagles
Then they included this:
Litigation endangers NFL success
By ROGER GOODELL
Late Monday afternoon, U.S. District Court Judge Susan Richard Nelson issued a ruling that may significantly alter professional football as we know it.
For six weeks, there has been a work stoppage in the National Football League as the league has sought to negotiate a new collective-bargaining agreement with the players. But Judge Nelson ordered the end of the stoppage and recognized the players' right to dissolve their union. By blessing this negotiating tactic, the decision may endanger one of the most popular and successful sports leagues in history.
What would the NFL look like without a collectively bargained compromise? For many years, the collectively bargained system - which has given the players union enhanced free agency and capped the amount that owners spend on salaries - has worked enormously well for the NFL, for NFL players, and for NFL fans.
For players, the system allowed player compensation to skyrocket - pay and benefits doubled in the last 10 years alone. The system also offered players comparable economic opportunities throughout the league, from Green Bay and New Orleans to San Francisco and New York. In addition, it fostered conditions that allowed the NFL to expand by four teams, extending careers and creating jobs for hundreds of additional players.
For clubs and fans, the trade-off afforded each team a genuine opportunity to compete for the Super Bowl, greater cost certainty, and incentives to invest in the game. Those incentives translated into two dozen new and renovated stadiums and technological innovations such as the NFL Network and nfl.com.
Under the union lawyers' plan, reflected in the complaint that they filed in federal court, the NFL would be forced to operate in a dramatically different way. To be sure, their approach would benefit some star players and their agents (and, of course, the lawyers themselves). But virtually everyone else - including the vast majority of players as well as the fans - would suffer.
Rather than address the challenge of improving the collective-bargaining agreement for the benefit of the game, the union-financed lawsuit attacks virtually every aspect of the current system including the draft, the salary cap and free-agency rules, which collectively have been responsible for the quality and popularity of the game for nearly two decades. A union victory threatens to overturn the carefully constructed system of competitive balance that makes NFL games and championship races so unpredictable and exciting.
In the union lawyers' world, every player would enter the league as an unrestricted free agent, an independent contractor free to sell his services to any team. Every player would again become an unrestricted free agent each time his contract expired. And each team would be free to spend as much or as little as it wanted on player payroll or on an individual player's compensation.
Any league-wide rule relating to terms of player employment would be subject to antitrust challenge in courts throughout the country. Any player could sue - on his own behalf or representing a class - to challenge any league rule that he believes unreasonably restricts the "market" for his services.
Under this vision, players and fans would have none of the protections or benefits that only a union (through a collective-bargaining agreement) can deliver. What are the potential ramifications for players, teams, and fans? Here are some examples:
No draft. "Why should there even be a draft?" said player agent Brian Ayrault. "Players should be able to choose who they work for. Markets should determine the value of all contracts. Competitive balance is a fallacy."
No minimum team payroll. Some teams could have $200 million payrolls while others spend $50 million or less.
No minimum player salary. Many players could earn substantially less than today's minimums.
No standard guarantee to compensate players who suffer season- or career-ending injuries. Players would instead negotiate whatever compensation they could.
No league-wide agreements on benefits. The generous benefit programs now available to players throughout the league would become a matter of individual club choice and individual player negotiation.
No limits on free agency. Players and agents would team up to direct top players to a handful of elite teams. Other teams, perpetually out of the running for the playoffs, would serve essentially as farm teams for the elites.
No league-wide rule limiting the length of training camp or required off-season workout obligations. Each club would have its own policies.
No league-wide testing program for drugs of abuse or performance enhancing substances. Each club could have its own program - or not.
Any league-wide agreement on these subjects would be the subject of antitrust challenge by any player who asserted that he had been "injured" by the policy or whose lawyer perceived an opportunity to bring attention to his client or himself. Some such agreements might survive antitrust scrutiny, but the prospect of litigation would inhibit league-wide agreements with respect to most, if not all, of these subjects.
In an environment where they are essentially independent contractors, many players would likely lose significant benefits and other protections previously provided on a collective basis as part of the union-negotiated collective-bargaining agreement. And the prospect of improved benefits for retired players would be nil.
Is this the NFL that players want? A league where elite players attract enormous compensation and benefits while other players - those lacking the glamour and bargaining power of the stars - play for less money, fewer benefits and shorter careers than they have today? A league where the competitive ability of teams in smaller communities (Buffalo, New Orleans, Green Bay and others) is forever cast into doubt by blind adherence to free-market principles that favor teams in larger, better-situated markets?
Prior to filing their litigation, players and their representatives publicly praised the current system and argued for extending the status quo. Now they are singing a far different tune, attacking in the courts the very arrangements they said were working just fine.
Is this the NFL that fans want? A league where carefully constructed rules proven to generate competitive balance - close and exciting games every Sunday and close and exciting divisional and championship contests - are cast aside? Do the players and their lawyers have so little regard for the fans that they think this really serves their interests?
These outcomes are inevitable under any approach other than a comprehensive collective-bargaining agreement. That is especially true of an approach that depends on litigation settlements negotiated by lawyers. But that is what the players' attorneys are fighting for in court. And that is what will be at stake as the NFL appeals Judge Nelson's ruling to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Mr. Goodell is commissioner of the National Football League.
Ok, maybe it's just because I don't do a lot of indepth reading on the lockout, but that letter is the first I've heard of the union wanting to do away with the draft or minimum salaries or the salary cap or any of the other things the commish talked about. In fact, pretty much everything I've heard from the union reps and individual players is that they are fine with basically renewing the old CBA.....they just want to look at the books and make sure they are getting the proper % promised to them. I think the only other major concern of theirs (players) is long-term health and post-career healthcare. I'm sure there's more once you dig a little, but at least from the outside I've never gotten the impression that the players are really asking for very much.
It's Goodell using horsesh*t lawyer doublespeak to state the NFL's indefensible positions. The union was more than happy to go along with the agreement that was in place. He's taking random extreme positions from players agents (note - not the players themselves) and using them as a scare tactic.
The funny thing is I always thought it was the commissioner who was supposed to represent the best interests of the game, not whore it and himself out to the owners.
When I posted "lawyers suck" I was specifically referring to that slimy piece of shtein. farg Goodell and the owners. I hope the players farg 'em over raw & dry now.
Yeah, I don't see how the commish stands to benefit at all by aligning himself with the owners. He should have remained impartial (at least in appearance). Because now, even when a new deal is reached, players aren't going to trust him one bit. I guess in the long run, it really doesn't matter what players think of the commish, but I'm sure they'd prefer not to think he was ever against them. I wouldn't be surprised if players use his position during the lockout against him when it comes to future suspensions and fines that he hands out.
And the owners just keep doing their best to alienate the fans. First they walked out of negotiations prior to the lockout and refused to talk to anyone for over a week. Now they're doing petty shtein like giving coaches the day off so that no one is available to work with the players. And I have no doubt that they've privately threated people's jobs if they actually do work with players. So it's probably safe to say that at least for the next couple of days, players will show up to practice facilities and there won't be a soul in the building for them to work with.
He does get paid by the owners but his first duty should be to the health & welfare of the game. If he's going to be nothing more than a whore for the Jerry Jones and Danny Snyders of the league, then don't continue on with the pretense of appealing to the fans to save face. Just come out and say it... you're following orders and those orders are to break the players and maximize the owners' profits under any and all circumstances.
The players are in fact suing that sans a CBA the teams are thirty two individual entities and not one group, and therefore collusion is illegal at any level. This includes the draft.
PFT is going haywire with this shtein, if anyone could possibly be interested.
The players' suit, if enacted 100% as filed would absolutely do all of the things that Goodell claims it would do. It's a hardball negotiating ploy. No one on either side wants that shtein.
QuoteDear Sucker,
Lol, truth.
Btw in case anyone is naive, Goodell's only job description is to make money for the owners, plane and simple.
denied (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6439599)
tradetradetradetradetradetradetradetradetradetradetradetradetradetradetradetrade
lol
f you owners
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/04/27/nfls-flirtation-with-contempt-of-court-intensifies/
QuoteThe risk of a finding of contempt of court has spiked significantly after today's events, in our view. Though the league could project (feigned or otherwise) confusion on Monday and Tuesday, there is no doubt today regarding Judge Nelson's intentions.
The lockout is over. The injunction ending the lockout is not stayed.
In light of letters from the lawyers for the NFL and the players submitted to Judge Nelson on Wednesday, we believe the league no longer can credibly claim that further clarification is needed.
First, a letter from NFL local counsel Aaron D. Van Oort to Judge Nelson targeted the proposed order submitted by the players on Monday night elaborating on the ruling lifting the lockout. "We believe that the prescriptive language of the Court's Order — 'The lockout is enjoined' — coupled with the Opinion that precedes that language, provides sufficient guidance of the Court's directions," Van Oort writes.
The players saw the opening, and they drove a bus through it. In a letter from players' local counsel Barbara Berens to Judge Nelson, the players withdrew the proposed order, "[g]iven the NFL Defendants' concession that they understand their obligations."
In other words, Van Oort said all that needs to be said. "The lockout is enjoined," and all that that implies.
And Mort reported that some owners are pissed at their legal teams.
the nfl filed for an appeal already...supposedly will be heard in the morning
if they can get a decision soon enough andy and jewboy might have a window to deal kolb to seattle
Per Sal Pal: 8th circuit ruling should come down at 2-3 pm et. So the league may have no choice but to let everything happen FA ,trades etc etc
Apparently the plan for transactions will be released tomorrow as teams are ordered to open their doors for football activities at 8am.
SO no Kolb trade tonight. farg
they could do it tomorrow morning and get a second rd pick. maybe.
Farg that. What they should probably be doing is negotiating some sort of conditional trade with a couple teams. Take Arizona for example....tell them who you want at their draft position, and if they select him, you make the trade once the league is open for business as usual.
I imagine there will be a few gentlemen's agreement trades made like that.
Quote from: General_Failure on April 28, 2011, 02:49:12 PM
I imagine there will be a few gentlemen's agreement trades made like that.
As long as the draft picks are on their original teams long enough to sell some jerserys, it's all good.
I think it'll be kind of funny because Kiper will probably be pulling his hair out trying to figure out why some teams are picking guys they don't necessarily need.
Not sure where I heard it but I am pretty sure that can't be done.
the nfl specifically said that teams can't do it, the problem is, how do you prove it?
"The NFL is a monstrous ATM machine, And the people inside that machine are fighting over twenties."
Ordinarily, I think Gregg Doyel is a sanctimonious douche, but no truer words were ever written.
again the players arent fighting anyone....they were locked out...unless hes referring to infighting amongst the owners
I think the point is more to the fact that all of the bickering is over chump change.
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 28, 2011, 08:36:11 PM
again the players arent fighting anyone....they were locked out...unless hes referring to infighting amongst the owners
You can't be serious. Both sides are being flat out ridiculous. farg all of them.
how are the players ridiculous...they wanted to keep the status quo of a system that was making everyone gobs of money
the owners decided to lock them out and then asked the players to give a couple billion dollars back
if a cba had expired here and both sides couldnt come to a deal...then id say well lets look and see what both sides are asking for and then lay blame....but this is 100% on the owners
Quote from: ice grillin you on April 28, 2011, 08:53:51 PM
how are the players ridiculous...they wanted to keep the status quo of a system that was making everyone gobs of money
the owners decided to lock them out and then asked the players to give a couple billion dollars back
if a cba had expired here and both sides couldnt come to a deal...then id say well lets look and see what both sides are asking for and then lay blame....but this is 100% on the owners
it's incredible that people can't comprehend this
It's a matter of fact. The difference is education. You have either educated yourself on the matter or you have not.
Obviously, this is a fight the owners picked.
And don't mistake me for saying that the status quo is perfect, nor that the player's union is either. Just that it's clear that this is happening because the owners made a move to get more/give the players less.
8th circuit court of appeals orders temporary stay
so, we have a stay, pending review of original stay, pending the appeal
farging legal garbage
farg you NFL
Quote from: SunMo on April 29, 2011, 01:55:17 PM
8th circuit court of appeals orders temporary stay
so, we have a stay, pending review of original stay, pending the appeal
Nope, ESPN's story was wrong. The 8th Circuit hasn't done shtein yet.
Quote from: QB Eagles on April 29, 2011, 05:51:41 PM
Quote from: SunMo on April 29, 2011, 01:55:17 PM
8th circuit court of appeals orders temporary stay
so, we have a stay, pending review of original stay, pending the appeal
Nope, ESPN's story was wrong. The 8th Circuit hasn't done shtein yet.
As of a couple minutes ago, the 8th Circuit HAS ordered the stay.
so lockout is back on, temporarily. but I think it's not a permanent stay if I understood.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/05/08/rumors-fly-of-a-complete-nfl-shutdown/ (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/05/08/rumors-fly-of-a-complete-nfl-shutdown/)
If this is true, I'm on board with the rest of you. The CBA had a buyout clause which the players agreed to, and it was legally exercized. The owners picked the fight, the union went for strict litigation, which bothers me. The only way this would get resolved was bargaining, IMO, and that still appears to be true, since nothing is happening right now.
However, if the league decides to default, after demanding numerous cities and states pay for their stadiums, leaving said cities and states on the hook, they should all be set ablaze.
QuoteI love football. Football is pretty much what I live for, and it seems to me that only the players are interested in making football a reality this fall. So if you're somehow on the side of management in this NFL dispute, please know that you are wrong and that you are stupid and that I farging hate you.
Time for Demarcus Smith to pick up his pants, realize he just got farged and lost this battle, and come to some kind of an bargaining agreement with the owners ASAP.
but then he'll look like a quitter, thus making it very diffcult for him to win a seat in politics, which we should all know was the underlying reason he took on this job to begin with..
Quote from: reese125 on May 17, 2011, 07:18:13 AM
Time for Demarcus Smith to pick up his pants, realize he just got farged and lost this battle, and come to some kind of an bargaining agreement with the owners ASAP.
or he could just keep lying his face off (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/05/18/more-misplaced-rhetoric-from-de-smith/)
semantics
the point is the players are going to court to try and play football while the league is going to court trying to not play football
PFT = NBC who is in bed with the NFL = pro ownership pieces by mike florio
the comments on the site are sickening
every last one is just killing d smith and propping up the owners. im sure its not nfl staffers spamming the comment section. im sure its just regular people who support billionaires hard earned greedy business propositions.
america in general is filled with really dumb people who the majority of are always gonna be on the wrong side...so thats expected
but florio on almost every other issue ive ever heard him on has always been super fair....however since this lockout every single time he comes on WIP now he is so pro owner its ridiculous
It's easy to be pro owner when De Smith is the #1 talking head for the players. He's an idiot, and the players would get a better deal with someone else. So frankly, De Smith is bad for football, bad for the owners, and bad for the players.
and hes still better than at least 25 of the 32 owners...dont look at the people look at the facts involved with the situation...if you do that and dont come away seeing that this is 100% on the owners then you have an agenda
on the flip side in 04 the nhl owners were 100% right
It is amazing how many people do think the owners are right, I guess people forget that the players are the ones that make the game.
while i agree
thats true in all sports whether there is labor unrest or not and thus isnt really a reason you can use because you have to take each particular strike/lockout seperately
there are times when ownership has to make changes that favor them because a particular league has monotary issues....but the current nfl system is pretty much the worst example of that you could ever find
i've found that the people who do support the owners usually hate unions or organized labor of any sort. in other words, people who are stupid enough to vote against their own interests.
Pretty sure Ray Lewis said that crime will rise if there's no NFL season because there's nothing else for people to do.
Quote from: Eagles_Legendz on May 22, 2011, 02:09:23 PM
Pretty sure Ray Lewis said that crime will rise if there's no NFL season because there's nothing else for people to do.
yeah i watched the whole interview....it was amazing...sal pal even tried to steer him away from it by answering the question for him saying 'you mean all the people that are going to be put out of work by a lockout - like stadium employees and shtein?'
and then ray ray still went off into lunatic land
Three hours a week for seventeen weeks is all that stands between me and a shooting spree.
I shudder to think of the homicidal carnage and senseless destruction we'd see every Thanksgiving if it wasn't for the Detroit game. Because we get to see it on the field instead, I guess.
He meant himself.
Ray of Light (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XZDzOGFXts)
http://www.cbssports.com/#!/nfl/story/15231374/nfl-source-labor-negotiations-8085-percent-complete
its lookin like they are getting close to something and 2 major cogs revealed:
1 - essentially guaranteeing an LA move to increase every single farging penny of revenue
2- discontinuing nfl network's tv deal and selling a 16-game thursday package to the highest bidder for 2012
there would be some saturday games involved in that package, but basically that means turner (tnt or tbs) and comcast (versus) will bid upwards of 1 billion for the games. so more football. every week. during the week. yes?
i dont like the idea of thursday games period but as a season tciket holder i really despise them
pretty sure the deal is you can only have 1...so theres that.
im sort of mixed on it. it is football and it is another excuse to gamble. but the games are generally poorly played and the matchups arent really all that enticing.
Other than Thanksgiving, Thursday games suck. Saturday would be farging worse. I want to watch football on Sundays and Mon night. Thurs and Sat games can eat my farging wang.
Quote from: MDS on June 21, 2011, 02:38:57 PM
pretty sure the deal is you can only have 1...so theres that.
its only one but when you add that on top of sunday and monday night games which they already have to many of it makes it much worse...plus i dont get fridays off like i do mondays so a thursday game automatically means two days of leave for me
Quote from: Sgt PSN on June 21, 2011, 02:40:04 PM
Other than Thanksgiving, Thursday games suck. Saturday would be farging worse. I want to watch football on Sundays and Mon night. Thurs and Sat games can eat my farging wang.
i love sat games as long as they happen in december and dont farg with college football...in fact if it wasnt for college football i would be all for the league switching from sundays to saturdays as their primary gameday
im sure youre well aware of this but the nfl doesnt give a shtein about you and your tickets. they make ooodles of money off of tv revenue and figure if they put on a game enough people will show up.
and that 1 thurs game might not be a home game. itll be 1 overall for each team. and i guarantee sassy will be watching.
Quote from: MDS on June 21, 2011, 02:05:35 PM
so more football. every week. during the week. yes?
so you ask everyone if more football during the week would be a good thing....i proceed to answer that i would hate it...and you respond with this
Quote from: MDS on June 21, 2011, 03:19:22 PM
im sure youre well aware of this but the nfl doesnt give a shtein about you and your tickets.
as if your original question was asking if it was a smart thing for the nfl to do....you either are not very smart or completely psychotic or both
Quote from: MDS on June 21, 2011, 03:19:22 PM
and that 1 thurs game might not be a home game.
it also might not be a road game...but again you didnt ask if all eagle thursday nite games would be at home...you asked if more weeknight football is a yes?
you hate it because your nfl fandom revolves around boozing before, during and after games
other peoples revolves watching games on their couch
so alls im saying is you are in a small minority of people who dont want games because it could take away 1 sunday home game from you.
Quote from: MDS on June 21, 2011, 03:38:42 PM
you hate it because your nfl fandom revolves around boozing before, during and after games
other peoples revolves watching games on their couch
so alls im saying is you are in a small minority of people who dont want games because it could take away 1 sunday home game from you.
You nitwit. Even people who watch from home still enjoy getting sauced before, during and after. Don't need to be in the parking lot to get drunk.
Quote from: MDS on June 21, 2011, 03:38:42 PM
so alls im saying is you are in a small minority of people who dont want games because it could take away 1 sunday home game from you.
no actually you didnt say that at all...you brought up the league and its revenue not how the average fan feels about it
Quote from: MDS on June 21, 2011, 03:19:22 PM
im sure youre well aware of this but the nfl doesnt give a shtein about you and your tickets. they make ooodles of money off of tv revenue and figure if they put on a game enough people will show up.
which is strange because you original question was asking everyone on the board how they felt about it....
Quote from: MDS on June 21, 2011, 02:05:35 PM
so more football. every week. during the week. yes?
make your mind up son
yes of course
but its a lot easier to drink at a house then fall asleep than go to the game and set up tents and wait in traffic and drive drunk only to get 4 hours before you have to get up for work in the morning.
also most people simply watch games from their couches and then move on. i know people here have drinking problems but many americans (i.e. Hoydas) do not.
sports bars are empty on sundays in the fall
oh wow this is something else
i never said or implied people dont drink en mass for football. of course they do. but the nfl isnt setting viewership records because of bar attendance. and this is what it all comes back to. tv. ratings. people watching at home where its counted and where they can and will watch the commercials.
the thursday games are another excuse for it and im on the fence about whether i like it or not...but i guess since i know ill watch and gamble anyway i guess theres my answer.
ahhhh i get it now...basically you asking everyone how they felt about more weeknight games was a thinly veiled way for you to get into a tv ratings conversation
i care slightly less about the nfls tv revenue than you care about alcohol...which is to say i dont care at all
next time take this up in the sports media thread
thanks
more stuff from Mort:
• Players get 48 percent of "all revenue," without extra $1-billion-plus off top that previously had been requested by owners.
• Players' share will never dip below 46.5 percent, under new formula being negotiated.
• Teams required to spend close to 100 percent of the salary cap.
• Rookie wage scale part of deal but still being "tweaked."
• Four years needed for unrestricted free-agent status. Certain tags will be retained, but still being discussed.
• 18-game regular season designated only as negotiable item and at no point is mandated in deal.
• Owners still will get some expense credits that will allow funding for new stadiums.
• Retirees to benefit from improved health care, pension benefits as revenue projected to double to $18 million by 2016.
Quote from: ice grillin you on June 21, 2011, 04:07:48 PM
ahhhh i get it now...basically you asking everyone how they felt about more weeknight games was a thinly veiled way for you to get into a tv ratings conversation
i care slightly less about the nfls tv revenue than you care about alcohol...which is to say i dont care at all
next time take this up in the sports media thread
thanks
it is a tv ratings conversation. its the only reason they are doing any of this. its not about bars or tickets or anything. its about whether or not youre gonna sit on your couch and watch an nfl game on a thursday instead of watching the office or a zesty big east game on espn.
the dont ask everyone how they feel about weeknight games...just say they are doing it to increase revenue (which everyone already knows) and leave it at that
NFL.
Sunday.
1:00 PM.
The end.
Quote from: ice grillin you on June 21, 2011, 06:51:16 PM
the dont ask everyone how they feel about weeknight games...just say they are doing it to increase revenue (which everyone already knows) and leave it at that
maybe i had a bit of a knee jerk reaction to your initial response. you can think what you want, i suppose. even if its rooted in 1960's era stubbornness like rome.
I love December Saturday games too.
Thursday's not so much.
yea but youll watch it and gamble on it, right?
and thats why theyll do it.
I'd watch it at 4am on Wednesday.
And I would gamble on just about anything.
So yeah.
new deal to be ratified next Thursday in Atlanta? (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6756301)
Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on June 21, 2011, 08:00:47 PM
I love December Saturday games too.
Thursday's not so much.
I love Thursday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday games. I may not enjoy the disadvantage to a shortened week when it comes to the Eagles, but as a fan, the more they spread out the games, the more I can see live.
John Clayton reporting that the salary cap will be $120M.
I didnt know he broke news any longer.
And each club gets $21M in benefits, whatever that means. I haven't read the whole thing yet
I didn't even think Clayton could break wind any longer.
Anyway, if I heard correctly, Sirius reported today the rookie wage part is nearly worked out and as part of that, all 1st round picks will get 4 year deals with a 5th year optional.
Sounds like these dickholes might let us have football this year
More details:
-- new CBA would be 7-10 years
-- the 5th year option on the top 10 picks would be the average of the top 10 players in the NFL at that position (basically like the transition tag)
-- the option on picks 11-32 would be the average of the top 3-25 players in the NFL at that position
-- if the option is exercised after the 3rd season, the money is guaranteed
-- owners will get an arbitration system without judicial oversight in exchange for agreeing to overhaul the arbitration process
-- some owners want a 1-player exemption from the salary cap to avoid being over the $120M....something similar to what's being done for vets that sign for 1 year
Owners dropped their demand for right of first refusal, so everyone's gonna be a FA, but teams will have 72 hours to re-sign their own. They also agreed to players becoming UFAs after 4 years, and the transition tag will no longer exist....just the franchise one.
It also looks like two-a-days at TC will be gone, with any 2nd practice on the same day being helmetless/padless instead
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/18/source-packers-are-telling-players-to-be-ready-to-show-up-on-saturday/
Sources saying that it's a lock this whole thing is over Thursday.
players vote tomorrow, then owners thursday
FOOTBALL FOOTBALL FOOTBALL FOOTBALL
i bet a courier hand delivers me my season ticket invoice within an hour of the owners signing off
Quote from: ice grillin you on July 19, 2011, 09:30:37 PM
courier
(http://assets.philadelphiaeagles.com/assets/news/banner-052407.jpg)
gross
jews normally have great teeth
its part of our motto
Quote from: MDS on July 19, 2011, 09:39:32 PM
jews normally have great teeth
its part of our motto
its where you hide all your gold
yo diehard how the hell this czech farg know our secrets?
Quote from: MDS on July 19, 2011, 09:50:44 PM
yo diehard how the hell this czech farg know our secrets?
Czech? Eurotrash? wtf?
its probably why he hates ovechkin so much
his own peeps go to the disco tech and he resents the implication
QuoteIt appears that owners are prepared to vote on the new CBA between 3:30 and 5:30 this afternoon and the NFLPA has a conference call at 8pm.
the owners voted 31-0 to approve, with Oakland abstaining
Quote from: BigEd76 on July 21, 2011, 07:03:21 PM
the owners voted 31-0 to approve, with Oakland abstaining
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSCFA3ynxqQ
Al Davis cracks my shtein up.
the Hall of Fame game was officially canceled
players are not happy and ratification is not given at all and recertification isn't certain either.
Quote from: SunMo on July 21, 2011, 08:22:20 PM
players are not happy and ratification is not given at all and recertification isn't certain either.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJ_R-G_i4Xk
Sounds like the owners are trying to make the players look like the bad guys if they don't agree to this thing. Whatever farg the owners.
farg all of them. Players. Owners. Rich iceholes farging up the best pro sport. farging dickwads.
Well sure, except for the fact that the players are totally in the right here. They mostly idiots who have been coddled and out of touch with reality for their whole lives and who should never be permitted to speak in public, but they're still the right ones in this argument.
Owners look bad here.
Lurie interview with SalPal just highlighted what the owners are doing; trying to make the players look bad. He said "its on the players" about twenty times.
They tried to sneak things into the unanimously ratified CBA.
Why are these clowns farging around now? Damn.
it sounds like the owner ratified an agreement that was not completely finished and the players want to see the final details before they agree to vote on it
Quote from: rjs246 on July 21, 2011, 09:21:03 PM
Well sure, except for the fact that the players are totally in the right here. They mostly idiots who have been coddled and out of touch with reality for their whole lives and who should never be permitted to speak in public, but they're still the right ones in this argument.
I'm assuming your complete review of the signed agreement along with your law school education is talking here. And not Miller Lite.
I'm not talking about the owners' agreement. Im talking about the labor dispute in general. But you knew that you obtuse freakshow.
Is it too late for some greedy lawyers to tack on late demands and blow up the whole thing back to square one? I hope it isn't too late.
That would be great if the last minute demand was a dozen roses for every touchdown scored to be delivered immediately on the field.
Everyone is going to go ahead and take it at face vale that the owners tried to sneak something in here, right? No chance the NFLPA* messed up in their communcation with the actual players?
Just making sure, thanks.
Quote from: FastFreddie on July 22, 2011, 06:14:38 AM
Everyone is going to go ahead and take it at face vale that the owners tried to sneak something in here, right? No chance the NFLPA* messed up in their communcation with the actual players?
Just making sure, thanks.
nope
the owners also gave the union a deadline on when they have to recertify by...which is being nothing more than completely antagonistic
i dont think the owners got nearly wanted they wanted in this deal but they cant stand the thought of losing games/money so they ratified it...and now are acting like babies poking and prodding the union because they arent happy with it
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/22/mort-players-vote-expected-on-friday/
Quote from: FastFreddie on July 22, 2011, 06:14:38 AM
Everyone is going to go ahead and take it at face vale that the owners tried to sneak something in here, right? No chance the NFLPA* messed up in their communcation with the actual players?
Just making sure, thanks.
I'd lean towards the billionaire boys club being the antagonists here. They're playing a PR battle now.
Yeah, giving the players a deadline was totally a fleshpop move. They should have just said they were cool with "whenever."
Hippies.
management telling a union when to take a vote on anything is pretty much the ultimate slap in the face of organized labor
now mort saying they probably wont vote today
mort.
kirk morrison was just on wip saying that maybe by sunday night
said the deal the owners sent over had some new stuff in it...nothing major but shtein that had to be reviewed
Quote from: FastFreddie on July 22, 2011, 11:56:58 AM
Yeah, giving the players a deadline was totally a fleshpop move. They should have just said they were cool with "whenever."
Hippies.
It wasnt a fleshpop move nor was it a slap in the face. It was a power move designed to put the pressure and the scrutiny on the union. They tried to slide some new shtein in there and now are playacting like they're surprised that the union wants to take a look at the details. It's all theater and posturing and bullshtein. farg the owners.
Quote from: ice grillin you on July 22, 2011, 12:50:20 PM
management telling a union when to take a vote on anything is pretty much the ultimate slap in the face of organized labor
Pretty sure that they would consider sending in scabs (or Pinkerton agents) to be more of an "ultimate slap".
heath evans just sayin that there was a lot of language in the deal the owners approved that wasnt in the last deal the players were given....this could be complete posturing to counteract the owners own shadyness but he says he doesnt believe this version of the cba will be approved by the players
evans isnt even in the room
theyll talk over the weekend and get something finished by monday or tuesday
go find something else to do
Quote from: MDS on July 19, 2011, 09:11:19 PM
players vote tomorrow, then owners thursday
FOOTBALL FOOTBALL FOOTBALL FOOTBALL
Quote from: ice grillin you on July 22, 2011, 09:38:07 PM
heath evans just sayin that there was a lot of language in the deal the owners approved that wasnt in the last deal the players were given....this could be complete posturing to counteract the owners own shadyness but he says he doesnt believe this version of the cba will be approved by the players
No offense, but Heath Evans has absolutely ZERO idea of anything. Just sayin.
Quote from: PhillyGirl on July 22, 2011, 09:43:43 PM
Quote from: ice grillin you on July 22, 2011, 09:38:07 PM
heath evans just sayin that there was a lot of language in the deal the owners approved that wasnt in the last deal the players were given....this could be complete posturing to counteract the owners own shadyness but he says he doesnt believe this version of the cba will be approved by the players
No offense, but Heath Evans has absolutely ZERO idea of anything. Just sayin.
and you have absolutely no idea what heath evans knows or doesnt know
theres no chance he knows nothing...hes an nfl player....he could know everything or he could know somewhere in the middle...my bet is middle high
White people know stuff.
Quote from: ice grillin you on July 22, 2011, 09:43:09 PM
Quote from: MDS on July 19, 2011, 09:11:19 PM
players vote tomorrow, then owners thursday
FOOTBALL FOOTBALL FOOTBALL FOOTBALL
im following the consensus
and the consensus is telling me to ignore what heath bell is saying
heath evans. exactly.
Quote from: ice grillin you on July 22, 2011, 09:48:29 PM
and you have absolutely no idea what heath evans knows or doesnt know
theres no chance he knows nothing...hes an nfl player....he could know everything or he could know somewhere in the middle...my bet is middle high
Might be your most lame post. Seriously. What are you even attempting to say?
that theres no chance heath evans knows nothing about the labor situation...you are a dumb MA zealot but not this dumb
Medium High!
yeah thats like he knows more than the average player but not more than the ones who know the most
i must be speaking in ebonics
I don't know what the farg you're saying, but you seem to enjoy using a lot of double negatives.
Quote from: General_Failure on July 22, 2011, 10:08:58 PM
I don't know what the farg you're saying, but you seem to enjoy using a lot of double negatives.
aussies dont know much....btw on maher right now they are talking about how much the english despise you guys...something i never knew...
Wait, they despise a bunch of people they sent to a prison colony on the other side of the world? Stop the presses.
If I'm not mistaken, the French are the most widely hated, and they gain that dubious honor (much to their credit) in part because when polled, even they often listed France as the most loathesome nation on the planet.
Quote from: General_Failure on July 22, 2011, 10:13:21 PM
Wait, they despise a bunch of people they sent to a prison colony on the other side of the world? Stop the presses.
like they are white trashy
this english dood mentioned the penal colony thing...that the english sent all their pick pockets and sheep shaggers to aussie and they have come back as the bee gees and ruport murdoch
maher used the analogy that the english look at aussies like someone from nyc would look at a mississippi
and english dood said aussie is like alabama with out the cultural sophistication
And more racism.
QuoteThe open items before the league's approval of the labor deal
Posted by Mike Florio on July 22, 2011, 10:00 PM EDT
On Thursday, the NFL announced that it had approved a new labor deal, subject to acceptance of the deal by the players. Some players complained that they hadn't seen the final version of the deal that was approved by the owners, other players complained that the NFL had slipped new terms into the final version of the deal that was approved by the owners.
A day before, the NFLPA* Executive Committee and board of player representatives saw a summary of the proposed deal, which included the open items, as of Wednesday. Howard Balzer of the Sports Xchange and 101espn.com has obtained a copy of the summary.
The open items are set forth below.
First, the minimum team expenditure would be only 89 percent of the salary cap. The term would be coupled with a guaranteed league-wide cash spend of 95 percent of the salary cap. If half of the teams spend 100 percent of the cap, half could spend 90 percent of the cap, preserving as a practical matter a 10-percent spread between the highest-spending and lowest-spending teams. If, alternatively, all teams have a minimum cash spend of 95 percent, the total cash spend would be 97.5 percent or more, assuming at least half of the teams spend 100 percent of their allotment, with the other half spending 95 percent.
Second, those offseason workout bonuses (such as the $750,000 due to Jets tackle D'Brickashaw Ferguson) would be paid if the player reports to training camp and performs the services required of him. Thus, under this term, players who report for work (and then work) would earn all offseason workout bonuses, despite the absence of an offseason workout program.
Third, for rookie pay, an escalator would be available to push the fourth-year salary to the lowest level restricted free agency tender, which is $1.2 million in 2011, but which will increase with the salary cap.
Fourth, players would be guaranteed up to $3 million for the second and third year after a catastrophic injury. Balzer reports that, in the deal approved by the league on Thursday, the number had been cut to $1 million in the second year and $500,000 in the third year.
Fifth, the California loophole for workers' compensation benefits would continue.
Sixth, the possibility of an opt out was included as an open item. Balzer reports that the final version included no opt out, making it a firm 10-year deal. (It has been reported that the players want a potential opt out after seven years.)
Seventh, payment of $320 million in lost benefits would be made for the 2010 season. In the summary document, the lump sum expressly is linked to the "lockout insurance" case. Basically, the players are proposing the restoration of those lost benefits as the payment of damages for the league's failure to max out TV money when persuading the networks to pay rights fees during a lockout.
Eighth, a settlement of the Brady antitrust case would need to be made, separate and apart from the labor deal.
Ninth, a player would be subject to the franchise tag only once in his career.
Tenth, short-term injured reserve would be available, along with a possible game-day roster of 47. The deal approved by the owners reportedly limits the game-day roster to 46.
I'll be pulling out some of the settled items from the summary later tonight for discussion and analysis. Thanks again to Howard Balzer of the Sports Xchange and 101espn.com for passing it along.
Quote from: General_Failure on July 22, 2011, 10:13:21 PM
Wait, they despise a bunch of people they sent to a prison colony on the other side of the world? Stop the presses.
I thought Big Brother was just in New Zealand on loan from the U.S. and not technically an Aussie. Did I miss something?
pencil neck dweeb and jeff fisher's errand boy reporting that major progress was made today...vote monday should approve cba.
an excerpt from Vikings punter Chris Kluwe's response to Nate Jackson
http://deadspin.com/5823788/chris-kluwe-responds-can-i-kick-it-yes-i-can
QuotePlease, enlighten me with your wisdom, because the next time I have something to say I'd like to make sure it's OK with you that I say it and that I say it at the proper time.
Oh, wait a minute.
I don't really care what you or anyone else thinks about what I say or when I say it. If I see something greedy, hypocritical, or just plain stupid, I'm going to call out whoever the offending party happens to be. I've done it to the owners; I've done it to the NFL front office; and I'll certainly do it if I see it happen with the players. And make no mistake: trying to hold up the settlement of a CBA affecting almost 1,900 players just so four can get special treatment is pretty much the definition of greed. Whether it was instigated by their attorneys, agents, or whoever, it's still a douchebag move to make.
And you know why it's a douchebag move to make? Because it makes ALL OF US look bad. It makes ALL OF US look like grasping, blackmailing, money-grubbing jerks whose only care is how much blood we can squeeze from the rock that is the fans — you know, the people who ultimately pay all of our wages. And I'm not a fan of that. (Owners, make sure you pay attention, too. Charging outrageous sums for drinks, seats, and seat licenses, while a great moneymaker now, is definitely counterproductive in the long run, especially with the advent of high-def TVs). You know how you grow the football pie? It's definitely not by shteinting on the people who spend money on you. Maybe this is a small thing, but small things add up over time.
I'll grant you that Mankins and Jackson got screwed by the CBA situation last year. They're entering the prime of their career and were counting on entering free agency. But at the same time, the franchise tag and restricted free agent tag aren't exactly the kiss of death. One year under the RFA offer would be as much money as a doctor earns in his/her ENTIRE LIFE. What. The. farg. You're telling me that having to go one year making "only" as much money as most people will earn their entire lives is such a hardship that you need an extra $10 million payout for putting your name on a lawsuit? I honestly don't know how to respond to that.
Oh wait, yes I do. It's a douchebag move.
Speaking of which, my favorite part of your entire rant is the following: "If it is his goal to slide into a post-punter career as a presumptuous and accusatory football analyst, then he has set himself up quite nicely. ..." Let's replace "punter" with "tight end" and see how that reads. Ooooh, it reads quite nicely. I like it. At least I had the grace to do it in 140 characters or less, not this meandering shteinstorm that you felt compelled to vomit out at someone you've never met, don't know the first thing about, and likely might enjoy talking to if we ever met at a bar (someone who has written a meandering shteinstorm of his own in rebuttal).
So, Nate Jackson, while I respect your right to free speech (as apparently you don't respect mine), I also respect my right to tell you to go jam a tackling dummy up your ass sideways for being a snake-tongued, shtein-talking Internet tough guy icehole who is so far out of touch with reality that you have no idea just how privileged we are to play this game for ridiculous amounts of money.
Hallelujah, holy shtein where is the tylenol!
Thats a Clark W Griswold rant there.
I dig it
Quotemortreport
by AdamSchefter
De Smith and Roger Goodell have worked directly to assure that nothing goes off path. Exec committee called this a.m. Expect presser Monday
QuoteAdamSchefter
Welcome back, football.
The last 3 posts in this thread are maybe the 3 best in a row ever.
So the two a day practices are gone and I just read on PFT that the players also negotiated that there will only be 14 padded practices throughout the season.
Football is moving more and more towards the flag variety.
Personally I think it'll make for a better product on the field. Players will be less worn down.
And I thought that 2 a days could still happen, just that the 2nd practice couldn't be padded?
or they are finally getting into the 21st century
QuoteThe NFL has passed a rule that will expand the active roster for each team from 45 to 46 players. They have also declared that the third quarterback on each team will no longer be required to be inactive, but will actually be on the active roster.
I like both of those ideas ^, but they needed to expand the roster by a lot more, like 10 players. Football is too physical of a sport and only having one backup per position is difficult
Chris Kluwe is seriously one of my favorite players now. LOL..punter or not. That was zippity doo da fantastic.
i'm guessing youre talking about his nate jackson thing, and yeah he's awesome.
ive been walking by this caravan of reporters every day on my way to work and never cared why, but then it got bigger a few days ago and i talked to one of the guys and realized they're all sports reporters. this whole this is happening two blocks from my house and i never even realized it.
Lets just trade Kolb for Kluwe...that was awesome
Goddamn right. Holy shtein that was beyond awesome.
okay so I just read both letters and I am now more than ever convinced that sports is utterly frivolous, and that coverage of it is no better than People magazine.
they are both douchebags and any person pathetic enough to actually read and talk about their womanish bickering should off himself
farging idiots
Hi, you're on a sports message board. You are part of the problem.
Quote from: Diomedes on July 24, 2011, 04:17:06 PM
okay so I just read both letters and I am now more than ever convinced that sports is utterly frivolous, and that coverage of it is no better than People magazine.
they are both douchebags and any person pathetic enough to actually read and talk about their womanish bickering should off himself
farging idiots
plus kluwe is a punter....who cares what he has to say
Quote from: ice grillin you on July 24, 2011, 04:34:32 PM
Quote from: Diomedes on July 24, 2011, 04:17:06 PM
okay so I just read both letters and I am now more than ever convinced that sports is utterly frivolous, and that coverage of it is no better than People magazine.
they are both douchebags and any person pathetic enough to actually read and talk about their womanish bickering should off himself
farging idiots
Him being only a punter and acknowledging that fact is part of the beauty of it.
plus kluwe is a punter....who cares what he has to say
well i didnt read either letter...mostly because i dont care enough to but also because hes a punter
Quote from: FastFreddie on July 24, 2011, 04:25:39 PM
Hi, you're on a sports message board. You are part of the problem.
we all know I'm not here for the football talk
We're all here for The Wire.
And movie reviews.
I'm here for up-to-the-minute news on the weather.
I don't know why I'm here
well, the game day threads..I'm all about them.
the rest of the football talk here is atrocious beyond belief. and as mentioned above, with each passing day I car less and less about all sports.
guys (and weird chicks) have sports; chicks (and weird guys) have celebrity gossip
SAME THING
Quote@AdamSchefter: Teams can begin signing UFAs tomorrow at noon. Those contracts would not take effect until Aug 2.
schefter just added everything could start this afternoon
hold tight kiddos
QuoteAdamSchefter
NFLPA approves deal. Done.
So now i can pay attention to NFL channels again and, in the end there won't be a single second of actual football missed...
It's like nothing ever happened.
Like a nice lead-pipe smash to the head.
You wake up in a pile of blood, wondering what day it is, and who's underwear you are wearing.
So thank god there's no 18 game schedule
Yeah, having to pay for one more game that would actually count would totally suck.
Quote from: SD on July 25, 2011, 05:40:51 PM
So thank god there's no 18 game schedule
Until 2013
Quote from: SD on July 25, 2011, 05:40:51 PM
So thank god there's no 18 game schedule
not yet. give it 3 or 4 years.
I love the NFL but 18 is too much and not at the risk of player's health going into the playoffs.
It works perfectly the way it is. Stop fixing it.
Quote from: hbionic on July 25, 2011, 11:01:28 PM
I love the NFL but 18 is too much and not at the risk of player's health going into the playoffs.
well it can only go to 18 if the players allow it so if it happens then they cannot blame anyone but themselves
Bottom line is the league and players both will make more if they go to 18 games, so it's just a matter of time.
yeah, thank god. 4 preseason games rule!
with how much ota's and training camp has been cut i dont think four preseason games is that out of line anymore...whats out of line is having to pay full price for them
And the talk before was changing to 2 preseason games when they add the 2 regular season ones. It wouldn't surprise me if they come up with an idea to expand the playoffs at some point.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/taterskins/nfl-makes-mistakes-by-following-crowd-on-drug-testing/2011/08/05/gIQAziQgwI_story_1.html
Didn't know where to post this, but good opinion on the nfl drug testing.
Sorry to disagree but I think that was the poorest argument I've ever seen on the whole PED debate. If I wasn't so lazy I'd spell out a point by point rebuttal to virtually everything she says, but you'll just have to stay bound in suspense.
I'll wait...in suspense. But I would be curious to hear your rebuttal.