Lockout Thread

[MDS]

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.

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

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?

[ice grillin you]

that theres no chance heath evans knows nothing about the labor situation...you are a dumb MA zealot but not this dumb

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

Medium High!

[ice grillin you]

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

[General_Failure]

I don't know what the farg you're saying, but you seem to enjoy using a lot of double negatives.

[ice grillin you]

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...

[General_Failure]

Wait, they despise a bunch of people they sent to a prison colony on the other side of the world? Stop the presses.

[Diomedes]

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.

[ice grillin you]

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

[General_Failure]

And more racism.

[PhillyGirl]

The 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.

[hbionic]

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?

[MDS]

pencil neck dweeb and jeff fisher's errand boy reporting that major progress was made today...vote monday should approve cba.

[Eagaholic]

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

Please, 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.