Here's a scenario with Free Agency even before a new CBA

[JimBaker488]

Should the negotiations here stall, and the players choose to decertify as a union, ownership would almost certainly declare their intentions to lock out the players. Then the players likely would move to get relief from U.S. District Judge David S. Doty in the form of an injunction. It's not certain what Doty would do, of course, but he has made some significant pro-player decisions while overseeing NFL labor. If Doty granted injunctive relief, he could likely rule that the league's last work rules were still applicable, or he could simply allow the NFL to institute a set of rules of its choosing. But it's a virtual certainty the NFL would appeal the injunction.

If the injunction survived the appeal process, the 2011 league year would start and the rules would include free agency and the ability to trade players.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1GG8kLIPi

[El Tejano]

The players should just say screw it and play for the UFL. Time to start letting the NFL know they don't run everything.

[GP]

Revenge of the USFL.

I like the idea (I was a proponent of such an idea awhile back, as well) but the only thing standing in the way is this: The consumer's fixation with all things "NFL."

Gonna' be hard for the UFL to raise the money in advertising, tv contracts, sponsorships and overall gameday revenue because all those people shelling out the money will be reluctant to do so if they feel the NFL will be back...then the UFL is back to square one.

Tough nut to crack.

[IDEXAN]

I'm a 100% behind the 32 owners.
Here's what I'd tell the players if I was an owner - let 'em eat cake.

[infantrycak]

Peter is so far off the mark on this one it isn't funny.

[gtexan02]

Originally Posted by IDEXAN

I'm a 100% behind the 32 owners.
Here's what I'd tell the players if I was an owner - let 'em eat cake.

Im not 100%, but Im close to it. Even a lot of ex players side with the owners

[Blake]

This is exactly why I have yet to pay a red cent towards my season ticket renewal.

I am behind the players. If the owners want more money they need to prove it with facts. Not wicked smiles.

[JB]

Originally Posted by Super Mario

This is exactly why I have yet to pay a red cent towards my season ticket renewal.

I am behind the players. If the owners want more money they need to prove it with facts. Not wicked smiles.

And why should the players care how much money the owners are making? Do you demand a raise every time your employer raises rates?

Do you really think the players should get more than the owners out of the revenue pie?

[Blake]

Originally Posted by JB

And why should the players care how much money the owners are making? Do you demand a raise every time your employer raises rates?

Do you really think the players should get more than the owners out of the revenue pie?

Where do you get that the players are asking for a raise? The owners want to scoop 2 billion off the top instead of 1 billion, saying that they "need it", yet wont prove it to the players who will be the ones giving up the extra billion they are asking for.

Why the owners dont want to open up their books 100% is left up for speculation at this point. But I would have to side on them making a **** load of money already and not wanting it known. Or they are doing some scrupulous stuff. And not having to want to explain it.

[Double Barrel]

Originally Posted by JB

And why should the players care how much money the owners are making?

They don't other than to verify the justification for the owners taking another billion off the top and lowering percentage of the cut to players.

The owners are the ones demanding more money in this one.

Originally Posted by JB

Do you demand a raise every time your employer raises rates?

This ain't the real world, my friend. This is elite talent than draws top dollar from the public. Much different than the average Joe working a 9 to 5 job.

Originally Posted by JB

Do you really think the players should get more than the owners out of the revenue pie?

Average it out. 1900+ players vs. 32 owners. Who do you think makes more from the product per man?

Do you think owners should fleece taxpayers through extortion in order to make crazy profits off the lifetime of hard work and dedication of elite athletes? Any given play can be the end of a career for a player. Fans show up to watch players, who are the product, not owners.

Take away the anti-trust exemption and make them pay for their luxury stadiums and I could see more of the owners side.

See, we can put different perceptions out there until we're blue in the face. It comes down to which perspective you choose to perceive.

I try to be objective, but I simply cannot help holding a grudge about the taxpayer angle. We have so much critical infrastructure that desperately needs upgrades, but we let these owners play with our emotions and basically extort money so we feel like "first class" cities and all that garbage. People that could give a rat's ass about football are paying for those stadiums. I just can't feel sorry for the fat cats that engage in such tactics.

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by Double Barrel

Do you think owners should fleece taxpayers through extortion in order to make crazy profits off the lifetime of hard work and dedication of elite athletes? Any given play can be the end of a career for a player. Fans show up to watch players, who are the product, not owners.

Take away the anti-trust exemption and make them pay for their luxury stadiums and I could see more of the owners side.

Totally hear you and agree with you on the public funding but that is more between us and the owners. Fact is we agreed to it. But for us doing it most likely seat prices are lower, the owners make less and the players make less. I see that as a separate issue though than players v. owners. Even the last guy on the roster makes more than 99.99% of Americans. I'm not inclined to take a side in this rich on rich fight. I just want to see football.

[NitroGSXR]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

Totally hear you and agree with you on the public funding but that is more between us and the owners. Fact is we agreed to it. But for us doing it most likely seat prices are lower, the owners make less and the players make less. I see that as a separate issue though than players v. owners. Even the last guy on the roster makes more than 99.99% of Americans. I'm not inclined to take a side in this rich on rich fight. I just want to see football.

Yup. This fight's got nothing to do with me. Let's play some football. Bring in replacements I dont give a hoot. Do whatever it takes. I'm all paid up and even upgraded to four seats from two last month.

This whole squabble really blows. It shouldn't ever affect me as a fan outside of the price of my tickets. Whatever... just get me my fix.

[IDEXAN]

Originally Posted by NitroHonda

Let's play some football. Bring in replacements I dont give a hoot.

If anybody has ever watched those ole tapes from the 50s you know those guys may not have moved as fast as todays NFL players but they were still entertaining. And scrappy to. I say bring 'em in from the Canadian football league, get rugby guys and soccer guys and teach them American football.
It'll be fun to watch, and all the while let the prima donna NFL Americans sit it out while their best football years pass them by. Somebody is giving those boys some real bad advice, they better hope it doesn't back-fire on them ?

[El Tejano]

I'm looking for the article but on Yahoo today they said the option of the players going to play for the UFL or CFL is very much wide open. They said they would even play for the low 6 digit figure as well. This was a yahoo article and Jason Babin was saying he wouldn't mind doing it.

I know someone said that it would be hard for the UFL to do it because the threat of The NFL being there and that the UFL would be back to square one but that wouldn't be the case for the CFL. Their league has held on all these years already. When you then add into the mix that the NFL wanted to get a team in Canada already (I believe Buffalo has made the threat to move there before too), now the NFL loses out on a league and a new location or market.

All that being said, I'd like to ask why the NFL feels a scab season would be bad. Yes, they've done it before and the play was bad but tiimes are different these days. Free Agency wasn't as effective back then and with the different changes to the rules players careers have lasted longer, more players can still play at later ages. Jeff Garcia, was playing for the UFL last year and he looked pretty good, Maurice Clarett shaped up a bit.


“It was an incredible experience, you will love it, and the competition is the same competition as the NFL. Ninety-five percent of the players have been in the NFL before, so there’s no dropoff in talent. That’s what I would tell anybody - go for it.”
Hartford Colonials RB - Andre Dixon

Back in the day of the scab season in the mid 80s, there wasn't a UFL or even Arena League football to keep players in playing shape. Now they do have those guys and as Andre Dixon said, 95% of those guys used to play in the league and most just came from the league. Here are a few names I've located to where yes the product wouldn't be as great as the current one but it wouldn't be as horrible as the scab season players from the mid 80s.

Emmanuel Cook (recently a top NFL draft prospect)
Duante Culpepper
Patrick Chukwurah
Tatum Bell
Maurice Clarret
Andre Dixon (recently a top NFL draft prospect)
Demarcus Faggins (ok so that name alone should mess up my theory but he hasn't been out of the league long)
Jeff Garcia
Maurice Hicks
Corey Ivy
Grady Jackson
Cato June
Zeke Moreno
Josh McCown
Shane Olivea
Sammie Parker
Ryan Periloux
Michael Pittman
Simeon Rice
Dominic Rhodes
Marcel Shipp
Charles Spencer (remember him?)
Cecil Sapp
Todd Sauerbrun
Lee Vickers

Alot of old guys, but guys that love the game of football never the less and for the most part can still play. They were just too old or too hurt for an NFL team to give them any more chances. The scabs of the mid 80s were a bunch of guys that otherwise would've never had a chance of being an NFL player. Any old Oiler fans remember WR Mike Akiu from Hawaii?

Now let me make this more interesting. Teams like the Oilers, who were at the bottom of the league ended up benefitting from this type of season. They acquired more talent, this way and were able to renew good players contracts out of that. Then 7 straight playoff seasons commenced for the Oilers. Last I checked, the league's product got better after that too because more of the sorrier teams got better. That could happen now, and last I checked there were more losing teams than winning teams. Fans of these type of teams (Yes us Texan fans) would be happier fans because they are getting better quality scab football, even in a scab season, because lunch pail players that love the game are playing and just maybe their team gets to the playoffs (Texan fans don't act like you won't root for the Texans) and possibly when the players return their team is even better because they acquired more depth.

NFL better consider this because a league like the CFL could end up taking their current players.

[hot pickle]

shane falco for prez!!!!! lol