Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

This Changes Everything!


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
35 replies to this topic

#31 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,550
  • Reputation: 2,262
HUDDLER

Posted 24 February 2010 - 09:19 PM

I hear rumblings that the players could go on a mini strike through training camp. Many of the RFA wouldn't have to sign their tenders until then anyway.

Look for the owners to use this offer to try and get a new CBA in place by March 5.


They will be picketing after they get locked out. Can't exactly strike when they don't have a job or a contract. I don't expect this to get resolved until the Fall of 2011.

#32 FelineFANatic

FelineFANatic

    Jump Zone

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 115
  • Reputation: 0
HUDDLER

Posted 24 February 2010 - 10:49 PM

The NFL owners will likely reject it. They don't want a cap (floor) and will use the opportunity to unload big contracts with no cap consequence and sign a lot of guys to RFA tenders for 1 year so they aren't obligated to pay them in 2011 if there is a lockout.


:iagree: Spot on.

#33 mountainpantherfan

mountainpantherfan

    In Honor of Sam Mills

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,907
  • Reputation: 5
HUDDLER

Posted 25 February 2010 - 10:50 AM

They will be picketing after they get locked out. Can't exactly strike when they don't have a job or a contract. I don't expect this to get resolved until the Fall of 2011.


What's been discussed is that the RFA and the Franshised/Trasition Tagged players would hold of on signing their tenders as long as possible. But if so many players don't show up for offseason programs there would be a possible no show from many of the contracted players. Not exactly a strike but similar. It might not happen but like I said there are rumbles from contracted players that don't like the situation as much as those RFA that were suppose to be UFA.

#34 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,550
  • Reputation: 2,262
HUDDLER

Posted 25 February 2010 - 11:06 AM

What's been discussed is that the RFA and the Franshised/Trasition Tagged players would hold of on signing their tenders as long as possible. But if so many players don't show up for offseason programs there would be a possible no show from many of the contracted players. Not exactly a strike but similar. It might not happen but like I said there are rumbles from contracted players that don't like the situation as much as those RFA that were suppose to be UFA.


If you are talking about this year, I can see them not signing the tender until late as a protest. It is a little like pissing into the wind. Doesn't really hurt anyone but yourself and doesn't make things any different but whatever.

If players who are tendered don't show up for OTAs the teams will just move on without them. Most of them have been in the league several years so unless they are installing a new system it won't really matter. It might put them further down the depth chart until they get up to speed. They are well within their rights to sign it as late as they choose up to the deadline.
If players who are under contract decide to not show they can expect to get fined for each day they miss. As long as they don't mind losing money to make a useless point, they should go for it.

At this point the players would be stupid to do anything that makes them appear to be at fault. Right now the owners are the bad guys and the players need to play off that. Millions of fans and ticket holders can exert the pressure of the wallet on the owners and will do so if they think the players are getting the raw deal. Players would be smart to paint themselves as the victims here which a strike never does.

Edited by panthers55, 25 February 2010 - 11:20 AM.


#35 mountainpantherfan

mountainpantherfan

    In Honor of Sam Mills

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,907
  • Reputation: 5
HUDDLER

Posted 25 February 2010 - 01:35 PM

If you are talking about this year, I can see them not signing the tender until late as a protest. It is a little like pissing into the wind. Doesn't really hurt anyone but yourself and doesn't make things any different but whatever.

If players who are tendered don't show up for OTAs the teams will just move on without them. Most of them have been in the league several years so unless they are installing a new system it won't really matter. It might put them further down the depth chart until they get up to speed. They are well within their rights to sign it as late as they choose up to the deadline.
If players who are under contract decide to not show they can expect to get fined for each day they miss. As long as they don't mind losing money to make a useless point, they should go for it.

At this point the players would be stupid to do anything that makes them appear to be at fault. Right now the owners are the bad guys and the players need to play off that. Millions of fans and ticket holders can exert the pressure of the wallet on the owners and will do so if they think the players are getting the raw deal. Players would be smart to paint themselves as the victims here which a strike never does.


Aha, but thats never stopped them before. I just saw a program on NFL Network where they were talking to Boomer about him laying down in front of a bus during the 87 strike. Most of these guys just don't get it even the smarter ones. What I thought was funny is how Boomer said he didn't regret any of his actions but looking back he felt he acted in a foolish way.

#36 Snake

Snake

    Rivera did What???

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 12,810
  • Reputation: 1,306
HUDDLER

Posted 25 February 2010 - 01:44 PM

Boy the Skins and the Raiders will be paying the price if there is a cap.