Please Educate me on the possible "Lockout"

[panthers55]

Considering they hired one of the minds behind the NHL lockout, I'd say they're probably all drinking the kool aid.

Problem is, the NFL is already the US's most popular sport. The brand has nothing to gain by locking out.

The owners agree with you and believe that success and popularity is enough to survive a lockout. I don't think they will go through with it. They just need to convince the players that they will, and hope they cave.

[Kevin Greene]

The lockout appears a real concern and something being driven by the owners. I hope they realize that it will hurt the NFL moving forward just like it did to baseball.

I think the owners are in a bad position to a degree. The NFL is a tremendous cash cow. The franchises are worth a billion alone. TV revenue is off the scale. The money is there, a cap is in position.

Now I would like to see a rookie salary cap. Some of the money these 1st round busts pocket is ridiculous and cripple teams for years. An NFL players window is short, they need to work out something where the Rooks get reasonable money and vets get what they deserve as well.

Last baseball strike I stayed away for years, sure hope I don't have to make that choice with football.

[Snake]

There is still a year to workout the new CBA. I'm sure all sides want it worked out and don't want a lockout.

Well the owners want to work out a New CBA the Players Union dose not because the current one favors them a whole lot.

It won't happen. Too much money to lose (I've said this same exact thing many times before).

Dont underestimate how greedy the Players Union is...... They are fat little piggies right now and dont want to give up an inch.

A "strike" is initiated by the workers (they refuse to come to work) a "lockout" is initiated by ownership/management (they won't allow the workers to come to work). At the moment, the NFL owners are threatening to lock out the players if they don't come to terms on a new CBA.

The way things look right now - it's pretty likely to happen. Jerry Richardson is the chair of the ownership committee that's negotiating with the players and he's holding off on extending Fox's contract or hiring a new coach for 2011 because there's a good chance there could be no NFL in 2011.

Both sides are digging in there hills so I guess you could call it a Lockout or you could call it a strike. Ether way if no one give there will be no Football. In the past the Owners have always won when a strike happens.

[Mesmer]

Also something to note.. David Stern and Gary Bettman will be the two happiest men on Earth if this happens.

Taking the most popular sport out of the mix for one fall/winter means massive ratings boosts to NBA/NHL

[panthers55]

Well the owners want to work out a New CBA the Players Union dose not because the current one favors them a whole lot.

Dont underestimate how greedy the Players Union is...... They are fat little piggies right now and dont want to give up an inch.

Both sides are digging in there hills so I guess you could call it a Lockout or you could call it a strike. Ether way if no one give there will be no Football. In the past the Owners have always won when a strike happens.

From everything I have read, the owners are the ones precipitating this. The union would be fine with the status quo and have said as much by agreeing to extend the current agreement another 6 years. The owners decided to end the current agreement and are the ones engineering the lockout. I am not savvy enough to know if their concerns are legitimate or not just reporting what I have read. But it is clear that the union and the players are not at the root of this. They like what they have and the owners want to take back what they have already given the players.

[Wither]

From everything I have read, the owners are the ones precipitating this. The union would be fine with the status quo and have said as much by agreeing to extend the current agreement another 6 years. The owners decided to end the current agreement and are the ones engineering the lockout. I am not savvy enough to know if their concerns are legitimate or not just reporting what I have read. But it is clear that the union and the players are not at the root of this. They like what they have and the owners want to take back what they have already given the players.

Well yeah, that's what he was saying. He was saying that the union is fine with the agreement they have had recently because it favors them, but the owners want to change it because it favors the union.

To be honest I think the union is the one on the wrong side of the argument.

Separate from my previous statements in this post, I also think the union would be wrong to force a lockout (unless the owners are really demanding something ridiculous). They are supposed to protect the interests of the players and a lockout would not be doing that (people lost interest, owners lose money, cut players, etc. etc. - I think we all agree a lockout would not be good for anyone).

[Snake]

Well yeah, that's what he was saying. He was saying that the union is fine with the agreement they have had recently because it favors them, but the owners want to change it because it favors the union.

To be honest I think the union is the one on the wrong side of the argument.

Separate from my previous statements in this post, I also think the union would be wrong to force a lockout (unless the owners are really demanding something ridiculous). They are supposed to protect the interests of the players and a lockout would not be doing that (people lost interest, owners lose money, cut players, etc. etc. - I think we all agree a lockout would not be good for anyone).

Also even if there is not a lockout Uncapped years tend to favor the players. So the owners want to get a CBA done. I think the two big issues are how the TV money is spread and a Rookie cap.

I really am surprised that the owners have not demanded a Rookie cap before now. I mean in this years draft I heard that the top QB prospect was demanding 50 mill guaranteed. I mean that's just stupid to expect anyone to pay that much for someone unproven.

[Mesmer]

It's long overdue. The fact that nobody wants the #1 overall choice is pretty telling. Generally the 5-15 ish picks are much easier to shop.

It really puts the worst team in a hole more, when they owe some dude that probably sucks like 300 zillion dollars before he steps on the field.

[panthers55]

Also even if there is not a lockout Uncapped years tend to favor the players. So the owners want to get a CBA done. I think the two big issues are how the TV money is spread and a Rookie cap.

I really am surprised that the owners have not demanded a Rookie cap before now. I mean in this years draft I heard that the top QB prospect was demanding 50 mill guaranteed. I mean that's just stupid to expect anyone to pay that much for someone unproven.

FWIW the owners don't want a CBA done unless the players are willing to give back some of what they have already gotten. Sort of like you agreeing to work for a certain wage and after a year or two your boss comes back and says he will only let you work if you will take a pay cut of 20%. When you ask for him to show you why and suggest that if the company is losing money you might agree to it, he says he doesn't have to show you anything. Worse is that he is only employer in town and if you refuse to work for him, you are out of work.

As for the rookie cap the owners don't really care as much as you would think because they spend 60% of their revenue for player's salaries and it doesn't matter how it is spent. The vets are actually in favor so they get a bigger piece of the pie.