Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Latest on the 2011 Lockout


Anybodyhome

Recommended Posts

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5652700

"NFL Players Association executive director DeMaurice Smith sees new signs that owners are preparing for a football-free 2011.

With support from Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers, he asked fans to take the players' side.

Speaking at a tailgate-style fan luncheon a few blocks from Lambeau Field on Tuesday, Smith referred to a recent Sports Business Journal report that said the NFL is requiring banks that lend money to its teams to extend grace periods for loan defaults through the end of the 2011 season in the event of a lockout.

"That to me is a step where the owners are protecting themselves in the event that there is no season," Smith said."

The NFLPA boss Smith is an idiot and he is just now realizing this could be serious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NFLPA boss Smith is an idiot and he is just now realizing this could be serious.

DeMaurice Smith is actually incredibly intelligent and well educated.

It doesn't matter who the player rep is. He inherited this problem, and the lockout was already cast in stone.

Unless you think the players should just immediately bend over to the demands of 32 men who claim to be losing money all the while refusing to divulge their financial information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How in the world are the players to blame here? They signed an agreement where their salaries are pegged to how profitable the league is, something every single working stiff in this miserable gay country would love to be able to do. It obviously hasn't hurt the nfl too much.

The owners knowingly signed in to this agreement and are now just tearing the pages up for no reason.

If anyone could actually point out where the owners have said what they want I'd be amazed, because not even the players really know the owners demands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have a dog in this fight except for the game itself, which is bigger than all of this. That being said, I've never heard anything come out of Smith's mouth that didn't sound like typical legalese, ambulance chasing lawyer bullshit. And education doesn't amount to squadoosh unless you put it to use.

The owners, on the other hand, have kept their collective mouths shut outside of the negotiations and the fans are only left to guess as to what the owners are demanding.

My guess is a decreased revenue package, a rookie salary cap and an 18-game season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have a dog in this fight except for the game itself, which is bigger than all of this. That being said, I've never heard anything come out of Smith's mouth that didn't sound like typical legalese, ambulance chasing lawyer bullshit. And education doesn't amount to squadoosh unless you put it to use.

What is he supposed to say? He's in the middle of a labor negotiation where the ownership has flat out refused to tell the players what their specific demands are. He has nothing to tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybodyhome if I asked you what specifically sounds like "typical legalese, ambulance chasing lawyer bullshit" would you actually respond or would you just kinda fade away?

I wouldn't mind terribly either outcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...