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!

     

1/14/2011 CBA News


Anybodyhome

Recommended Posts

Excellent read on the latest CBA news...

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Friday-new-and-note-8329.html

The NFLPA held a conference call this week with two of their important leaders, Domonique Foxworth of the Ravens and Scott Fujita of the Browns. Both players were placed on injured reserve this season, and it was no surprise that the focus of the call was on the health and safety of players and the NFL’s proposed 18-game season.

Interestingly, I came away from the call more optimistic than before it that a deal can and will be worked out. The union never said that the 18-game issue was non-negotiable. There was nothing about that call that suggested to me that the divisions between the two sides were insurmountable.

Bonus info at the end of the article on players' pay during playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Err... this is what I took from that article:

Trust is vital, and lacking

As for the back and forth between the league and the union, whether through Twitter, public comments, dueling articles on ESPN.com, or the in-house web sites nfllabor.com (NFL) and nfllockout.com (NFLPA), it is not necessarily a bad thing. Rhetoric is part of the game and has been part of most negotiations.

The deeper concern, however, is trust. Nothing will happen towards a new CBA unless there is trust between the parties.

The NFLPA does not see trust when the NFL refuses to show transparency of their economic concerns. The NFL does not see trust when they read comments in the media about the negotiations and see the union going to Congress to try to leverage their celebrity for potential use in the event of a lockout.

The NFLPA does not see trust when they see a letter to fans from Commissioner Goodell that spins the negotiation as something the league is trying to make happen with an inflexible union. The NFL does not see trust with the NFLPA going on its "Decertification Tour" rather than engaging in substantive negotiations.

The NFLPA does not see trust when they see television contracts that pay through a lockout. The NFL does not see trust when it sets aside days to meet in December that are not taken advantage of.

The NFLPA does not see trust when it sees letters in forums like the Washington Post by team leaders such as Mark Murphy of the Packers. The NFL does not see trust whe it sees letters in forums like the Washington Post by team leaders such as Drew Brees of the Saints.

And the NFLPA does not see trust when it sees the NFL engage Bob Batterman, the attorney who guided the NHL through a lockout, as far back as 2007. The NFL does not see trust when it sees the union have media conference calls spinning a message that is one-sided.

There is a deal to be made here. It will not be made, however, without some vulnerability shown by each side.

That doesn't sound so promising.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The players also mentioned the concern of health benefits going away upon the expiration of the CBA in March. As player reps, teammates with pregnant wives have asked them if they should induce labor prior to March in order to insure benefits."

I really have to shake my head when they talk about stuff like this. Have the players ever heard of COBRA? If I made the kind of money these fools make I would have plenty left over to purchase quality health insurance for my family. The average American makes this work on a 5 figure salary. No reason that some millionaires can't do the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lock them out. Just sit out the wave of players whining about not being able to feed their families (and how much can a family eat that takes up a 5 mill per year +salary?). Then have them crawl back to the table and make the employees take the employers offer.

18 games is the issue? WHEN did most of these players go on IR? Can they show me or anyone else that weeks 16-17 are when most of the injuries occur? If so then they might have an arguement. Bottom line the employees don't want to work anymore than they have to, oh well tough poo I say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The players also mentioned the concern of health benefits going away upon the expiration of the CBA in March. As player reps, teammates with pregnant wives have asked them if they should induce labor prior to March in order to insure benefits."

I really have to shake my head when they talk about stuff like this. Have the players ever heard of COBRA? If I made the kind of money these fools make I would have plenty left over to purchase quality health insurance for my family. The average American makes this work on a 5 figure salary. No reason that some millionaires can't do the same.

IDK... White women are expensive. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The players also mentioned the concern of health benefits going away upon the expiration of the CBA in March. As player reps, teammates with pregnant wives have asked them if they should induce labor prior to March in order to insure benefits."

I really have to shake my head when they talk about stuff like this. Have the players ever heard of COBRA? If I made the kind of money these fools make I would have plenty left over to purchase quality health insurance for my family. The average American makes this work on a 5 figure salary. No reason that some millionaires can't do the same.

The more money we come across, the more problems we see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely don't want to see two more games added on the regular season for two reasons. One, it's all a money grab, and that is the SOLE reason why they want two more games. If the NFL gets their way on this, just imagine what else they will want to change for the sake of money. (The love of money is the root of many evils)

And two, there will be more players getting injured. The NFL likes to talk about meaningless pre-season games, yet for teams who lock up playoff position, the last two games of the season will be just that. The system is perfect the way it is, why mess with that? Money, money, money will be the downfall of the NFL. (I'm sure within closed doors, the commish is talking about setting up teams in different countries.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NFLPA does not see trust when they see television contracts that pay through a lockout.

This makes no sence to me. If the owners are the ones that will be doing the lockout. Can't the networks say the owners are breaching their contract with them? If so, maybe it's time for the 4 networks to speak up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely don't want to see two more games added on the regular season for two reasons. One, it's all a money grab, and that is the SOLE reason why they want two more games. If the NFL gets their way on this, just imagine what else they will want to change for the sake of money. (The love of money is the root of many evils)

And two, there will be more players getting injured. The NFL likes to talk about meaningless pre-season games, yet for teams who lock up playoff position, the last two games of the season will be just that. The system is perfect the way it is, why mess with that? Money, money, money will be the downfall of the NFL. (I'm sure within closed doors, the commish is talking about setting up teams in different countries.)

For those of us who've been around for awhile, we all heard the same thing when the league went from 12 to 14 games and from 14 to 16 games. It's not a new argument, it's the new technology and the new awareness that is bringing information on injuries to the forefront.

And, as Uptown stated, the same players who are complaining about playing 2 more games will be the same ones bitching about not being able to rip someone's head off.

Look, the owners are not going to plunk down an 18-game schedule without other considerations. There are several associated clauses that will be in the new CBA to help teams with an 18-game schedule. Additional roster spots, additional practice squad players, probably a second bye week, reducing the number of contact drills during training camp and OTAs, additional compensation, etc. Trust me, once the players realize they're going to get paid more for those 2 additional games, the whining will stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Call me crazy but if you’re in the bottom 7 in efficiency using Zone 84% of the time why not try something else? You paid Jaycee top 5 CB money use him more effectively. Zone is only efficient if you can generate a good pass rush to force a QB into mistakes otherwise you will get picked apart
    • Good Lord this board has become a cesspool of negativity and where fandom becomes something twisted and unrecognizable.  
    • Yeah, I could jump right into the unbelievable Bryce debate now that some people are trying to flip the script because Bryce Young has, at most, a handful of decent games as a pro, but that's going to work itself out. Suffice it to say that I've seen better QBs (with an s) in a Panthers uniform, and I've certainly seen better QBs be drafted while we're playing around with Bryce, one of them who beat the crap out of us already this season... Let's forget about Bryce (and his markedly underwhelming play since he's been here); I think that most sane fans will agree that drafting him was an error, but it happens. Sure, it doesn't happen to the tune of King's ransom---including your main receiver---but it happens. You bet, you lose. Speaking of receivers...and betting and losing... Oh, man, we drafted Xavier Legette. Yes, just like with Bryce, I've entered "the dark side." Some Huddlers were telling us from the beginning, and they were right. But, I'm not apologizing for waiting to see what a guy's got before making my decision on him. X was a one-year wonder at South Carolina who parlayed some really nice production that season, a great personality and thick country accent, into becoming a first round pick (but only in Carolina). For Dan Morgan and company, He was a big swing that has turned into a big whiff (and I can still feel the ill breeze from that one). Sh¡t happens, right? Well, not so fast. Ladd McConkey was the decidedly more polished receiver who was literally ready to hit the ground running as soon as stepping onto the field as a pro. Ladd was never the biggest guy (though not the smallest), but he was the guy that could run routes, always seemed to get open---no question---and had the same speed as X, but with legit quickness and nuanced shake and bake. But Dan chose the project. He chose the guy where the game speed looks more like a tractor trailer than a 5.0 mustang. Look, I've supported X (just like Bryce) many many a day, but no more. Now I'm not saying that I won't root for the guy. Just like with Bryce, he seems like a great kid. But as far as giving excuses for the kid, and, perhaps more importantly, waiting for some miraculous breakout, I'm done with that. I've seen enough. You don't draft a project for a project. And yes, Bryce had proven to be a project after his first season. In my mind, drafting a supposedly number one receiver that needs lots of development for a starting quarterback that needs immediate help to try and further his development is not going to lead to good things. Pick the surest guy. Or at least pick the one who appears to be the surest guy, because picking can be tricky... especially when you're too busy tricking yourself. 
×
×
  • Create New...