NFL owners don't get it...

[Highlandfire]

Another thing, with it being 32 separate franchises there will be no revenue sharing. Several teams will fold meaning less jobs for players. And of course when teams refuse to increase their rosters, the players will sue saying they are violating the players rights.

I say close up shop for at least a year and re organize into two leagues so anti trust no longer applies

[mountainpantherfan]

Blame the Owners

Not going to blame the owners or players. The people at fault for this are the lawyers (on both sides including DeSmith), the agents and the media. Sadly the owners and players are both going to suffer financially because of all of this while DeSmith, the lawyers and the agents become millionairs. And ESPN will be covering the story every step of the way...

[carolinarolls]

Another thing, with it being 32 separate franchises there will be no revenue sharing. Several teams will fold meaning less jobs for players. And of course when teams refuse to increase their rosters, the players will sue saying they are violating the players rights.

I say close up shop for at least a year and re organize into two leagues so anti trust no longer applies

This...

I can hardly believe this is happening. It's sad and hilarious at the same time.

[roaddog96]

Another thing, with it being 32 separate franchises there will be no revenue sharing. Several teams will fold meaning less jobs for players. And of course when teams refuse to increase their rosters, the players will sue saying they are violating the players rights.

I say close up shop for at least a year and re organize into two leagues so anti trust no longer applies

Now that I think about it, how could the players sue because the franchises won't sign them? The rule mandating that there needs to be a 53 man roster was eliminated by the players,and since there would be no central power that would govern the franchises and make them all follow the same rules, then it's basically at owners discretion who they sign and who they don't. I can't sue a potential employer on grounds that they have jobs and won't hire me, when its at the owner's discretion who he wants to hire or not. Now that they are no longer a union, and in this scenario, there is no CBA that would have rules in place to insure a certain amount of roster spots, they are basically screwed if they tried.

[Highlandfire]

Now that I think about it, how could the players sue because the franchises won't sign them? The rule mandating that there needs to be a 53 man roster was eliminated by the players,and since there would be no central power that would govern the franchises and make them all follow the same rules, then it's basically at owners discretion who they sign and who they don't. I can't sue a potential employer on grounds that they have jobs and won't hire me, when its at the owner's discretion who he wants to hire or not. Now that they are no longer a union, and in this scenario, there is no CBA that would have rules in place to insure a certain amount of roster spots, they are basically screwed if they tried.

I would hope that is the case

[Mr. Scot]

I doubt either side "gets it" to be honest.

[mountainpantherfan]

Roaddog is right but the issue is that the teams would have to be careful with cutting players in the offseason. It's one thing to say, as an industry (sports) standard that being cut during preseason is acceptable.

Being cut in March is a different story all together. Players could sue for termination for a long list of issues real or precieved.

The bottom line is that the best players will make a lot of money and a lot of lesser players will be making a lot less. Which sucks for those players. I do feel for these player, and even the owners to some extent, because the lawyers really pulled one over on everyone.

[Highlandfire]

LMAO I can't wait to see the big lawsuit. About a year or two into this new system, you will see all the have not's sue the NFLPA for decertifying and screwing them over lol.

[mountainpantherfan]

LMAO I can't wait to see the big lawsuit. About a year or two into this new system, you will see all the have not's sue the NFLPA for decertifying and screwing them over lol.

That can't happen but they could sue Tom Brady et al. And then some owners like the Bengals and the Bills will probably sue the Cowboys and Patriots over the last CBA.

Yeah, lawsuits are coming from all over the place. And lawyers will be getting paid a lot of money. Remind me again what NFL team De Smith use to play on? Oh, wait, he wasn't a former player...then what was his former profession? Oh yeah, thats right, a lawyer. fug YOU DE SMITH!!!

[RHCPanther]

Is this thread a joke? You seriously think that players are going to be stupid enough to kill the CBA?

Wake up...it's a huge game of poker. Players just want to end this quickly so that they don't miss any paychecks or workout bonuses. They are posturing so that the owners are much more reasonable when mediation resumes.

[jtnc]

If this was to ever happen just do away with the NFL do altogether.

[Davis83]

well i saw one point a poster made that really made me think - if no CBA and the teams are 32 indiviual companies - then it will be really funny to see a player fired half way thru a game because he jumped offsides or false starts at a critical point in the game.

How long do you think wives are gonna go along with moving to a city and then your hubby loses his job the next week - move again only for him to get fired again...etc.

Laugh, but the owners could easily make a "company" rule holding employee's to standards (no penalties, no interceptions, no fumbles).... and then using those to "fire" players at will.

And... will be hilarious to see players show up to games on a 1972 no-air conditioned bus from their stay at the Super 8 motel.

[pstall]

we live in a time where we have ZERO long view of things. we want it all yesterday. we have no character anymore. just give me my cut is what we want.

NFL Owners=rich white dudes/fat cats. Players=indentured servants/ blue collar.

be careful what you wish for. :lol:

[Anybodyhome]

I find it amusing the members of this board, being a vast majority of conservative, right-leaning folks, are actually taking a pro-union stance on this issue.