You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    Did I just hear that the players association -- you remember the players association? Those are the guys who pretended to be perfectly willing to broker a compromise with the owners contingent primarily on a rookie wage scale -- is now requesting that potential high draft picks NOT attend the upcoming draft in New York?

    Oh my . . .   oh my oh my!

    There's something about Scew You! and Solidarity! occupying the same space that just tickles my funny bone.

    Cool





     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from NEGAME2. Show NEGAME2's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    You can tell how much they "care about the fans" because at this point it's the only football thing we can look forward to.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from carawaydj. Show carawaydj's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    There is no reason for the NFLPA to be doing this.  It has no impact on their bargaining position at all.  It does nothing but hurt the fans and the draft prospects.  That is probably a big moment in most of those prospects lives.  Telling them not to attend is nearly akin to telling college students to skip their graduation.  It's just wrong.  Let them have their day.

    DeMaurice Smith is a snake like any other high profiled attorney.  He's accustomed to the adversarial system of justice.  He has no interest in what is fair.  He has no interest in splitting the difference.  He is going to use every ploy and every tactic he can to get as much as he can.  This is how the system works.  Fair to say that the owners will do the same.  Only difference is that the owners are.....get this...the owners; the people who actually own the business, not just pass through.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Clay73. Show Clay73's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up:
    [QUOTE]There is no reason for the NFLPA to be doing this.  It has no impact on their bargaining position at all.  It does nothing but hurt the fans and the draft prospects.  That is probably a big moment in most of those prospects lives.  Telling them not to attend is nearly akin to telling college students to skip their graduation.  It's just wrong.  Let them have their day. DeMaurice Smith is a snake like any other high profiled attorney.  He's accustomed to the adversarial system of justice.  He has no interest in what is fair.  He has no interest in splitting the difference.  He is going to use every ploy and every tactic he can to get as much as he can.  This is how the system works.  Fair to say that the owners will do the same.  Only difference is that the owners are.....get this...the owners; the people who actually own the business, not just pass through.
    Posted by carawaydj[/QUOTE]

    Correct me if I am wrong but if there is not a CBA in place, then a players draft would be in violation of the anti trust laws.  The only way they can get an exemption from the anti trust laws is to have a signed CBA between the players and owners.  I am not a lawyer but I think that is what we are confronted with at this point.  That is the point of contention with the Brady, Brees and Manning law suit, I believe.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from carawaydj. Show carawaydj's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up : Correct me if I am wrong but if there is not a CBA in place, then a players draft would be in violation of the anti trust laws.  The only way they can get an exemption from the anti trust laws is to have a signed CBA between the players and owners.  I am not a lawyer but I think that is what we are confronted with at this point.  That is the point of contention with the Brady, Brees and Manning law suit, I believe.
    Posted by Clay73[/QUOTE]

    You will be correct IF, and ONLY IF, the judge rules against the owners when the case is heard and decided.  That said, why is the NFLPA trying to do this?  If they win in court there will be no draft, or most likely just postponed.

    This whole union decertification is a sham anyway.  They voted to disband not because they were not happy with the union, but as a negotiating ploy.  This sham decertification is the only reason these sham antitrust issues are even there.  At least judge Doty will not be presiding over the antitrust suit.  That's all we need as fans; have our draft taken away too.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    Shhhhhh.

    There are some here who actually believe the Union (allegedly) represents all things good in their struggle to maintain some small semblance of humanity and self-respect against THE MAN. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    The players are now suing the NFL saying the draft is an illegal restraint of trade. So of course they don't want players participating in the draft. 

    And the rookies are probably better off without a draft.  Then they'll be free to seek employment with whatever team they want.  Just like you and I were able to seek employment anywhere we wanted when we graduated from college.  If I were a top prospect, I'd be pretty happy to be able to shop my services with all 32 teams and see who was willing to pay the most rather than being stuck negotiating with just one team.



     
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up : If the anti-trust exemption goes away, there won't be 32 teams for very long.
    Posted by p-mike[/QUOTE]

    Maybe not, but there will still be enough. Football's not going away. European soccer has a free market system and there are plenty of soccer teams still. And the players make tons of money too. 
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up : If the anti-trust exemption goes away, there won't be 32 teams for very long.
    Posted by p-mike[/QUOTE]

    That isn't true. What on earth makes you think that? Minus anti-trust exemptions, the NFL owners might actually have to *gasp* show a modicum of financial restraint and not build enormous stadiums they can't (don't want to) afford, they might have to think a little harder about who they sign, but if they are really good businessmen, then it shouldn't be an issue at all.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    So if the union de-certified then that means that DeMaurice Smith is out of a job?  Yes?

    If the NFL goes the way of Soccer they can have it. Beckham sure raked it in.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    I find it interesting that the pro-union contingent is arguing vigorously for free market principals. 

    I can see it now.  The richest players basking in their even greater riches while the low wage earners get less and less and less until enough of them say, "We need a union to even the playing field."  Only it won't be the owners they want a piece of.  It will be their own teammates.

    All those years of work to benefit all players, poof, gone.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ender587. Show Ender587's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    No chance Rookies just become free agents and start getting signed.. thats chaos.  some team with 3 picks in the draft and plenty of cap to spend buys out the top three picks and all of a suddens in the playoffs next year?

    nope
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up:
    [QUOTE]I find it interesting that the pro-union contingent is arguing vigorously for free market principals.  
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]

    And the anti-union people seem outraged that the union decided to dissolve. Whacky upside down world we live in, eh?
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49Patriots. Show 49Patriots's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    The prospects will be free agents until the owners sign the CBA. So, in a nutshell, they need to pressure the owners because they won't receive a pay-check until that happens. 


    =) 



     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up : And the anti-union people seem outraged that the union decided to dissolve. Whacky upside down world we live in, eh?
    Posted by prolate0spheroid[/QUOTE]

    I'd rather not speak for others, but personally, I see decertification as nothing more than a short-sighted, overreaching power play to force the owners to show the players everything.  The players have decertified before only to re-form.  If the alternative was so good, there'd have been no reason to re-form. 
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paul_K. Show Paul_K's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    The NFLPA trade association realizes that the rookies showing up for the NFL Network's big show increases their ratings, which increases the owners' ad revenue.  They have asked the rookies to show up on other networks to suck the viewers away.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up : I'd rather not speak for others, but personally, I see decertification as nothing more than a short-sighted, overreaching power play to force the owners to show the players everything.  The players have decertified before only to re-form.  If the alternative was so good, there'd have been no reason to re-form. 
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]


    I'm still trying to confirm, but if you read the lawsuit filed by the players, they claim that they re-created their union in 1993 at the request of the owners. The players (not unionized at the time) had just won a big class action anti-trust suit against the owners and were working out a settlement with the owners. The re-creation of the union was part of that settlement and was, according to the players, something the owners wanted. In other words, re-crating the union was actually a concession to the owners. 

    I've said all along that the union and CBA benefit the owners as much as--if not more than--the players because they allow the owners to legally implement anti-competitive practices that, in the absence of the union and CBA, would be illegal.  It seems to me that the owners committed a bit of hubris two years ago when they decided to make big demands for further concessions from the players, forgetting just how important having a healthy and friendly partnership with a union is to the owners.  Now, I think, the players will remind them just how nice having a union can be in this particular industry. It will be interesting to see how our chests-all-puffed-up owners will enjoy competing against each other in a world without salary caps, drafts, restricted free agency, rookie salary scales, franchise tags, or other anti-competitive arrangements that having a union allowed them to get away with.  If they're such great businessmen it should be no problem, of course. Thousands of other businessmen do the same every day.  Certainly our NFL team owners can do it too, no?  I mean what how good are these owners as businessmen if they have to rely on having a union to be able to compete?  But unbelievably these great captains of industry are actually going to court to try to get a union back. How ridiculous is that?





      



     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up : That isn't true. What on earth makes you think that? Minus anti-trust exemptions, the NFL owners might actually have to *gasp* show a modicum of financial restraint and not build enormous stadiums they can't (don't want to) afford, they might have to think a little harder about who they sign, but if they are really good businessmen, then it shouldn't be an issue at all.
    Posted by zbellino[/QUOTE]

    Whether or not it's true remains to be seen, but what certainly is true is that there are a number of "haves" in the league that are supporting a number of "have nots," and when the incentive to cooperate is taken away, I doubt very seriously that Jerry Jones (or Robert Kraft) is going to volunteer to subsidize Zygi Wilf. "Financial restraint" has absolutely nothing to do with it. The guy with largest revenue stream will win, and the guy who can't afford to compete will be the Pittsburgh Pirates . . . until such time as his fans can no longer support him, at which point he will be no one at all.




     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up : Whether or not it's true remains to be seen, but what certainly is true is that there are a number of "haves" in the league that are supporting a number of "have nots," and when the incentive to cooperate is taken away, I doubt very seriously that Jerry Jones (or Robert Kraft) is going to volunteer to subsidize Zygi Wilf.
    Posted by p-mike[/QUOTE]


    Is a smaller league with better teams such a bad idea?  Think how much better the quality of the game could be with 24 teams instead of 32.  Much easier to build a roster deep with top-quality players.  

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up : I'd rather not speak for others, but personally, I see decertification as nothing more than a short-sighted, overreaching power play to force the owners to show the players everything.  The players have decertified before only to re-form.  If the alternative was so good, there'd have been no reason to re-form. 
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]

    Underdogg is only against The NFLPA because where he's from, the Elders have advised his clan that splitting into smaller factions might lessen their own tribe's strength & fracture the greater balance of the hunter-gatherer unity, when and if they're attacked by The Navajo, or someone from the spirit world, and overall it be best to leave this one in the hands of the medicine man, who'll come up with a suitable concillatory sunshine/healthy crop dance, and later handout friendship beads to everyone involved...  (I'm sorry, I Am SORRY, I just couldn't help myself, that just came out, and lol-I AM sorry)...
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    Pro . . .

    Actually, no. It's a fantastic idea, as far as I'm concerned.

    I've long advocated for a smaller league. I think it would be more competitive and the quality of play would be enhanced . . .  which is great for the fans (even if it will cost yet more to watch), but it will also mean fewer jobs, which would appear to be at cross purposes to what the union . . .  errrrrrrrrrrrrrr . . .   I mean the "association" should want.


    Frankly, I would be fascinated to see what a true open market would do to the league. Baseball seems to have found a way to survive with a two-tiered system, but I don't know that the NFL can function without a virtually bottomless well of national TV money, and I fear that will be the first casualty of a wildly imbalanced league.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    Prolate,

    As you know, I don't give the owners a pass in this.  The effed up themselves by agreeing to the previous deal.  I find Jerry Richardson a bit difficult to swallow especially his emotional "we took a sh*t deal last time and were not going to do it again" take.  Every owner got a vote and they voted 30-2 for the deal. 

    They got themselves into this mess, but I don't begrudge them their desire to get themselves out of it.  Its their team.  imo, this has much less to do with the past and everything to do with the future.  In the past 5 years they have seen the economy tank, nascar rise to its highest heights only to be faced with empty seats today, the NBA, NHL, and MLB are suffering as leagues.  The NFL may be more bullett proof but the owners would be wise to know that the good times can't last forever.  If the league is to remain viable, the owners have to have a solid handle on their own financials going forward. 

    Pain today for prosperity tomorrow.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from tenacioust. Show tenacioust's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    A union by any other name is still a turd
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from newenglanderinexile. Show newenglanderinexile's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up:
    [QUOTE]A union by any other name is still a turd
    Posted by tenacioust[/QUOTE]

    This country will never be great again until 100 people own everything and everyone else is making $7 an hour with no benefits starting at age 5. 
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up

    In Response to Re: You Cannot Make This Stuff Up:
    [QUOTE]Pro . . . Actually, no. It's a fantastic idea, as far as I'm concerned. I've long advocated for a smaller league. I think it would be more competitive and the quality of play would be enhanced . . .  which is great for the fans (even if it will cost yet more to watch), but it will also mean fewer jobs, which would appear to be at cross purposes to what the union . . .  errrrrrrrrrrrrrr . . .   I mean the "association" should want. Frankly, I would be fascinated to see what a true open market would do to the league. Baseball seems to have found a way to survive with a two-tiered system, but I don't know that the NFL can function without a virtually bottomless well of national TV money, and I fear that will be the first casualty of a wildly imbalanced league.
    Posted by p-mike[/QUOTE]

    I think there are basically three models of owner-player relationship we could have.  The best is (1) an owner-player partnership in which the two sides cooperate to set rules that are good for everyone.  This is where I hoped the sides would end up, but once the owners made big demands while refusing to share (meaningful) financial information, you could see partnership wasn't going to win the day.  In the absence of that kind of partnership, then a typical (2) free market relationship is probably best where neither party (players or owners) can collude and every team and every player has to negotiate individually with no collectively set rules. Both of these relationships (partnership or free market) create some kind of equality between the parties, where each has rights and a fair chance of advancing the party's self interest. It seems like what a lot of posters on this web site want, however, is (3) an unequal relationship of owner dominance, where the owners can collude if they want and can dictate terms to the players and the players just have to "shut up and like it." This is the caveman approach to labor relations, where the owners bring a club to the table and drag the players out by their pony tails. I guess I can hear my wife saying: ""Does this surprise you that football fans are Neanderthals?" Personally, I had hoped otherwise, but no, I guess it doesn't really surprise me . . . 




     

Share