rumored NFL lockout in 2011

I'm not going to sign that and put my name on the players side until I hear all the facts.

Originally posted by global_nomad:
I'm not going to sign that and put my name on the players side until I hear all the facts.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/nfl/01/11/18-game-proposal.ap/index.html


"Slap in the face" is not the language I was looking for. Damn it!

I tweeted Jehuu Caulcrick former 49er practice squad player, current Bill. I asked him if he was going to play in another league in case of a lockout, he tweeted me back saying "Since we have contract with a NFL, you cannot go play in another league in case of a lockout"

Interesting, I had no idea.

Originally posted by WillistheWall:

Originally posted by global_nomad:
I'm not going to sign that and put my name on the players side until I hear all the facts.

those damn players!

Originally posted by global_nomad:
I'm not going to sign that and put my name on the players side until I hear all the facts.

Hey global and others, I've been hearing this a lot. I'd like to clarify that by signing the NFLLockout.com petition, you're not endorsing the players side of this argument. The only thing you're doing is making it known that you want to see a season next year.

Think of this as your way to push to get a deal done. As a football fan, I don't know why you wouldn't want to lend your name to this petition.

Lockout will hurt both the players and owners. They deserve the financial hit that would happen if they're too stupid to compromise.

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by dj43:
From what I have read and heard, the players are willing to back off the 60% figure to some lesser number. The debate is over how much.

Other issues include the percentage that owners would contribute to veteran benefits - those players that played before benefits were available. That is one owners have been willing to assume, but again, the issue is how much.

All of these issues are things that they have discussed in general terms but the sticking point is the 18 games schedule of regular league games. Owners claim the must have it in order to pay what the players want and players are opposed because they feel it will cause more injuries and shorter careers. Several team player reps have said that until/unless the 18 game proposal is taken off the board there will be no agreement. Both sides seem very entrenched on this issue. Since the number of games impacts the cash flow at every level, there can be no agreement until they know what the cash flow is going to be. All the percentages and numbers are impacted.

It looks like it will be a quiet summer at training camps around the league...at least until the replacement players come in.

i f**king hate the idea of an 18 game schedule.

But that's an interesting sticking point, given that players salaries for preseason games are much less than their salaries for regular season games, while ticket prices are the same. I know they rarely sell out the preseason games, but I find it hard to believe that they are really losing that much money on the current season schedule.

Ad rates for preseason games are a fraction of regular season rates. Owners want more opportunities to sell their product at full price. PS represented a discounted price though an admittedly lower quality product.

In theory, the owners have a good point - more times to sell their product and they stadium they spent HUGE money building - at full price. The problem with that for the players is that they pay for it with their bodies, for now and later in life.

16 games are fine. I don't think many fans really want an increase in the schedule. By the time the SB is done, pro football has occupied 1/2 the year. That is enough.

There is a time when both players and owners need to say "enough. We don't need more money." Of course that overlooks the fact that owners have gone on the hook for decades of debt while the players invest no money but the do invest their bodies.

Hopefully, the NFL sees what a lockout did to baseball and hockey. Hockey already struggled, and now they have less viewers than before. Baseball is still not as popular as it was before their strike. In fact, it took the steroid era to even bring back any interest.

Originally posted by TheRatMan13:
Hopefully, the NFL sees what a lockout did to baseball and hockey. Hockey already struggled, and now they have less viewers than before. Baseball is still not as popular as it was before their strike. In fact, it took the steroid era to even bring back any interest.

Yeah this is the day and age of capitalism, greed, and being as cutthroat as possible. Just remember people in the end were the ones that are f***ed.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by dj43:
From what I have read and heard, the players are willing to back off the 60% figure to some lesser number. The debate is over how much.

Other issues include the percentage that owners would contribute to veteran benefits - those players that played before benefits were available. That is one owners have been willing to assume, but again, the issue is how much.

All of these issues are things that they have discussed in general terms but the sticking point is the 18 games schedule of regular league games. Owners claim the must have it in order to pay what the players want and players are opposed because they feel it will cause more injuries and shorter careers. Several team player reps have said that until/unless the 18 game proposal is taken off the board there will be no agreement. Both sides seem very entrenched on this issue. Since the number of games impacts the cash flow at every level, there can be no agreement until they know what the cash flow is going to be. All the percentages and numbers are impacted.

It looks like it will be a quiet summer at training camps around the league...at least until the replacement players come in.

i f**king hate the idea of an 18 game schedule.

But that's an interesting sticking point, given that players salaries for preseason games are much less than their salaries for regular season games, while ticket prices are the same. I know they rarely sell out the preseason games, but I find it hard to believe that they are really losing that much money on the current season schedule.

Ad rates for preseason games are a fraction of regular season rates. Owners want more opportunities to sell their product at full price. PS represented a discounted price though an admittedly lower quality product.

In theory, the owners have a good point - more times to sell their product and they stadium they spent HUGE money building - at full price. The problem with that for the players is that they pay for it with their bodies, for now and later in life.

16 games are fine. I don't think many fans really want an increase in the schedule. By the time the SB is done, pro football has occupied 1/2 the year. That is enough.

There is a time when both players and owners need to say "enough. We don't need more money." Of course that overlooks the fact that owners have gone on the hook for decades of debt while the players invest no money but the do invest their bodies.

an 18 game schedule will ruin football. The postseason will be a joke. Not only will more players be completely out of the games due to injuries, the ones that do play will be that much more banged up, exhausted, and we're going to see the quality of the postseason dip considerably.

Originally posted by TheRatMan13:
Hopefully, the NFL sees what a lockout did to baseball and hockey. Hockey already struggled, and now they have less viewers than before. Baseball is still not as popular as it was before their strike. In fact, it took the steroid era to even bring back any interest.

just to be clear, a lockout and a strike are two different things.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Lockout will hurt both the players and owners. They deserve the financial hit that would happen if they're too stupid to compromise.

I believe there will be a compromise, the players will take the bigger hit though. Look at all the special teams guys, back-ups, etc. You know they want to play the season. Some of those guys just play in the league for a few years, bounce around from team to team. so they want to maximize playing time and pay that they can.