Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789
Results 81 to 86 of 86

Thread: Why NFL could close in 2011

  1. #1
    Member Since
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    1,071
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default Why NFL could close in 2011


    0 Not allowed!
    Anyone read this article on Yahoo this morning?
    Thoughts...

    Yahoo! Sports - Sports News, Scores, Rumors, Fantasy Games, and more
    slug=ms-laborquestions090810
    **ChiefsChick**

  2. #81
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,123
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 27
    Given: 26

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Hayvern View Post
    Wrong, it was due for an extension, after the 2011 season. Yes, the owners opted out of the final season of the extension, but either it would have happened in 2010, or it would have happened in 2011.

    Right now, the argument is that the players do now want two more games for the regular season. I don't really get this argument because you play those games now, and they don't mean anything.

    A player can have a career ending injury in a pre-season game as easily as he can in a regular season game. If you are going to play the games anyway, make them worth something.
    Quote Originally Posted by Chiefster View Post
    The problem I have with this is that it gives coaches two less weeks to evaluate talent and make final cuts.
    That, and the players are currently not playing much of those two preseason games, whereas they will be required to play every minute of two additional regular season games.

    One of the remaining two preseason games would still require a lot of playing time from starters, as game three currently does.

    What it boils down to is almost two complete games added to the schedule, as opposed to two games that they already playing, being counted, as was suggested.

    Then, after a season or two of having only two preseason games, to prepare for an eighteen game schedule, of course teams will want the other two preseason games back, without subtracting them from the eighteen game schedule.

    That would complete the addition of two games of work and physical risk to the players. And that is exactly what the owners are looking for.

    But I also love the bias shown with the issue, as "the argument is that the players do now want two more games for the regular season" suggesting that it is the NFLPA that is making some demands, instead of the fact that it is the owners who are making the demand for more games.

    Hayvern, you make it seem like there was no cost to the decision to opt out of the current agreement, by saying it would have happened eventually.

    Yeah. That is not something that places the blame for the threatened lockout onto players though.

    All blame for the current situation should be placed on the owners. They, literally, asked for the blame.

    Had the owners not opted out, (because how many of us are really feeling sorry for the massive profits that they are recording under the current CBA?)then the threat would have been a year away. Not to mention the extra year to negotiate, while not threatening to lockout.

    Make no doubt, the whole issue exists now, because the owners chose to make it an issue right now.

    As for who is actually putting themselves at risk, is this really a question? Some billionaire risks part of his massive collection of money, while a player risks his health, livelihood, and even his life.

    No amount of financial risk equals the risk that the players are putting fourth.

    What? The owners are risking being poor? (Not really) So what? Be poor. Life goes on. Try being permanently handicapped. Then I'll listen to your plight.

  3. #82
    Member Since
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    9,541
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 373
    Given: 74

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by chief31 View Post
    That, and the players are currently not playing much of those two preseason games, whereas they will be required to play every minute of two additional regular season games.

    One of the remaining two preseason games would still require a lot of playing time from starters, as game three currently does.

    What it boils down to is almost two complete games added to the schedule, as opposed to two games that they already playing, being counted, as was suggested.

    Then, after a season or two of having only two preseason games, to prepare for an eighteen game schedule, of course teams will want the other two preseason games back, without subtracting them from the eighteen game schedule.

    That would complete the addition of two games of work and physical risk to the players. And that is exactly what the owners are looking for.

    But I also love the bias shown with the issue, as "the argument is that the players do now want two more games for the regular season" suggesting that it is the NFLPA that is making some demands, instead of the fact that it is the owners who are making the demand for more games.

    Hayvern, you make it seem like there was no cost to the decision to opt out of the current agreement, by saying it would have happened eventually.

    Yeah. That is not something that places the blame for the threatened lockout onto players though.

    All blame for the current situation should be placed on the owners. They, literally, asked for the blame.

    Had the owners not opted out, (because how many of us are really feeling sorry for the massive profits that they are recording under the current CBA?)then the threat would have been a year away. Not to mention the extra year to negotiate, while not threatening to lockout.

    Make no doubt, the whole issue exists now, because the owners chose to make it an issue right now.

    As for who is actually putting themselves at risk, is this really a question? Some billionaire risks part of his massive collection of money, while a player risks his health, livelihood, and even his life.

    No amount of financial risk equals the risk that the players are putting fourth.

    What? The owners are risking being poor? (Not really) So what? Be poor. Life goes on. Try being permanently handicapped. Then I'll listen to your plight.
    I think everyone knows what I think on this issue. I think that it's both sides that need to get there heads on stright. That includes the players union. Let me put it like this. It takes two to tango.

    Anyway on to my main part. I think that most the bias has been pro players. At least from what I have seen. example. Mark Schlereth many times has talked about how the NFL is to strict with the players when it comes to there uniforms. And I agree with him on that. But then while talking about the owners he went on a rant about how bad it is that the owners don't force players to wear mouthguards. You can't have it both ways. That's the type of talk I have heard on this issue. But I tend to tune out the tv when They start talking about the labor issure after a while.

  4. #83
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,123
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 27
    Given: 26

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by matthewschiefs View Post
    I think everyone knows what I think on this issue. I think that it's both sides that need to get there heads on stright. That includes the players union. Let me put it like this. It takes two to tango.

    Anyway on to my main part. I think that most the bias has been pro players. At least from what I have seen. example. Mark Schlereth many times has talked about how the NFL is to strict with the players when it comes to there uniforms. And I agree with him on that. But then while talking about the owners he went on a rant about how bad it is that the owners don't force players to wear mouthguards. You can't have it both ways. That's the type of talk I have heard on this issue. But I tend to tune out the tv when They start talking about the labor issure after a while.

    Wow. That's a pretty obscure example. The mouthguards and uniform issues are closet issues. I don't think that those two issues are going to have anything to do with a lockout.

    But, talk about your hypocritical thinking....

    The NFL asserts that they are infinitely concerned with players' health and well-being when defending fines for hits. But, they are demanding that the players play two more games.... for more profits.

    The two biggest demands in this labor dispute are being made by the owners.

    Two more games is huge. It is similar to my boss saying that he wants me to work Saturdays, but at the same pay that I was getting for Mon-Fri.

    You want a day of free labor? Hmmm...

    The other is that the owners are asking to get some money back from the NFLPA.

    So, you want me to work more days, for less pay?

    How this whole thing is being blamed on the players, or even being looked at as the fault of both sides is quite baffling.

    FACT: The owners cancelled the agreed upon contract.
    FACT: The owners want more work from the players.
    FACT: The owners want more money.
    FACT: The owners are threatening a lockout.

  5. #84
    Member Since
    Feb 2010
    Location
    N. Kansas City
    Posts
    147
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    I say if there is know football in 2011,we the fans should have a holdout in 2012.I love football very much.It has been my fovorite thing to do and watch for the past 33 years but this has gone too far.They all make crazy money.Even the guys that make less than a million a year.Players and owners make a mint.Half the players don't even give it there all.Just playing for the money.Like I said they hold out in 2011,the fans need to hold out in 2012.At least not go or watch them for the first few weeks.Let them know we are in charge.Not the owners or the players,but the fans are in charge.Another thing they should do is,make every team and every player make the same amount of money but when they make it to the playoffs or super bowl,depending on how deep of a run they make in the playoffs.That is the big payday for the players.Make them perform to get the money.Tired of the half *** play from some of the players and they still get paid sick money.We they fans are more serious about are team,than some of the players.Someone should set up some kind of poll to see what everyone thinks.I would but my computer skills arent the best lol.Hope to hear some good comments.I think if the fans did this,football would be better than ever in 2013.The NFL and the players would have to rethink themselfs.For that matter ,let them know what we think now.Maybe they will listen and get there asses in gear and get the deal done.Get fans in every NFL city envolved if ther is a holdout in 2011.Talking about economy,if there is a holdout.It will hurt this great nation badly.There will be billions of dollars of revenue lost.

  6. #85
    Member Since
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    9,541
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 373
    Given: 74

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by chief31 View Post
    Wow. That's a pretty obscure example. The mouthguards and uniform issues are closet issues. I don't think that those two issues are going to have anything to do with a lockout.

    But, talk about your hypocritical thinking....

    The NFL asserts that they are infinitely concerned with players' health and well-being when defending fines for hits. But, they are demanding that the players play two more games.... for more profits.

    The two biggest demands in this labor dispute are being made by the owners.

    Two more games is huge. It is similar to my boss saying that he wants me to work Saturdays, but at the same pay that I was getting for Mon-Fri.

    You want a day of free labor? Hmmm...

    The other is that the owners are asking to get some money back from the NFLPA.

    So, you want me to work more days, for less pay?

    How this whole thing is being blamed on the players, or even being looked at as the fault of both sides is quite baffling.

    FACT: The owners cancelled the agreed upon contract.
    FACT: The owners want more work from the players.
    FACT: The owners want more money.
    FACT: The owners are threatening a lockout.
    That's not as uncommon as many think in the business world. And this is the business side of football. As one of the store managers at my work I deal with other stores around in the area. If we are short on something that they have planty of we work out a deal to get what we are short on. Doing so you get to no the people from those stores. Gamestop my employer felt that one store in our area (thankfully not mine) was not meeting there expectations and the owners of that store gave there employees the choice to take a pay cut or close the store. It happens alot in the business world.

    The reason that I put some (not even half) of the blame on the players is this. I have heard former players admit that in the last CBA the owners got there butts kicked. If you made a deal or anyone made a deal and it didn't turn out as good as you might have thought that it would and you had the RIGHT in that deal to opt out you would anyone would. The owners had the right in that agreement to opt out they took that right. Just like the players would take any right that they have in the CBA. The players can give a little just as easy as the owners can. Neither side is at this time. The owners are threating to lockout the players the players have threatened to decertify the union so they can sue the owners. Both sides are makeing threats. I think that both sides will eventualy give a little and get a deal done before the season. I just feel that it's unfair to say the owners are 100% to blame. I think its more like they are 75% the players are 25%

  7. #86
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,123
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 27
    Given: 26

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by matthewschiefs View Post
    That's not as uncommon as many think in the business world. And this is the business side of football. As one of the store managers at my work I deal with other stores around in the area. If we are short on something that they have planty of we work out a deal to get what we are short on. Doing so you get to no the people from those stores. Gamestop my employer felt that one store in our area (thankfully not mine) was not meeting there expectations and the owners of that store gave there employees the choice to take a pay cut or close the store. It happens alot in the business world.
    Regardless of how often it happens in other businesses, NFL ownership is far from being unprofitable.

    And, I see no way that this takes the focus off of the owners, who are the people actually making the holdout threats, for even better profits.

    Just because it is common to be so hyper-greedy, doesn't mean that it is faultless, and certainly doesn't shift the fault to anyone else.


    Quote Originally Posted by matthewschiefs View Post
    The reason that I put some (not even half) of the blame on the players is this. I have heard former players admit that in the last CBA the owners got there butts kicked. If you made a deal or anyone made a deal and it didn't turn out as good as you might have thought that it would and you had the RIGHT in that deal to opt out you would anyone would.
    Fine. But there is zero fault on the players for that decision to opt out.

    If the owners made a bad deal, (Man are they ever going to the poorhouse from it.)then that was their decision.


    Quote Originally Posted by matthewschiefs View Post
    The owners had the right in that agreement to opt out they took that right.
    Not without fault.

    Quote Originally Posted by matthewschiefs View Post
    Just like the players would take any right that they have in the CBA. The players can give a little just as easy as the owners can. Neither side is at this time. The owners are threating to lockout the players the players have threatened to decertify the union so they can sue the owners. Both sides are makeing threats. I think that both sides will eventualy give a little and get a deal done before the season. I just feel that it's unfair to say the owners are 100% to blame. I think its more like they are 75% the players are 25%
    I don't call it 100%. But, seeing as how it was the owners who initiated this whole showdown, and the biggest demands are being made by the owners, I think that 75%/25% is quite generous to them.

    Now, not having been in any of the negotiations, I can't say how much the players may have offered to sacrifice. But, it is safe to assume that they haven't caved on every single request, as a deal would have been done immediately.

    I have heard, however, that the owners are refusing to share information that would show how badly the last contract was "hurting" them.

    Pretty hard to make claims of poor profits, while not offering the evidence that you have in your possession.

    I put it at about 90%/10% because the players could simply agree to whatever demands the owners have.

    But good to see that you do realize that this is being initiated by the owners.

    Perhaps, behind the scenes, during the meetings that they have had, the players are being very tight. I just don't see how one could make such an assumption, considering how it is the owners who are making the major demands.
    Last edited by chief31; 02-06-2011 at 06:37 PM.

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789

Similar Threads

  1. And the 1st pick for the 2011 NFL draft is...
    By Argo in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 02-08-2011, 12:47 AM
  2. How bout we draft these hands in 2011?
    By fairladyZ in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-27-2010, 02:58 AM
  3. Madden 2011 chiefs ratings
    By jacko58 in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 07-25-2010, 04:23 PM
  4. A quick look ahead to 2011
    By stevefuller in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-05-2010, 02:51 PM
  5. 2011 Pro bowl held in Hawaii
    By AussieChiefsFan in forum The Locker Room
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-21-2010, 04:42 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •