- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: DeMaurice Smith: 2-year strike may be necessary leverage for NFLPA in CBA negotiations
Posted on 1/30/20 at 6:30 am to BilJ
Posted on 1/30/20 at 6:30 am to BilJ
quote:
Yes I’m sure they’ve done this. Maybe 5% of the players in the league could withstand that type of hold out
FWIW, the last time there was a major strike in 1987, it was the star players who crossed the picket lines and ended up ending the strike. It was players like Joe Montana, Eric Dickerson, Lawrence Taylor, Steve Largent, Tony Dorsett, Mark Gastineau and Howie Long who folded to the owners and screwed the NFLPA. It's never the fringe roster players who end up running out of money. It's always the star players who live lavish lifestyles.
0
Posted on 1/30/20 at 6:32 am to htran90
All of that takes away revenue from the owners. Preseason is where the owners make money because the players aren’t paid under their regular contracts until Week 1. That’s why the owners want a 17th game if the preseason is going to be shortened.
And expanding the active roster on game day means more money out of the owners pockets in the form of game checks. Practice squad players get paid far less than a guy on the 53-man roster.
What you’re describing is a players’ utopia but there are no givebacks to the owners to make that happen. And they won’t go for that.
And expanding the active roster on game day means more money out of the owners pockets in the form of game checks. Practice squad players get paid far less than a guy on the 53-man roster.
What you’re describing is a players’ utopia but there are no givebacks to the owners to make that happen. And they won’t go for that.
Posted on 1/30/20 at 7:10 am to RLDSC FAN
a 2 year strike would be the best possible scenario for player health and resetting the ridiculous sense of entitlement on both sides
Posted on 1/30/20 at 8:49 am to Upperdecker
quote:
Most of the players would cross their own picket line. They can’t afford to not play for 2 years. They wouldn’t strike for anywhere near that long
I bet close to a third of the players won't be in the league in two years (retirement, career ending injury, marginal players getting cut). You think they're going to give up two years of income that they will never match again on their lives? Good luck getting that passed by your voting membership.
Posted on 1/30/20 at 9:03 am to Stretch Suba
quote:
And expanding the active roster on game day means more money out of the owners pockets in the form of game checks.
Actually, it would be more out of the players pockets. Owners are required to pay out a percentage of revenue. So whether there are 53 or 60 players, the percentage remains the same, they just have to divide it over 7 additional players.
They need to go back to 2 bye weeks before they add games.
And I agree with a previous poster that said the current schedule structure makes sense.
6 games in division, 4 games against rotating cross conference division, 4 games vs rotating division in same conference, 2 games with teams w/in the conference that finished in the same seed as their division.
Where would the 1 extra game come from? Would they do away with this set-up and just go back to random draws? Force inter-conference proximity rivalries? (I.e., Saints play Houston every year, and then play KC in years they are locked with the South?)
Posted on 1/30/20 at 9:04 am to Tigers0891
quote:
love that the answer for extending the regular season is that they will do them a big favor and reduce the preseason.
Reducing the preseason only takes away opportunities for lesser players to grind to make the roster / first call type opportunities of the practice squad. Also, your starters and those most exposed to injury throughout the season hardly play the pre-season anyways, therefore reducing it does not effectively balance out the addition of another full speed real game. I hope the league cannibalizes itself hard. A multi year lockout sounds great to me ! Let’s do it
Well it would be a favor since the players have been wanting the Pre-Season shortened.
Posted on 1/30/20 at 9:04 am to RLDSC FAN
The XFLs time to shine.
Told yall this league was going to be something.
Told yall this league was going to be something.
This post was edited on 1/30/20 at 9:05 am
Posted on 1/30/20 at 9:05 am to Upperdecker
quote:
Most of the players would cross their own picket line. They can’t afford to not play for 2 years
Especially rookies and players on rookie deals that weren't first rounders.
Posted on 1/30/20 at 10:44 am to RLDSC FAN
If you get rid of 2 preseason games, significantly increase roster sizes, and put a 2nd bye week
Posted on 1/30/20 at 10:51 am to BilJ
I would be very interested to see what a two year strike would do to the nfl popularity
I have a hankering suspicion people would realize its the familiarity and fantasy football element keeping them so engaged, and not the actual product
Im not sure how quickly they would bounce back
I have a hankering suspicion people would realize its the familiarity and fantasy football element keeping them so engaged, and not the actual product
Im not sure how quickly they would bounce back
Posted on 1/30/20 at 10:56 am to RLDSC FAN
If true, now's the time to invest in some kind of college fantasy platform
Posted on 1/30/20 at 10:57 am to lsupride87
quote:
I have a hankering suspicion people would realize its the familiarity and fantasy football element keeping them so engaged, and not the actual product
Im not sure how quickly they would bounce back
Eh I think in Big Markets they'd bounce back.
New York Chicago etc.
shite products on those fields and they still sell out
Posted on 1/30/20 at 11:21 am to I Bleed Garnet
Lol DeMaurice.
They need to fight for roster expansion - 60 active, 20 practice squad spots and up to 10 players on the inactive/injured list at a time.
The NFLPA needs to put something in their contracts on their end that their members are required to set aside a certain percentage of their income for retirement. Try to convince owners to do a match on it.
But the NFL absolutely needs to set up a healthcare fund for former players.
As far as the 17th game issue, not sure how it would work as far as selecting that opponent, but that extra game should be a neutral site game for everyone - like the London/Mexico City games.
They need to fight for roster expansion - 60 active, 20 practice squad spots and up to 10 players on the inactive/injured list at a time.
The NFLPA needs to put something in their contracts on their end that their members are required to set aside a certain percentage of their income for retirement. Try to convince owners to do a match on it.
But the NFL absolutely needs to set up a healthcare fund for former players.
As far as the 17th game issue, not sure how it would work as far as selecting that opponent, but that extra game should be a neutral site game for everyone - like the London/Mexico City games.
Posted on 1/30/20 at 11:24 am to TheeRealCarolina
quote:
Lol DeMaurice.
literally means "Of Maurice"
Posted on 1/30/20 at 11:25 am to TheeRealCarolina
roster expansion is a must at this point, its current # is kind of ridiculous.
I'm OK with expanding the regular season but they need to ask for multiple bye weeks and get rid of TNF...or at the very least require teams that play on it be coming off a bye. The NFL can't continue to bang the drum for player safety when Thursday Night Football is completely contradictory to it.
I'm OK with expanding the regular season but they need to ask for multiple bye weeks and get rid of TNF...or at the very least require teams that play on it be coming off a bye. The NFL can't continue to bang the drum for player safety when Thursday Night Football is completely contradictory to it.
Posted on 1/30/20 at 11:28 am to RLDSC FAN
quote:
2-year strike
Good luck getting the players to agree to something like that
Posted on 1/30/20 at 11:33 am to Weekend Warrior79
quote:
Actually, it would be more out of the players pockets. Owners are required to pay out a percentage of revenue. So whether there are 53 or 60 players, the percentage remains the same, they just have to divide it over 7 additional players
You think the players would agree to this?
Why do they need to expand rosters anyway?
Posted on 1/30/20 at 11:51 am to Stretch Suba
quote:
Preseason is where the owners make money because the players aren’t paid under their regular contracts until Week 1
They essentially lose half a preseason game of revenue if they play neutral site and split it. Or have it rotate 2 home this year, 1 home next year etc
quote:
And expanding the active roster on game day means more money out of the owners pockets in the form of game checks. Practice squad players get paid far less than a guy on the 53-man roster.
It's 7 more minimum contract players.
There's 10 practice squad players and they each make roughly 130k. If a minimum contract makes 480k, it's 350k each.
So it will cost roughly 2mil more per year by doing so. If they're active or not, they still get paid.
quote:
What you’re describing is a players’ utopia but there are no givebacks to the owners to make that happen. And they won’t go for that.
It's give and take, no? If players get that than the owners will get something somewhere else
Posted on 1/30/20 at 12:07 pm to Tiger Prawn
Posted on 1/30/20 at 2:37 pm to BilJ
quote:
roster expansion is a must at this point, its current # is kind of ridiculous.
How so?It's not like you can't go and get players off waivers if you're crippled by injuries.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News