Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

16 games is perfect there is no need for 18.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=mredskins;783726]Just because I am stupid and really have not being following this very closely, when exactly is the final hour?[/quote]

March 4 at 12:01am

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=freddyg12;783718]What I can't stand about the preseason/18 game schedule logic is that they're trying to sell the idea that players won't be playing as much, thus safety isn't compromised. That isn't being said outright but Goodell's comments imply that.

We all know that starters & guys guaranteed roster spots are not playing much in preseason. Adding 2 real games will increase the risk of injury significantly. Or for some teams that have their playoff position locked by week 16, those two games will look like preseason because the coaches will be scared to play anybody. This is the beginning of a watering down of a good product.[/quote]

What baffles me more is Hocky has similar violent hits, they have fist fights, getting hit with a heavy puck flying at 90 mph, and the fear of at any time bouncing their heads off the rock hard ice. Yet they play a ton more games.

I think everyone is also missing the point that though they wanted to add 2 more games, there was the thought that they would allow more players on the team as well. Instead of the 53 it was rumored that they might up the number if there were 18 games. Plus I don't really see the big deal. I understand the worry that 2 more games take the toll on the body but they could just as easily be injured after game 2 of the season so maybe the league should either turn the NFL into flag football or simply make it a televised computer game (Madden) so no one has to worry about injuries.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=Mattyk;783732]March 4 at 12:01am[/quote]
ok so pretty much right around the corner.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;783723]Preseason sucks...its boring....its just a glorified training camp.
Gimme 18 games!!![/quote]

[quote]Only [B]27 percent favored the idea[/B] in an Associated Press poll released last week, and even fewer (18 percent) gave it a thumbs-up when Sports Illustrated’s Peter King solicited opinions on Twitter and received more than 1,200 responses.[/quote]

I often wonder when people start sighting their "poll" percentages if the poll was done fair? I mean I never knew there was a poll and I'm in favour of the 18 game season. Plus I know the poll is supposed to simply give them an idea of numbers but I don't Twitter and is 1,200 responses an acturate assessment of what the actual populace wants?

I understand preseason, and the main reason for it, to be able to evaluate the young talent. But honestly why don't they just simply have more scrimages? or after the 1st two weeks of team drills and practice teams would be allowed to practice against each other with out the violent hits.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=SolidSnake84;783722][B]I think they know that the lockout is inevitable at this point.[/B] There is no point to have meetings when they already know that they can't change anything....sad.

But maybe, let's hear it for the Replacement Redskins?? Shane Falco as QB maybe???[/quote]

I think your right. I thought I read somewhere that the owners didn't like the judge who decides the issue's because he leans towards the players more then the owners issue's. The owners want him removed and the players don't. I thought it said the owners want the Lockout cause then the Judge who is in place now would no longer have authority and a new Judge would have to be picked? I might have read it wrong but it sounded like the owners were wanting the Lockout in part for that reason unless the players agreed to picking a new Judge prior to the Lockout.

I know thats not the meat and potatoes of the Lockout but I wonder how much other stuff is in the CBA that after the Lockout occurrs would be null and void, and the owners want it removed so they are not binded by the old rules.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

Honestly 16 weeks plus playoffs is enough for me. I am pretty much NFL burned out by this time of the year. By week 14 or so it starts feeling like your Sunday afternoon part time job. Maybe I am just at a stage in life where I have better things to do then waste 4 hours on a Sunday afternoon watching football, doesn't mean I am not a fan just means I have different priorities now.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=mredskins;783735]ok so pretty much right around the corner.[/quote]

3 weeks today

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

I think the 18 game season is being used as a bargaining chip for both a more advantageous money split for the owners and a rookie salary cap. The rookie wage scale would go a long way into reining in spending for rookies allowing more money to be spent on vets.

Personally, I'm anti 18 game season. There's no need for it. Hell, keep your 4 preseason games but don't force them on season ticket holders and charge a much reduced rate for them. Hell, they could easily cut it back to 3 games and be fine. Just get the deal done. You're at risk of really pissing off the people that actually do pay your checks, the fans.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[URL="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6107737"]Sources: NFL-Union talks canceled[/URL]

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=Mattyk;783742]3 weeks today[/quote]

Seriously. I know we all have different opinions of who is right, who is wrong, who needs to give a little and who needs to stand firm.

[B][U]BUT[/U][/B] For anything to happen these guys need to sit down, talk through the issues, and find a way.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=SolidSnake84;783722]I think they know that the lockout is inevitable at this point. There is no point to have meetings when they already know that they can't change anything....sad.

But maybe, let's hear it for the Replacement Redskins?? Shane Falco as QB maybe???[/quote]

[url=http://espn.go.com/nfl/topics/_/page/nfl-labor-negotiations]NFL Labor Negotiations - NFL Topics - ESPN[/url]

From: San Francisco Chronicle: NFL Considering Replacement Player Options?

07:11 AM ET 05.06 | At this time of year, unsigned players are working out in hopes of signing as free agents. It's also an interesting time for the teams, as they look ahead to the possibility of a lock out in 2011. Fringe players might become starters if there's a long labor dispute. The NFL went with replacement players in 1987 during the last protracted labor stalemate. The league might already be making preparations and rumors are they are going to buy a 25 percent stake in the United Football League. The UFL, which now has five teams and plays six games in the fall, could become a feeder league along the line of NFL Europe. However, if there's a long lockout, UFL players could possibly become NFL players overnight.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=SBXVII;783734]What baffles me more is Hocky has similar violent hits, they have fist fights, getting hit with a heavy puck flying at 90 mph, and the fear of at any time bouncing their heads off the rock hard ice. Yet they play a ton more games.

I think everyone is also missing the point that though they wanted to add 2 more games, [B]there was the thought that they would allow more players on the team as well.[/B] Instead of the 53 it was rumored that they might up the number if there were 18 games. Plus I don't really see the big deal. I understand the worry that 2 more games take the toll on the body but they could just as easily be injured after game 2 of the season so maybe the league should either turn the NFL into flag football or simply make it a televised computer game (Madden) so no one has to worry about injuries.[/quote]

I'm not missing that point at all, but at the end of the year do you want to see your team's starter (whoever that is in our case) or 3rd string qb? Increasing the roster size is essentially an admission that there will be more guys on IR or the PUP list.

I don't follow hockey, but it doesn't seem to have the extreme collision hits the nfl does, or the dangerous piling on leg injuries. Two more games is a big deal. As it is 16 games is too much. Before that the season was 14, before that 12, before that 10.

It's not just about injuries though, the NHL, NBA & major league baseball all have created a regular season product that even devoted fans can't or don't pay much attention to. The NFL IMO is pushing the limits on the demand for their product. There are already several 'meaningless' games at the end of the year, a longer schedule would increase that. And just like a preseason game, someone big like Brady or Manning, will get hurt in game 17 or 18 when their team has little to no mathematical chances of improving their playoff position.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

I still hold out a lot of hope that the 18 game season is a bargaining chip as an earlier article mentioned. Certainly there is a ton of posturing on both sides, and to give up the 18 game season would appear, now, as a huge concession by the owners.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=SBXVII;783738]I often wonder when people start sighting their "poll" percentages if the poll was done fair? I mean I never knew there was a poll and I'm in favour of the 18 game season. Plus I know the poll is supposed to simply give them an idea of numbers but I don't Twitter and is 1,200 responses an acturate assessment of what the actual populace wants?

I understand preseason, and the main reason for it, to be able to evaluate the young talent. [B]But honestly why don't they just simply have more scrimages?[/B] or after the 1st two weeks of team drills and practice teams would be allowed to practice against each other with out the violent hits.[/quote]

This points out to me part of the reason the 'reduce preseason' & increase the regular season argument is bogus; if the preseason is cut coaches will still need to evaluate their players in live contact. I appreciate your suggestion about practicing w/out hits, but don't know how well that can be done. Maybe there will actually be in season limits to full contact drills as part of a new deal, just as there are such limits for OTAs in the current deal.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=mredskins;783740]Honestly 16 weeks plus playoffs is enough for me. I am pretty much NFL burned out by this time of the year. By week 14 or so it starts feeling like your Sunday afternoon part time job. Maybe I am just at a stage in life where I have better things to do then waste 4 hours on a Sunday afternoon watching football, doesn't mean I am not a fan just means I have different priorities now.[/quote]

I agree. Towards the end of the season it does start to feel like a job a little. However how much of this is because we rarely have anything to celebrate towards the end of the year other than a good draft pick? Your statement of week 14 sounds just about right for when the Skins are pretty much out of the playoffs.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=mredskins;783740]Honestly 16 weeks plus playoffs is enough for me. I am pretty much NFL burned out by this time of the year. By week 14 or so it starts feeling like your Sunday afternoon part time job. Maybe I am just at a stage in life where I have better things to do then waste 4 hours on a Sunday afternoon watching football, doesn't mean I am not a fan just means I have different priorities now.[/quote]

I don't feel that way at all. The day the season ends is one of the worst days of the year for me. I have other things to do, too, and "different priorities." But I also recognize that every April I wish I could watch football, yet I can't, so I feel gratitude even towards the end of the season in December.

That said, I am opposed to 18 games. It just puts off the inevitable for two weeks in terms of the end of the season. It also is bad for the players.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

This is what I'm refering to....

[QUOTE]If March 4 arrives without an extension of the current CBA, which was and still is the settlement agreement of the antitrust case filed by Reggie White and others many years ago, Judge David Doty’s jurisdiction over the relationship between the two parties ends. Given that the league has tried to have Judge Doty bounced based on the perception that he has a union bias, the NFL surely would like to find a way to do a Doty-free deal. The union, on the other hand, surely would like to keep Doty involved.[/QUOTE]

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=Jontrem;783750]I agree. Towards the end of the season it does start to feel like a job a little. However how much of this is because we rarely have anything to celebrate towards the end of the year other than a good draft pick? Your statement of week 14 sounds just about right for when the Skins are pretty much out of the playoffs.[/quote]


I am sure the Redskin's lack of success in the past century has fueled this feeling of "work" as well for me.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=Lotus;783752]I don't feel that way at all. [B]The day the season ends is one of the worst days of the year for me.[/B] I have other things to do, too, and "different priorities." But I also recognize that every April I wish I could watch football, yet I can't, so I feel gratitude even towards the end of the season in December.

That said, I am opposed to 18 games. It just puts off the inevitable for two weeks in terms of the end of the season. It also is bad for the players.[/quote]

I hear ya. Sounds kinda corny but I feel kinda empty once the season ends and all of a sudden my Sundays are wide open. On one hand it's nice to have all that free time again, but for the first few Sundays I feel a bit lost. Especially coming off the playoffs - which is always the best football of the year regardless of whether the Skins are in or not.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=Mattyk;783724]These things always go down to the final hour, I'm still holding out hope for a last minute deal to avoid a lockout.[/quote]

[url=http://www.mynorthwest.com/category/nfl_articles/20110201/Happy-to-talk-labor,-Ward-worries-about-lockout/]NFL, union meet for 2-hour bargaining session - MyNorthwest.com[/url]

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=mredskins;783754]I am sure the Redskin's lack of success in the past century has fueled this feeling of "work" as well for me.[/quote]

You guys are like me. I am 30 year Redskins fan, and most Decembers, it is like work watching this team. Geez!

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

why is 50-50 too much for the owners?

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=diehardskin2982;783767]why is 50-50 too much for the owners?[/quote]

I would imagine the players would say because there are 32 ownership groups, and thousands of current and retired players.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=freddyg12;783747]I'm not missing that point at all, but at the end of the year do you want to see your team's starter (whoever that is in our case) or 3rd string qb? [B]Increasing the roster size is essentially an admission that there will be more guys on IR or the PUP list.[/B]

[B]I don't follow hockey, but it doesn't seem to have the extreme collision hits the nfl does, or the dangerous piling on leg injuries[/B]. Two more games is a big deal. As it is 16 games is too much. Before that the season was 14, before that 12, before that 10.

It's not just about injuries though, the NHL, NBA & major league baseball all have created a regular season product that even devoted fans can't or don't pay much attention to. The NFL IMO is pushing the limits on the demand for their product. [B]There are already several 'meaningless' games at the end of the year, a longer schedule would increase that[/B]. And just like a preseason game, someone big like Brady or Manning, will get hurt in game 17 or 18 when their team has little to no mathematical chances of improving their playoff position.[/quote]

[B]1st point:[/B] Duely noted. But it doesn't mean it's a given players will get hurt. It just means teams will have more roster spots to keep back ups. Right now teams have to decide what position is more important to them and use those spots. Not to mention the 8 PS spots. If the league allowed 10 more active spots or 15 the teams could have more players to pick from if injuries occur.

[B]2nd point: [/B]The meaningless games at the begining are usually set up to get starters in playing shape and evaluate prospects. The way I look at it... you either in the play offs which you can go back to starting a lot of rookies to give them playing time or your completely out which again give you the opportunity to play the rookies. The only teams to worry would be the teams who are on the bubble and are fighting to stay or get into the play offs.

I just don't see how 2 more games is going to make a huge difference with the players. Either they are healthy or they are not. If they are worried about injuries in game 17 or 18 then they should be worried about injuries in game 2 or 3 also. Maybe there should only be one game for each team and the winners move on to the playoffs. Then the SB. It all could be finished by Oct.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=diehardskin2982;783767]why is 50-50 too much for the owners?[/quote]

Owners say that such a ratio does not offer them the resources to invest in and grow the game, thus growing the financial pie that both owners and players draw from.

However, a cynic might say that the 50-50 ratio does not match up with owners' greed.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=diehardskin2982;783767]why is 50-50 too much for the owners?[/quote]

This is what I don't get. Why not just split the money between owners and players 50/50. Instead the players have a 60/40 split. 50% can go to players salaries, the other 50% the owner can use however he likes... stadium, equipement, coach's, front office, whatever.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[QUOTE=CRedskinsRule;783768]I would imagine the players would say because there are 32 ownership groups,[B] and thousands of current and retired players.[/[/B]QUOTE]

I maybe missing the point, but honestly, I could care less about the retired players. They chose that path. and... although the NFL nor the NFLPA has developed any type of retirement fund, I feel the players themselves had every opportunity to take a portion of their earnings and put it into an IRA or something. Instead they pissed it away. I just don't see how that should be placed on the owners and they be forced to solve the problem. How about the NFLPA step up and create a retirement fund and have the players give a % of their income to be put into a retirement fund for the future... kinda like the social security dept.

I also have felt that the insurance issue is BS also. Let the NFLPA act like any other corporation and find a decent HMO for all the players and again let the players pay for their own insurance and their families if they chose the family package. The more players that take the deal the lower the monthly costs.

Lastly, I'm not trying to sound one sided but all in all if the players are unhappy they can always take their talents to the CFL, UFL, or where ever. Fans will follow them just to see them. The owners have more invested and more to worry about in regards to this very thing happening.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=SBXVII;783784][B]1st point:[/B] Duely noted. But it doesn't mean it's a given players will get hurt. It just means teams will have more roster spots to keep back ups. Right now teams have to decide what position is more important to them and use those spots. Not to mention the 8 PS spots. If the league allowed 10 more active spots or 15 the teams could have more players to pick from if injuries occur.

[B]2nd point: [/B]The meaningless games at the begining are usually set up to get starters in playing shape and evaluate prospects. The way I look at it... you either in the play offs which you can go back to starting a lot of rookies to give them playing time or your completely out which again give you the opportunity to play the rookies. The only teams to worry would be the teams who are on the bubble and are fighting to stay or get into the play offs.

I just don't see how 2 more games is going to make a huge difference with the players. [B]Either they are healthy or they are not. If they are worried about injuries in game 17 or 18 then they should be worried about injuries in game 2 or 3 also.[/B] Maybe there should only be one game for each team and the winners move on to the playoffs. Then the SB. It all could be finished by Oct.[/quote]

You assume players are "healthy or they are not." It's not just about what guys are inactive or out for the year. Every week guys are playing w/various ailments & are often not 100%. You seem to think that it's all or nothing, when players deal w/nagging injuries that only get worse the more they play. Often players delay surgery till after the season because they'd miss games otherwise.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=SBXVII;783793][QUOTE=CRedskinsRule;783768]I would imagine the players would say because there are 32 ownership groups,[B] and thousands of current and retired players.[/B][/quote]

I maybe missing the point, but honestly, I could care less about the retired players. They chose that path. and... although the NFL nor the NFLPA has developed any type of retirement fund, I feel the players themselves had every opportunity to take a portion of their earnings and put it into an IRA or something. Instead they pissed it away. I just don't see how that should be placed on the owners and they be forced to solve the problem. How about the NFLPA step up and create a retirement fund and have the players give a % of their income to be put into a retirement fund for the future... kinda like the social security dept.

I also have felt that the insurance issue is BS also. Let the NFLPA act like any other corporation and find a decent HMO for all the players and again let the players pay for their own insurance and their families if they chose the family package. The more players that take the deal the lower the monthly costs.

Lastly, I'm not trying to sound one sided but all in all if the players are unhappy they can always take their talents to the CFL, UFL, or where ever. Fans will follow them just to see them. The owners have more invested and more to worry about in regards to this very thing happening.[/quote]

Well the NFLPA represents current players, retired players (atleast that's my understanding).

As for the NFLPA acting like a corporation, it is not, it is a Union, the NFL is the "corporation"- type entity, so your argument actually tends to back the players point

in the end I maintain both sides just need to set aside pettiness and "man up" at the negotiating table.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/02/10/report-cba-talks-broke-down-after-union-proposed-50-50-split/related]Report: CBA talks broke down after union proposed 50-50 split | ProFootballTalk[/url]

The NFLPA suggested 50-50 split of ALL revenue intead of the 60 percent of "TOTAL FOOTBALLL REVENUE". The difference goes back to the nfl opening their books, which just isn't going to happen. The net difference in dollar values isn't that much but pat kirwan was very clear that we can't know exactly what the difference is because the books aren't open.

Again just bargaining points on each side

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=mredskins;783740]Honestly 16 weeks plus playoffs is enough for me. I am pretty much NFL burned out by this time of the year. By week 14 or so it starts feeling like your Sunday afternoon part time job. Maybe I am just at a stage in life where I have better things to do then waste 4 hours on a Sunday afternoon watching football, doesn't mean I am not a fan just means I have different priorities now.[/quote]

This is exactly right. The difference between NFL and the other two sports leagues (NBA and MLB) is the NFL accidently stumbled upon the less is more reality. It is dumb luck that the NFL leaves their fans wanting more. The NBA and MLB are a joke and losing tons of money. Empty seats is a real problem for most but not all NBA and MLB teams. Nobody cares about game 1 in a 80 or 100+ game season.
The NFL owners are greedy and dumb. Why do they mess with a good thing?
I am starting to not like the NFL commissioner either, because it seems increasing the season is his baby. Boooooo

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;781995]No offense to Tucker or to Dan Steinberg here, but this was the point where I got off the wagon:

[INDENT][I]"Tucker then chimed in, thanking Gibbs for his comments on Snyder and saying that other owners around the league let the bottom line cloud their football decisions, unlike Snyder."[/I][/INDENT]
Dan Snyder is not focused on the bottom line? He has not let the bottom line cloud his decisions in the last decade?


Please...


Danny Boy - - as an NFL onwer - - is driven by his ego and his desire to make money hand over fist. Denying that makes everything else one might say of questionable validity...[/quote]

Not hijacking the thread, but a link to that Washington Post article about Gibbs and the CBA was also an insert in this article.

[url=http://realredskins.com/2011/02/somebody-says-something-good-about-dan-snyder/]Someone has something good to say about Dan Snyder | Rich Tandler's Real Redskins[/url]

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

Good read on the differences on the NFLPA and NFL owners current rookie salary scale proposals by Andrew Brandt.

[url=http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/The-Rookie-Sacrifice-NFL-NFLPA-proposals-unveiled.html]The Rookie Sacrifice: NFL, NFLPA proposals unveiled | National Football Post[/url]

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[url=http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-richardsonmanning021311]Sources: Panthers owner disses Manning, Brees - NFL - Yahoo! Sports[/url]

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/02/15/goodell-says-the-time-has-come-to-make-a-deal/]Goodell says “the time has come to make a deal” | ProFootballTalk[/url]

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

Good article on the lack of trust between the NFL and NFLPA:

[url=http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/NFL-labor-pains-part-10-an-issue-of-trust.html]NFL labor pains, part 10: an issue of trust | National Football Post[/url]

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;784765]Good article on the lack of trust between the NFL and NFLPA:

[URL="http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/NFL-labor-pains-part-10-an-issue-of-trust.html"]NFL labor pains, part 10: an issue of trust | National Football Post[/URL][/quote]

Thanks for posting, I read most of the previous ones too. Really paints a depressing picture. I remember strikes & near strikes of years past, I don't recall there being two strong personalities on each side, both of whom seem to need to make a name for themselves w/their constituents.

I think both sides have changed so much too, the players are savvier now, and expect more & that shows in the NFLPA leadership. While the owners now are more hands on in managing their teams than ever before.

Maybe both sides are bluffing & putting extreme demands out there knowing that each will back off.

Re: Ongoing CBA discussions
 

Deal isn't happening. I am ready for no football. Or at least I tell myself that to mentally prepare.