Seymour still hasn't reported to the Raiders

[neckdemon]

If you are going to be a troll, you have to have your facts straight.

guess you'll just have be a loser then huh? your life sucks when you can't even get trolling right, huh?

[SMC]

That's what everybody said the last time.

Exactly.

People make it sound like it's a guarantee that they get a new CBA done in time.

The NFLPA association wasted months of negotiation time finding a new union head, and Upshaw's replacement doesn't have the same relationship as Upshaw did with the Commish.

The CBA Opt-out was led by the small market clubs like Buffalo. According to reports, there may be a schism between small market and big market clubs (a la MLB) over revenue sharing. Teams like Dallas and Redskins like the CBA the way it is, while teams like Buffalo and Jacksonville want it drastically changed.

So, this isn't a situation of Owners vs. Players as much as it is Small Market Owners vs. Big Market Owners vs. Players.

The Owners can't get their stuff straight so it's hard to have labor peace in that environment.

The best bet for uninterrupted football may be for the NFL to play 2011 without a labor deal as they continue to negotiate.

[InstantClassic]

[GodWearsAGrayHoodie]

In many ways I agree with the NFLPA, on there stance that if an NFL team is stupid enough to play a rookie 40 million dollars that is a stupid team team problem not an NFLPA's problem.

Here is the solution I would like to see. Right now if a player holds out the team gets nothing in return. Change that.

My proposal: If a player reenters the draft and is subsequently redrafted, the orginal drafting team gets a supplemental pick immeadeately following the player being redrafteed.

If that rule was in place and Crabtree was drafted at #15 next year, SF would get the 16th pick and the team that had the 16th would get the 17th, the team with the 17th would get the 18th etc.

This would greatly strengthen the teams position against players threatening to hold out. Would also encourage trades to resolve the problem.

[PatriotReign37]

Exactly.

People make it sound like it's a guarantee that they get a new CBA done in time.

The NFLPA association wasted months of negotiation time finding a new union head, and Upshaw's replacement doesn't have the same relationship as Upshaw did with the Commish.

The CBA Opt-out was led by the small market clubs like Buffalo. According to reports, there may be a schism between small market and big market clubs (a la MLB) over revenue sharing. Teams like Dallas and Redskins like the CBA the way it is, while teams like Buffalo and Jacksonville want it drastically changed.

So, this isn't a situation of Owners vs. Players as much as it is Small Market Owners vs. Big Market Owners vs. Players.

The Owners can't get their stuff straight so it's hard to have labor peace in that environment.

The best bet for uninterrupted football may be for the NFL to play 2011 without a labor deal as they continue to negotiate.

Theres going to be a lockout.

One big issue is that the Players want the Owners to open up their books. The Owners have obvousliy balked.

[SMC]

Theres going to be a lockout.

One big issue is that the Players want the Owners to open up their books. The Owners have obvousliy balked.

Yep, so true.

The Owners are claiming that the players are getting a higher percentage of revenues than allowed under the CBA, and the Players are calling BS. But the Owners don't want to back up their claim.

[#27TheDominator]

In many ways I agree with the NFLPA, on there stance that if an NFL team is stupid enough to play a rookie 40 million dollars that is a stupid team team problem not an NFLPA's problem.

Here is the solution I would like to see. Right now if a player holds out the team gets nothing in return. Change that.

My proposal: If a player reenters the draft and is subsequently redrafted, the orginal drafting team gets a supplemental pick immeadeately following the player being redrafteed.

If that rule was in place and Crabtree was drafted at #15 next year, SF would get the 16th pick and the team that had the 16th would get the 17th, the team with the 17th would get the 18th etc.

This would greatly strengthen the teams position against players threatening to hold out. Would also encourage trades to resolve the problem.

Nice idea, completely impractical. It will never happen for a million reasons. You can never have such an uncertainty in the draft. If that were the case, there could be ZERO trades before the draft.

[PatriotReign37]

Yep, so true.

The Owners are claiming that the players are getting a higher percentage of revenues than allowed under the CBA, and the Players are calling BS. But the Owners don't want to back up their claim.

Jones was throwing around 85% recently and back in 2005.

http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?t=109964

[GodWearsAGrayHoodie]

Nice idea, completely impractical. It will never happen for a million reasons. You can never have such an uncertainty in the draft. If that were the case, there could be ZERO trades before the draft.

Why would there be zero trades before the draft?

Hypothetically the rule existed and we had one potentail redrafter going into the 2009 draft. KC has the 34th pick. NE has a QB and linebacker it wants to get rid of. KC wants them. The trade still occurs. NE takes the risk that the 34th pick might become the 35th pick. Its not like on most years you are gonna have several potential 1st round redrafters.

Isn't NE and the Raiders taking an even bigger risk with Seymour? It might be the 1st pick in 2011 or it could be the 32nd. The fact that a pick might move one or two spots wouldn't prevent a trade.

[PatriotReign37]

Its quite the dilemma.

The players want more.

Teams like Buffalo, Minnesota and Jax are siphoning off revenue from successful markets like Dallas, NE, KC and even GB and now they want more. Jones says owners like him are paying too much already and have construction debt among other financial obligations to fulfill.

I agree with the Owners about teams that are slacking need to generate more revenue. Minnesota has needed a new stadium for years, but obviously, odds of getting something done now aren't good. I believe the Bills will eventually move to Toronto where there is more $ to be made.

[Blackout]

but what am I going to do on Sunday's if there's a lockout???

[PFSIKH]

In many ways I agree with the NFLPA, on there stance that if an NFL team is stupid enough to play a rookie 40 million dollars that is a stupid team team problem not an NFLPA's problem.

I get your point, but let's be realistic. The players are largely driving this train. I hate this argument from the baseball players and it is worse from the football players.

When and if the player's union adopts a Bruschi like position where they get a fair amount for the player and the team, I will buy that argument. I do not begrudge them getting paid, but let's not act like the players are totally guilt free.

They bargained for and received 60% of the gross revenue from the last CBA. Not to let owners off the hook, like Snyder, but do you seee the union agreeing to anything like capping base salary at 5 million? No f'ing way.

The players are just as greedy as the owners.

i doubt the nflpa ever agrees to a rookie cap. if so...they're gonna want a hell of alot more money, if not the entire contract, guaranteed. also....if it ever did go through...no way in hell it's a 5 years for 15 million type deal. the contracts would be for 3 years max, and they'd probably want to make players arbitration eligible before that. alot would change with a rookie cap.......they'd have to look at baseball for a model. especially wiht all thsi BS goin on now....the vets will probably want some sort of trade protection like baseball's 10-5 rules.

Why? It is in the best interest of the union to push that ridiculous money to it's prooven veterans. Sanchez might be worth the 50 odd million he signed for one day, but he is not today.

The minimum salary for a rookie is 310K this year. Next year, it is 325K. In the new CBA you can start it at 500K (this is a SWAG). A veteran player with 4-6 years will make 620K this year, in the new CBA bump that to a million (again a SWAG).

It is not so much given the money back, but reallocating it so the verteran players who have paid their dues earn it. Instead of a guy like Alex Smith struggling to stay in the NFL with a horrible 50 million dollar contract already in his pocket.

They can make an NBA like rookie salary cap structure where a player is extended after his third year or an unrestricted FA after 5 years.

Exactly.

People make it sound like it's a guarantee that they get a new CBA done in time.

The NFLPA association wasted months of negotiation time finding a new union head, and Upshaw's replacement doesn't have the same relationship as Upshaw did with the Commish.

The CBA Opt-out was led by the small market clubs like Buffalo. According to reports, there may be a schism between small market and big market clubs (a la MLB) over revenue sharing. Teams like Dallas and Redskins like the CBA the way it is, while teams like Buffalo and Jacksonville want it drastically changed.

So, this isn't a situation of Owners vs. Players as much as it is Small Market Owners vs. Big Market Owners vs. Players.

The Owners can't get their stuff straight so it's hard to have labor peace in that environment.

The best bet for uninterrupted football may be for the NFL to play 2011 without a labor deal as they continue to negotiate.

Exactly.

I know Ralph Wilson begrudgingly agreed to (or did he abstain from) the last CBA.

I think resolving the players issue is relatively simple. it is the small vs big market that is going to be a mess.

[GodWearsAGrayHoodie]

I think resolving the players issue is relatively simple. it is the small vs big market that is going to be a mess.

Unlike in baseball you have several big market owners that have historically taken the side of small market teams...Patriots and Giants are both major markets that support revenue sharing and ensuring that a cap is in place for the sake of parity and avoiding having a team become the Yankees. It is really Jerry Jones vs the rest of the league.

[neckdemon]

Why? It is in the best interest of the union to push that ridiculous money to it's prooven veterans. Sanchez might be worth the 50 odd million he signed for one day, but he is not today.

The minimum salary for a rookie is 310K this year. Next year, it is 325K. In the new CBA you can start it at 500K (this is a SWAG). A veteran player with 4-6 years will make 620K this year, in the new CBA bump that to a million (again a SWAG).

It is not so much given the money back, but reallocating it so the verteran players who have paid their dues earn it. Instead of a guy like Alex Smith struggling to stay in the NFL with a horrible 50 million dollar contract already in his pocket.

They can make an NBA like rookie salary cap structure where a player is extended after his third year or an unrestricted FA after 5 years.

the union will argue that the average career of a football player is alot shorter than that of any other professional sport due to the beating the game puts on a players body. so if they're not getting paid big bucks up front then they're gonna at least want to go to guaranteed contracts, and probably cap rookie contracts at say 3 years with some sort of arbitration eligibility after 2 years...at least thats my opinion....and i think it has some merit. if i was a player rep these are some of the ideas i would be suggesting.

[Blackout]

[quote name='Blackout

[GodWearsAGrayHoodie]

[quote name='Blackout

[PFSIKH]

the union will argue that the average career of a football player is alot shorter than that of any other professional sport due to the beating the game puts on a players body. so if they're not getting paid big bucks up front then they're gonna at least want to go to guaranteed contracts, and probably cap rookie contracts at say 3 years with some sort of arbitration eligibility after 2 years...at least thats my opinion....and i think it has some merit. if i was a player rep these are some of the ideas i would be suggesting.

Both of our proposals have merit and are probably wrong.

I seriously doubt the owners want to come off the current rookie minimums of 6 years (Top 16), 5 years (17-32) and 4 years for everyone else. Especially for first rounders.

Unless, there is something in the CBA that allows the team that drafted the player to pay more like in the NBA.

[slats]

Both of our proposals have merit and are probably wrong.

I seriously doubt the owners want to come off the current rookie minimums of 6 years (Top 16), 5 years (17-32) and 4 years for everyone else. Especially for first rounders.

Unless, there is something in the CBA that allows the team that drafted the player to pay more like in the NBA.

I think a three year limit on rookie contracts in exchange for a rookie cap could be done. For year four, they can RFA tender those players, and then they have the franchise tag after that - if they can't get a long term deal done. If the player's that good, the team can keep him or get back picks.

This is an excellent trade-off for owners having their mortgages foreclosed on players like Vince Young or Vernon Gholston. The unprovens don't get the super-sized money anymore, but those who earn it as pros would get it sooner.

It's something I'd like to see.

[SMC]

Unlike in baseball you have several big market owners that have historically taken the side of small market teams...Patriots and Giants are both major markets that support revenue sharing and ensuring that a cap is in place for the sake of parity and avoiding having a team become the Yankees. It is really Jerry Jones vs the rest of the league.

Historically true about the Giants & Pats supporting the small market teams. The Jets as well have been supportive.

BUT, things may be different now with the Giants & Jets having a new stadium and the construction debt involved as mentioned by Patriot Reign.

So while it may be Jones & Snyder vs. the rest of the league, the Giants & Jets and other teams with debt issues maybe joining suit.

The Vikes put in $4 million in revenue sharing, but got back $17 million. That is a point of contention as mentioned above.