crazy mock draft

Shit's harder to follow than a Korean soap opra.

 

That's really splitting hairs. My exact quote was "essentially be forced", but the essence of what I was saying (NFL plays 2011 under 2010 rules if injunction granted) the ESPN article supports as accurate.

 

Good lord. If you can't admit when you're clearly wrong, then at least learn to shut up. No, the owners would not be forced, "essentially" or otherwise, to play 2011 under the previous CBA agreement. A court can't make businesses stay open, although Doty definitely can limit what options the NFL owners have available to them. The NFLPA already offered to continue playing under the old deal and the owners refused unanimously without hesitation, so it seems highly unlikely that they would suddenly decide on that being their best course of action even if the initial court ruling goes against them. There are other options.

 

You can nitpick the word 'forced' if that is what you are referring to, however; the essence of what I communicated is true. If the injunction is granted, the most likely scenario is 2011 is played under 2010 rules. magnus outlined some of the ramifications.

Further backed up today by Andrew Brandt at National Football Post.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Brady-v-NFL-a-primer.html

 

So aside from the part where you were totally clueless, you're claiming you were correct? Jesus, just learn to shut the fuck up after you have embarrassed yourself. I was even nice about initially correcting you, which might have been a mistake since you seem to have taken that as an opening to pretend that you weren't wrong instead of having the decency to stop spouting your ignorance.

 

And yet, all you have done so far is fling insults. You have yet to demonstrate how my statements were false.

So let me ask you, please explain to me how what I communicated (If the injunction is granted, the most likely scenario is 2011 is played under 2010 rules) was false.

 

Retard, you already admitted that your statement was false. The owners aren't forced, "essentially" or otherwise, to resume playing under the old CBA. It is one option, and it could become the most attractive option depending upon court rulings, but they do have plenty of alternatives. That's what I said from the very beginning, so maybe you should stop being such a useless dumbass and go re-read the thread.

Actually, just stop posting altogether because you're the worst kind of moron. Someone who lacks knowledge but realizes that limitation can still be a functioning member of a community by asking good questions or otherwise soliciting information from people who actually do know something. Meanwhile you spew idiocy, but then get defensive and try to make excuses or even re-write that idiocy to avoid admitting to yourself and the rest of the world that you're a waste of space. Seriously, has anyone ever asked your opinion on anything football-related? No, and it's because no one thinks you possess knowledge worth sharing. Yet you still want to pretend like you actually know something in order to justify your otherwise pointless existence.

 

to redirect the yelling -

would the owners have to agree with the players to put together a deal on last year's rules? I would assume so. I would also assume that the owners attempting to do anything - imposing their last offer, or even taking one of the NFLPA deals of going back to 2010 - would prove collusion, right?

Of course, if the lockout is lifted, wouldn't that simply mean allowing players on the field/on to practice, and not necessarily that free agency and such would have to start.

 

I suppose, but I don't even know how the players can negotiate or agree to anything with a decertified union. I guess it's through the understanding that they will re-constitute the union if a negotiated compromise is reached, but that more or less proves what the owners are saying about the decertification being a complete sham. Doty is completely on the side of the players, but I would think that should affect a truly neutral judge.

I'm pretty sure that's correct. I think it would reinstate the players' medical insurance and access to facilities, but would not necessarily mean anything in terms of games.

 

I hope they get it figured out and that next season takes place but this is really good timing for me. My interest in the Panthers and the NFL in general is at an all time low. This would be much worse if it happened after the superbowl season or one of the years we lost the NFCCG.