lock out lifted

This certainly could affect the draft. Players could be swapped for picks.

 

On the other hand, this means there will be football, right now, if the stay is denied. We had 6 seasons of union-less non-CBA football while the Reggie White antitrust suit was litigated and eventually resolved.

One of the things the rank and file players are just starting to catch on to is the Brady-case lawyers are actually arguing their case on the basis that the union is not a union, and pure market forces should prevail. Rank and file players wil likely suffer the most without a union, while stars would benifit.

It means the rookie wage scale, which the union had agreed to previously, is not going to happen unless the two sides do start talking seriously about a CBA.

 

The law of unintended consequences resulting from this ruling is that now all 32 teams are open to antitrust lawsuits that award triple damages. Teams can’t set rules to govern the free agency chaos and resulting spending sprees that may well ensue and bankrupt the league. As much as I hated the lockout, it did protect the stability of the NFL as we know it. Plus, as Purrsy stated players can strike as a bargaining tool but owners can’t lockout? Not good...

 

Did anybody get their invoices for tickets this year? I've been out of town for 2 months so I have no clue if I have an invoice sitting at home.

 

Yes invoices arrived in early March. They give you the option to pay 10% now and remainder when a deal is struck between union and players.


I hope Chud uses this window to give Clausen a playbook

 

I got my packet at least a month ago, there were several payment options

 

There's such irony. The owners are fighting to preserve the structure of football, built through negotiations with the players and which was successful in part because it was win-win. The players seem to be willing (or at least threatening) to destroy the structure (draft, caps, minimums, etc.) so that they can preserve or improve their share of revenue. The players better be careful before they get what they ask for. Think about no limits on how many players a team can sign. Think about mid-tier players having to sign long-term contracts with little guaranteed money. There are a lot of benefits for players that will go down the tubes and in the end the owners will be fine because they are the owners.

 

What? That's completely backwards. The owners are the ones that opted out of the existing CBA and decided to create the lockout. The players were willing to continue under the existing agreement. I'm not picking sides in the dispute...I'd actually enjoy a season off, but I think fans should get their facts straight before picking a side.

 

The last CBA was not equitable. It was hastily agreed to (with an opt-out clause) simply to preserve Tags legacy. Yes, the owners brought this fight on. The fact is, this fight could happen now or it could happen when the CBA was set to originally expire. Either way, there was a fight looming. The owners just started it sooner rather than later. Don't make them out to be the only villians in this fight, though. The players share as much blame as the owners.

 

The owners have gone about this like a bunch of belligerent idiots, but the one part where I'll agree with them is that their non-payroll expenses have risen dramatically since the last CBA agreement. It makes no sense for the players to just pretend that hasn't happened.