NFL Owners may opt out of labor agreement next week

[Vintage]

I wonder how long before someone claims an anti-Dallas conspiracy..... that we are finally getting good and a strike shortened season is on the horizon....

 

[Redball Express]

I wonder how long before someone claims an anti-Dallas conspiracy..... that we are finally getting good and a strike shortened season is on the horizon....

If you re-read the story..Upshaw said they would just probably de-certify as a union and not go to a strike that would affect players immediately.

What would probably happen is that players presently under contract would continue to play under their agreements until they expire.

Players signed under new contracts from that point on would have the new deals in place with what the owners come up with as what the NFL and owners are willing to provide.

The reality to me is that the NFL should be able to just re-install much of what the labor union was doing and run the whole thing itself.

They should be able to maintain the player benefits and the post-career pensions and player bonuses the union was providing it it's contract to the players.

What is the major question is the future revenue-sharing of the TV contracts and how that slices up.

I'm not of the opinon that the owners are going to do anything so stupid as to let the ugliness that erupted in '87 to re-occur.

Nor the players. There is too much at risk for both sides. Much more than in '87.

I'm assuming if the owners are prepared to take this next step, they also have an extensive and meaningful alternative to the player's union being drawn up that will be very competitive to what they now are providing the players.

But I think the owners have a case in that if the union is not being there as a middle man and raking some of the profits that could instead just flow more directly to the players after 2009, that the owner's and players can become partner's in revenue sharing instead of being owner/employee based.

If that happens, the need for the union and the issues involved with it's existance dissolve.

The owners seem to want to start the ball rolling about getting it started, which means they have a plan in place and are ready to fine-tune it as the end of 2009 comes around.

As for the draft, I don't think that would end. The NFL would just continue that and what would change would be the union imposed salary slot for the various contracts.

That makes a ton of sense in that it's gotten to the point teams are unwilling to invest in college players that force them to pay out so much in the top 10-15 spots in the draft without having played a down of football.

This artificially is forcing the owners to involuntarily pay out salaries to unproven players and eat at the profit margins the team and owners feel they shouldn't have to do.

It's sort of a financial hostage situation I think the owners feel have gone far enough with. I'm not sure it's fair to the team or the other players on the team that are already there and are not the core players on a team and making less money than these unproven players coming out of college, but have been good enough to make the team.

It forces the teams to make personnel decisions based on union-determined enforced pay scales for these lesser players that makes it unaffordable for teams to pay both the high-priced rookie contracts and then half to cut some lesser star players from the team that other-wise could continue to have a career, but have to be cut and replaced with lesser players because their union-driven minimum salary wage scales are artificially too high.

The union has never adjusted the rookie salary slots over the time it became agreed upon and that is part of the issue. The Union just continued to not place any cap on that situation and it's like tripled or more since it first came into existance, yet the union continued to enforced the overall cap on the owners and teams per the agreement.

This is what a lot of this is all about. There are other things like the TV contracts and other issues, but this players union has damaged the overall harmony b/w the players and owners with that unwillingness to amend the rookie draftee wage scale and had a domino effect to where we are now.

So the draft will stay, but the union-imposed hard and fast expensive salary slots are leaving along with them.

We'll see what happens.

:starspin ReDBall ExPreSS :starspin

 

[DallasEast]

Ah yes. Another dillusional cowboy fan still living in the 90's. Twas a great time then. You had a spectacular coach. A hall of fame QB. A crack smoking overrated wide receiver in Michael Irvin, who somehow got elected to the hall. Ah, the glory days.

Here's what you do: go to your local supermarket. Grab a newspaper, and check out the current date on the front page. May 17th, 2008. Damn, you mean its not 1994 anymore? Next, you do a little math, and figure out how long it's been since your choking franchise, and that fat hillbilly of an owner has put together a team that doesnt choke in the playoffs and can actually win a game. Here's a hint. It's been over a decade. For all the Commanders' struggles and mediocrity, there are very few streaks that can outdo the playoff mediocrity of dem dallas cowboys. In a "what have you done for me lately" league, your favorite team has done ****. At least we Commanders' fans are aware that our team has not done much recently. Just keep denying it. Keepy denying the sorry state of your own franchise.

So, stop living in the past and get with the times, friend. When your team can play when it matters, give us a holler. Lately our POS franchise has been handing yours its ***. But hey, 13 wins baby. 13 wins!! Just focus on the good, and keep your head buried up your ***, since apparently reality is far too difficult for you to comprehend. I can understand that, though. Living in the glory days when your team was good is far easier than facing the stone cold reality of the current situation. Good luck for your upcoming season. Enjoy your 10-12 wins, and wild-card or divisional round playoff exit, without a playoff victory, I might add.

To paraphrase the greatly idiotic Darren Hambrick, “What do lately mean”? Well, according to Merriam-Webster, ‘lately’ means recently. Okay, what does recent mean? The definition says, “having lately come into existence; new; fresh; of or relating to a time not long past”.

It’s a good definition. In fact, it’s a solid definition. However, there’s a problem.

It doesn’t [insert blank here so mods don’t kick my you-know-what out of the forum] pertain to the National… Football… League. And contradicting yourself doesn’t make that fact any less true.

Tell me something. When DID the NFL ‘come into existence’? What? ”May 17, 2008”? Survey says! ANNNKK! Wrong answer. Correct answer is 1920. While innovations (a word foreign to the Daniel Snyder dictionary) have made professional football throughout the decades newer and fresher, the NFL is not some new kid on the block. It is not new. It is OLD.

Why am I even teaching YOU, a Commanders fan, this reality? Your franchise was created a short time after the league’s founding—a fact which cobra alluded to in an earlier reply on this thread. You should know, but acknowledging that fact would be contrary to your “what have you done lately” argument, right? For you and fans like you, NOTHING outside of, say, today for example, is of any real significance, right?

Oh wait. It’s May 17, 2008. There aren’t any regular or postseason games scheduled today. Sorry. That’s my mistake for attempting to use your weak argument.

What else did you mention? Oh yeah. 1994. Your year, remember? Get back to us when you want to specify a more impotent “what have you done lately” start date. Ah yes, here we go…

Since 1994, Dallas has an overall regular season record of 120-104 and zero ties. Washington’s regular season record is 104-135 and one tie. Advantage who, Mr. “What have you done lately”? We’ll just call you Mr. WHYDL from this point forward.

Since 1994, Dallas has eight playoff appearances. Washington has three. Advantage who, Mr. WHYDL?

Since 1994, Dallas has a postseason record of 5-7. Washington’s postseason record has been 2-3. Advantage who, Mr. WHYDL? You should be so proud. [So many smileys to insert here. So many.]

Since 1994, Dallas has a Super Bowl record of 1-0. Washington’s Super Bowl record is n/a. Advantage who, Mr. WHYDL?

Time to take a step back, Mr. WHYDL, and ask yourself, “What exactly HAVE the Commanders done lately”? Your argument. Seriously. Pick a more personally appealing start year and come back. Type it out for everyone to read. It will be interesting to find out exactly what YOU, a Commanders fan, will actually be crowing about and how you will be, in effect, dissing your own franchise in the same breath.

Yep, you read right, Mr. WHYDL. You’re dissing your own franchise. After all, your argument, and others like it, is that the NFL is all about “what have you done lately”? In effect, all events which occurred in the NFL prior to your argument’s criteria are irrelevant. In short, ****. Your word. While proving your disservice to your own franchise, I’ll paraphrase your own words for greater effect.

In a “what have you done lately” league, a fifth Super Bowl appearance and 37-24 drumming of the Buffalo Bills equates to ****.

In a “what have you done lately” league, a fourth Super Bowl appearance, which your favorite team humiliated Elway & Co., equates to ****. Cobra would be pissed if I didn’t mentioned that was a season-shortened strike year.

In a “what have you done lately” league, an NFC title game appearance, which ended in a 0-17 beatdown at the hands of the Giants, equates to, well, **** in more ways than one.

In a “what have you done lately” league, a third Super Bowl appearance, which ended in a 9-38 good ole boy Raiders whupping, equates to diarrhetic excrement, for lack of a better term.

In a “what have you done lately” league, a second Super Bowl appearance, which set the stage for a Hall of Fame coach who could only succeed in the pre-salary cap era, ended in a 27-17 win over Miami in a ~cough!~ season-shortened strike season, equates to ****.

In a “what have you done lately” league, the first Super Bowl appearance, where your favorite team couldn’t do what the ’07 Giants accomplished, ended in ka-ka of historic proportions.

And that’s just the Super Bowl era. Modesty prevents me from mentioning how the Bears beat so much **** out of Washington in 1940 after winning 73-0 in the NFL title game, that the nation’s fertilizer reserves were overflowing for months.

oops. no i didn’t. bad dallaseast.

History is what it is. You can’t change it to fit your agenda. What has happened in the NFL and its members doesn’t fit neatly within your tiny box which you want to quantify as a time not long past according to YOUR timeline only. Crow all you want, but never seek to throw **** where it’ll never stick, Mr. WHYDL.

 

[Redskins2008]

Same boat?

Your POS franchise isn't in the same sentence as our franchise.

5 Lombardi trophies.

3 in 4 years in the 90's.

Your Piece of S franchise only can win when there is a strike shortened season.

Don't bother talking until you get within 1 Super Bowl trophy as us. Or until you get within 20 games of us in head to head.

Are you too dense to realize how extremely inferior your POS franchise is to the Cowboys? And you have been around longer!

For me personal I dont care about head to head meeting between Commanders vs cowboys that is not for Super bowl trophy, and yes yall did won 3 in 90's but last time I look at the date it was 2008? right? You know player play football not just beating other team but for trophy.

 

[dargonking999]

For me personal I dont care about head to head meeting between Commanders vs cowboys that is not for Super bowl trophy, and yes yall did won 3 in 90's but last time I look at the date it was 2008? right? You know player play football not just beating other team but for trophy.

and yet, the cowboys and Commanders both have the same number of SB trophy's the last year, and the same number of playoff wins in 2008.

Strange huh?

 

[BAZ]

For me personal I dont care about head to head meeting between Commanders vs cowboys that is not for Super bowl trophy, and yes yall did won 3 in 90's but last time I look at the date it was 2008? right? You know player play football not just beating other team but for trophy.

But they are never going to play for the trophy, so that means you don't care about any games between them. So, that begs the question, why are you on this board if you don't care at all?

 

[DallasEast]

For me personal I dont care about head to head meeting between Commanders vs cowboys that is not for Super bowl trophy, and yes yall did won 3 in 90's but last time I look at the date it was 2008? right? You know player play football not just beating other team but for trophy.

Proof that Dallas dominates your every waking moment.

 

[BnGFever]

Proof that Dallas dominates your every waking moment.

Nah. We'll just hire Jessica Simpson to attend every dallas game, since Mr. Romo can't compete with any kind of love interest in attendence. Guess he's more worried about how his hair looks than winning when he's got his *****es around.