PDA

View Full Version : One more thing to consider when debating the CBA issue



GoBigOrGoHome
07-23-2010, 12:59 PM
I think we can all agree that greed is the central issue that is potenetially going to force a lockout in 2011. Teams are not signing current players (especially older veterans) because they are concerned about the effects of new contracts on their salary cap once a new CBA is in place.

Here is one more thing to consider: IF there is a lockout, then in 2012 teams will have to resume paying the guys they currently have on their rosters. We know this. Here is the kicker: In 2012, they are also going to have two draft classes to sign.

You know a lot of older players will not make it back from a lockout (just ask the NHL). But, I also see a lot of current players getting squeezed out by this potenetial massive influx of youth.

The players really want a rookie wage scale. Their wish may come true and promptly cost many of them their jobs. Because teams will sign rookies to pre-negotiated contracts and leave a bunch vets out in the cold. Or the UFL.

GBPKS
07-23-2010, 03:02 PM
I don't think anyone expects them to lose a whole season to a lockout.

Much like any negotiation, nothing is going to get done until the 11th hour (or maybe the 12th or 13th) - we may lose training camps and OTAs, and maybe we'll get a shortened season, but I don't think either side is stupid enough to lose a whole season to labor strife.

First of all, for the owners, there's just too much money to be made. Yes, they'd like to get a bigger slice of it and do more to control player costs - but they have the most popular sport in America and don't want to screw that up.

For the players, first of all - football careers are short enough as it is - they're going to lose a whole season? Plus, as Cris Collinsworth said on the Jim Rome show, this labor dispute is going to be the most one-sided matchup of all time. Billionaires who are still collecting their TV revenue versus millionaire athletes who still somehow manage to live paycheck to paycheck? If the owners play hardball, the players will fold.

I think the owners perceive that Paul Tagliabue gave the players too much in the last deal so he could maintain his legacy of labor peace and try to skate into the Hall of Fame. Now they want to take a little back.

I think ultimately the 18-game season is the hammer the league is holding over the heads of players union. I haven't seen any objective observer outside the game that is in favor of the 18 game schedule, but the NFL keeps talking about it and talking about it. Ultimately, the NFL can pull the 18-game schedule off the table, make the point to the players that they are conceding something (even when they're just maintaining status quo), and get the players to concede something (rookie wage scale, keeping franchise tags, etc.)

The real question is whether or not the league can ever get a salary cap back in the CBA now that we've gone to the uncapped year. I don't think we've seen a lot of reckless spending this offseason but I assume that's because the owners don't know if there's going to be a cap going forward.

As a Packer fan, I'm concerned about the future of a league with no salary cap and guys like Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder and Robert Kraft having the ability to break the bank. I would hate for the NFL to evolve into baseball and for the Packers to devolve into the Kansas City Royals...

GoBigOrGoHome
07-23-2010, 03:15 PM
I hapeen to agree with you on all points GBPKS. Still scary to think about how chaotic it would be if teams had two draft classes who were guaranteed a certain income. I think we'd see lots of good, solid role players (guys that are often fan favorites) get kicked to the curb.

KevinG
07-23-2010, 03:37 PM
I think ultimately the 18-game season is the hammer the league is holding over the heads of players union. I haven't seen any objective observer outside the game that is in favor of the 18 game schedule, but the NFL keeps talking about it and talking about it. Ultimately, the NFL can pull the 18-game schedule off the table, make the point to the players that they are conceding something (even when they're just maintaining status quo), and get the players to concede something (rookie wage scale, keeping franchise tags, etc.)


This thought has occured to me as well, that the league's push for an 18 game season could be posturing. It will be interesting to see where it ultimately ends up.

Colts01
07-25-2010, 01:55 PM
sadly I think were going to end up with an 18 game season