Owners Opt out of Collective Bargaining Agreement

papabear · #1 05-20-2008, 04:06 PM

If I understand things correctly 2010 would be uncapped season....and Upshaw has said that if the cap goes away the players will not take it back. That's probably just a bargaining tactic but it does put pressure to get something done.

I can't believe that the owners and players are dumb enough to let this come to a work stoppage. Both sides are making money now, and they are without a doubt the number one sports league in the US. I think both sides are smart enough to get it worked out....at least that is what I have been telling myself....if there was a lockout/strike I would be seriously pissed.

Edit: just read the article and he makes it sound like an uncapped season wouldn't be a free for all....either way I hope they get this straightened out. The sooner the better.

edo783 · #2 05-20-2008, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by papabear

it does put pressure to get something done.

I think that is the real intent. It takes a long time to get something like this done and I suspect they wanted to get things moving. A couple of years sounds like a long time, but if you just keep twiddling your thumbs, time slips away and all of a sudden yor trying to cobble something together.

papabear · #3 05-20-2008, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by edo783

I think that is the real intent. It takes a long time to get something like this done and I suspect they wanted to get things moving. A couple of years sounds like a long time, but if you just keep twiddling your thumbs, time slips away and all of a sudden yor trying to cobble something together.

The original deal they opted out of sounds like it was done with the intent of forcing both side to renegotiate early.

kRocket · #4 05-21-2008, 11:37 AM

It seems that the cap number combined with no structural cap on the rookie salaries really works against older, more experienced players. How many times do we see players cut and out of football because their salary takes too much cap room to allow the team to pay the rookies. Seems as if the players would be all for this.

KJ3 · #5 05-21-2008, 12:01 PM

upshaw...what a lifeless threat. they "won't take back" the cap. yeah...and then watch as the nfl crumbles to the level of enthusiam that baseball has. really, really, unbelievably really strong in some cities and then embarrasingly present in others....

NBT · #6 05-21-2008, 05:03 PM

Houston, I guess, is not one of the "unbelievably strong Cities", because the Astros sure don't play like it. Well, then again they DO, and then again they DON'T, and that is the whole problem. Case in point, they finally get to the World Series after 40 years of mushing around. So what do they do, of course they revert to form, and lose 4 straight.

............But back to my original post. The owners are upset that the players are getting too much of the gravy. And the vets are upset that too much of that gravy is going to untested rookies! I hope the Vets and the owners win this tug of war and peace returns to my favorite sport.

KJ3 · #7 05-22-2008, 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NBT

Houston, I guess, is not one of the "unbelievably strong Cities", because the Astros sure don't play like it. Well, then again they DO, and then again they DON'T, and that is the whole problem. Case in point, they finally get to the World Series after 40 years of mushing around. So what do they do, of course they revert to form, and lose 4 straight.

............But back to my original post. The owners are upset that the players are getting too much of the gravy. And the vets are upset that too much of that gravy is going to untested rookies! I hope the Vets and the owners win this tug of war and peace returns to my favorite sport.

no, and no the astros don't play like it. the astros play like they've been trading talented youth away for brand names to put butts in seats for about 15 years straight. one year they actually had enough brand names to make a team of it, and that was neat BUT it was a total farce as they have ultimately proven. i guess we are lucky enough to have an owner willing to spend more than a-rod's yearly rake on the team (i think the marlins still have like 3 mil to go to top a-rod's 26/27 mil) but we are also damned with this owner who spends just enough to keep the masses interested. everyone bends over for him and his $8.25 luke-cold, flat beer presented with an attitude because i only gave you a .75 cent tip because the beer was 8 f'n dollars and i only came with 10 but i quit following them this year....

anyway

i think the rookies do get overpaid. by a lot. but it's not like veteran guys (the typical non-superstar 6-10 year vet) are getting underpaid. i think they just don't like the ever widening gap between them and now matt ryan. if some dudes played 17 years they wouldn't see 34 mil. matt ryan has played exactly squat for 34 mil. steep.

EDIT: i also wanted to say guys like urlacher who signed a HUGE deal (i think 9 yrs, 54 mil?) and now want more because everyone else is getting more are totally bogus. greedy, greedy, greedy. if i were the bears i wouldn't be paying him an extra dime.