That kinda sucks. N.F.L. Talks Spill Into Frustration as Hopes for Deal Fade WASHINGTON â On the eve of the labor bargaining deadline, the N.F.L. appeared to be teetering on the brink of its first work stoppage since 1987. The negotiations on the financial issues that divide owners and players are at a virtual standstill and representatives of both sides are trading barbs in public. By late in the evening, the meltdown in relations seemed nearly complete, playing out on television and on Twitter. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/11/sports/football/11nfl.html
Its still not over yet, this is just the first major posturing move by both sides. Generally these negotiations in professional sports come down to the time when the league starts talking about a shortened season, and sometimes they even come down to the point that the league has an absolute deadline for cancelling whats left of the entire season. In the case of hockey lockouts, one year i think they even managed to pull something together 1 week after the cancellation of the season due to splashback from fans. The 2 sides seem to still be pretty far apart, and even though it looks bleak right now, alot of posturing is usually done right up until the final hour, so no one really knows what will happen. Im going to be really pissed if there is no NFL next year.
I'm not, but then I don't watch it anyway. Hey maybe we can get a bunch of ET guys together for our own football game. Even at my advanced age of 5 decades I'm game.
I hope all the players get fired and go broke. I guess making a few million a year to play a game isn't enough, they have to complain about it too.
For a bunch of billionaires, the owners certainly get poor advice and make dumb decisions. They made a really stupid decision a while back to appeal that licensing case to the Supreme Court. Really dumb move. Now they have staged a lockout when they had no need to. The lockout will have no effect on the players until the actual season would have begun. Why announce it now? The threat of antitrust litigation is overstated, in my opinion. The law is vague in this area, but I am confident the courts would recognize that some restrictions on players, such as roster sizes, are reasonable and necessary for a competitive league. The fact is, with the union decertified, all the owners had to do was repeal a few minor rules, like the franchise tag designation, and continue to operate just like they did this season with no salary cap. That turned out to be a huge boon for them, as they freed themselves of a salary floor as well, and several teams spent well less than the former minimum. They could have enacted an 18 game season. With no rules on mimimum salaries, they could force vets to take well less than the current minimum. The players only recourse would have been to go on strike, which would have required them to recertify the union. How bad would that have looked? It would confirm the owners' claim that decertification was just part of the bargaining strategy. Anyway, we know how a player strike would end, just like it did last time, with players crawling back begging for their jobs back. That's why the players decertified rather than going on strike. Considering how unpopular unions are now, the owners made a huge strategic blunder, but I expected no less from a league led by an empty suit like the current commissioner.