|
|
freddyg12 02-05-2010, 12:27 PM The big quote from Smith was that if the scale is 1-10, the likelihood of a lockout happening is about a 14.
The economics are such that it's extremely likely we won't see football in 2011.
Even if the owners decide to go the scab route? I don't know enough about the factors involved in a lockout; if there is one it then prevents any union member from crossing the line, right? Or does it lead to decertification of the union, thus eliminating it?
1987 wasn't a "lockout" correct, just a players strike?
If that 87 scenario happened today, I think a lot of players would cross the line. This era of players, like society as a whole, has more money tied up in investments, luxuries, etc. & not enough saved to maintain their lifestyle. The economy would make it harder for the players these days to liquidate assets too. I think the owners are in a good position.
CRedskinsRule 02-05-2010, 12:31 PM Even if the owners decide to go the scab route? I don't know enough about the factors involved in a lockout; if there is one it then prevents any union member from crossing the line, right? Or does it lead to decertification of the union, thus eliminating it?
1987 wasn't a "lockout" correct, just a players strike?
If that 87 scenario happened today, I think a lot of players would cross the line. This era of players, like society as a whole, has more money tied up in investments, luxuries, etc. & not enough saved to maintain their lifestyle. The economy would make it harder for the players these days to liquidate assets too. I think the owners are in a good position.
The players union has for sometime now, been telling the players to put money away. Will all of them, no, but will any with halfway decent accountants - I would think so.
freddyg12 02-05-2010, 12:53 PM The players union has for sometime now, been telling the players to put money away. Will all of them, no, but will any with halfway decent accountants - I would think so.
I'm sure some will be in fine shape, but I bet the majority would be forced to make some significant changes, e.g. sell a house. In this market that's not so easy. By 2011 maybe it will be much better though.
I also think players & their agents are much more aware of their age/ability to earn $. A player that's 28-29 is in a tough spot if he takes a year off. A year off for an older player can of course mean the end of his career. As players are playing longer to earn more $ these days, I think most would not want to strike or sit out a year.
Dirtbag59 02-05-2010, 01:50 PM Well how about this line:
LT Okung
LG Dockery
C Hamilton
RG Kuper
RT L. Jones
Well I don't know if Jones would play RT, maybe we can do what the Ravens did with Oher and put Okung at RT and keep Levi at LT.
I was personally hoping for from of a situation like this.
LT - C. Brown (rookie USC) - L. Jones
LG - D. Dockery - B. Hamilton
C - C. Rabach - E. Williams
RG - C. Kuper - Kory L.
RT - D. Colledge - Jason Fox (rookie Miami)
On this line you need your first name to start with a D or C. No exceptions :D
I think the thing though that people don't realize is that Rabach is a lot better then people give him credit for and now he's about to enter a system that is virtually tailored to his skillset. Hamilton is a nice guy to have around, thanks to his versatility and experience in a ZBS, but from what I've heard from the Denver fans is that we'd be better off having him around as a backup at this point in his career.
Colledge is the wild card and he's more of a personal preference that I think we could use as a nice audition at RT and a stopgap to get a better tackle prospect next year. Green Bay (who runs a ZBS) initially tried him at LT and he struggled there leading them to move him to Guard. He as all the prereq's you want in a zone blocker but he's had mixed results at the pro level. Nevertheless he's pretty versatile.
Okung would definetely work and he's one of the better sure fire first round tackle prospects to fit in a zone blocking scheme. By the same token I haven't found much evidence that none of them would have trouble fitting (Buluga - Iowa, Campbell - UMD, Davis - Rut, Williams - OU). Personally I hate Davis for the same reason I don't like Iupati in that they both seem to be blatant holders.
Still don't discount those second round tackles. Capers (WVU), Brown (USC), and Ducasse (UMass) would all work here at LT. Also worth mentioning is the fact that with no cap to limit teams from cutting players we could see a few surprises in free agency. Especially players from small market teams who will be looking to unload for the sake of saving money, now that they don't have a salary cap to supplement their income.
Also another second round tackle to look out for could be Indiana's Rodger Safford. He seems to have pretty good footwork and he faired well against top competition.
01/19/2010 - East-West Shrine Tuesday Practice: The matchup between Ole Miss defensive end Greg Hardy and Indiana tackle Roger Saffold was worth the price of the flight to Orlando. Saffold controlled Hardy in most one-on-one drills, eating up a spin move, turning him and allowing him no space in which to work. - Chad Reuter, The Sports Xchange, NFLDraftScout.com
Rodger Saffold, OT, Indiana. Saffold arrived in Orlando with questions about his quickness, athleticism, intensity and strength. From Day 1, he shined on the field. He showed the quickness and athleticism to slide to the corner and cut off edge rushers, keeping his knees bent and blocking with good leverage. Saffold proved he has what it takes to play left tackle in the NFL. He certainly moved into third-round consideration, and he could go as high as the second round with a string of good pre-draft workouts.
The great thing about this draft is the fact there a LOT of options at the tackle position.
GusFrerotte 02-05-2010, 05:39 PM The big quote from Smith was that if the scale is 1-10, the likelihood of a lockout happening is about a 14.
The economics are such that it's extremely likely we won't see football in 2011.
Screw it. These guys need to accept a major paycut.Only the cream of the crop should be making a million a year, and I am talking about Brady, Manning, etc. It is sad when in the summer of '07 the NFL asked the Federal Govt for $2 billion to cover operating costs. Maybe the idiots need to scale down their operations(hype machine). AS for the economy, hell yeah you won't see any football in 2011, nobody is going to be able to afford to go to a game, or probably won't care since they will be using every moment they are awake trying to survive.
tryfuhl 02-05-2010, 05:52 PM Well how about this line:
LT Okung
LG Dockery
C Hamilton
RG Kuper
RT L. Jones
Well I don't know if Jones would play RT, maybe we can do what the Ravens did with Oher and put Okung at RT and keep Levi at LT.
I can see why that suggestion would be made but I think whoever is better needs to be at LT; I'd take Gaither over Jones any day and understand why they kept him at LT. No favorites/loyalty needed, Jones isn't good enough for it anyways.
tryfuhl 02-05-2010, 05:58 PM If Brady and Manning types were the only ones making a million then a lot of people would be earning about 80k and might think about putting their degrees to use. That's the silliest thing that I've heard in awhile.
GusFrerotte 02-05-2010, 06:05 PM If Brady and Manning types were the only ones making a million then a lot of people would be earning about 80k and might think about putting their degrees to use. That's the silliest thing that I've heard in awhile.
Silliest thing I have heard in awhile is a NFL Players strike!!!!! Jeez, AH has a $100 million contract guaranteed and he only plays really what, two thirds of a season? Us poor shmucks in Detroit lose our jobs so the automakers keep their profits and bonuses. UAW= U Ain't Workin!!!!!
tryfuhl 02-05-2010, 06:32 PM They need to just extend the current deal a couple of years with an option for a 3rd year if they don't have something worked out by then; get Rosenhaus in there to negotiate.
Lotus 02-05-2010, 07:19 PM They need to just extend the current deal a couple of years with an option for a 3rd year if they don't have something worked out by then; get Rosenhaus in there to negotiate.
As reasonable as your suggestion is, the owners already bowed out of the current deal voluntarily. Extending the current deal is not what they will do.
|