Twitter burns as Owners ratify

I'm beginning to think the players don't know what the issues are. Each time we hear from a rep it's something different. Did the players get a different proposal with different material inside? Do they not have the power to vote for the better of the whole? Where they not being kept informed of the negotiations and it's content?

The owners had the same issues but wee able to agree on the proposal. There were 32 owners and 32 reps all supposed to decide on the proposal. Not 1900+ players. That's why they are called reps.

I'm sure it is harder to rail in 1900+ people and inform them of the issue than 32 owners. I'm sure things will get done over the weekend though, and the media just needs to let this work itself out. Also, the player reps need to get their act together and the players in general just need to stop going to twitter.

But people seem to be confusing not accepting with rejecting. It's two very different things

VERY true - - and the likelihood is that players would "not accept" the deal in front of them as opposed to rejecting it in its entirety if they do not ratify.


The players's side has a lot of work to do and a lot of communication to carry out in the next day or so, but at this moment, the ball is in their court.


IF they do not ratify, it will be incumbent on them to explain very clearly what parts of the deal are still in need of negotiation and what other parts of the deal are perfectly OK.

Players need to get off twitter and come together and create the dialogue to get this done. Not overly impressed by either side and its lax approach to let this seem like a soap opera at the end. Stay away from the media and the social networks and just get it done. kinda weak

The NFL PR machine is almost as good as the GOP/DEM PR machine. They agree to a deal THEY come up with, and act as if was something the players also agreed on and that they are the ones holding this up. The worst part is, people believe it...lol I guess that's why people keep voting in the same cats that continue to feed them bullshit at election time as well. /facepalm



What the **** is up with Al Davis? Hasn't this douchebag voted against each CBA agreement that has come up? Abstaining? Why can't the NFL just revoke the guys franchise from him much like MLB has done with the McCourts?



In fact, Davis approved the previous deal and back in the late 90s or early 00s, Davis was part of a contingent of owners who went to Gene Upshaw to convince him to make what was supposed to be a 3-year deal into a 5-year deal.


Now, if you want make the case that Al Davis has lost more than a bit off his fastball and is probably not the swiftest deer in the forest, be my guest. But he has not been a CBA stumbling block in the past.


For the record, two owners voted against the last CBA when it was presented to them - - the CBA that the league later voted to opt out of. Those were Ralph Wilson (Bills) and Mike Brown (Benglas).

so lets get this straight - the owners didnt add any last minute changes to the CBA as the players alleged - the players just were not fully aware of all the terms that D Smith had negotiated in their behalf. To me, it looks like the players should have kept their mouths shut. They all look like idiots for accusing the NFL of doing something sneaky, when in fact, they should be upset at D Smith, if anyone for not making them fully aware of the terms prior to last night.

Again, and to the very end, plenty of blame all around. NFLPA should have kept players better informed and prepped them over this last week, players should have made sure they were up on the substance of the negotiations, and the Owners should not have gone to the national media and proclaimed "We Have A Deal!!!"

At the end of the day, it will be all worked out with maybe a tweak or two. We may lose a week of training camp or even a preseason game, but, bottom line, there will be football come September.

And, come September, our Skins will probably be mediocre regardless of exactly when the two sides agree. <sigh>

Interesting tidbit from Schefter:

"NFL gameday rosters will expand this season from 45 to 46 players, with the No. 3 quarterback no longer counting as an inactive player."

Again, and to the very end, plenty of blame all around. NFLPA should have kept players better informed and prepped them over this last week, players should have made sure they were up on the substance of the negotiations, and the Owners should not have gone to the national media and proclaimed "We Have A Deal!!!"

At the end of the day, it will be all worked out with maybe a tweak or two. We may lose a week of training camp or even a preseason game, but, bottom line, there will be football come September.

And, come September, our Skins will probably be mediocre regardless of exactly when the two sides agree. <sigh>


Exactly how i feel as well. If i was a GB fan or who ever is good I be lets get this done so we can watch some good football but knowing this going to be a long year for the Skins hard to get to excited about anything.

I have not felt this under whelmed about a upcoming skins like this one in quit sometime. sigh.

I am as confused as many here. If the owners have agreed to end the lockout, but the players wont come back, Can the Owners now use replacement players until the players all agree to come back?

How it looks to me is that everything is ironed out except the issues of the players playing. Why not use replacements short-term to at least get a team on the field and generate revenue??

They can't be worse than last year.