Replacement Players

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

If the owners decided to play any games, they would be on the hook for the current contracts of the NFL Players. You think they are going to pay 100+ million each team and have those players sit at home watching scabs play? Not only that, it would kill the quality of the NFL during that time.

I don't see any scenario where the league could lockout the players and still continue business as usual with scabs. Again, I think you are confusing a player lockout and a owner lockout. Not the same.

1. Most NFL players have year by year contracts so that they can be voided without cost.

2. If the current players do not show up for work, it would be difficult for them to demand payment since they chose to withhold their services.

There are several good reasons why owners ought to be VERY reluctant to play games with replacement players, but having to pay the current players is not one of them.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

1. Most NFL players have year by year contracts so that they can be voided without cost.

2. If the current players do not show up for work, it would be difficult for them to demand payment since they chose to withhold their services.

There are several good reasons why owners ought to be VERY reluctant to play games with replacement players, but having to pay the current players is not one of them.

1) ...if the owners lock them out there very well might have to pay(or a portion) them upon return I would have to see the contract language,players don't return it's a strike and you don't get payed while on the piket line.


....as for replacement players nope.....didn't watch it then and not now ....I'll just go to the local High school and watch or maybe gets tickets for Navy.