Replacement Players

[MTK]

Of all the lame 4/1 gags I can't believe someone fell for that one.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Of all the lame 4/1 gags I can't believe someone fell for that one.

Next April Fool's day all the mods are resigning and we're putting Brody and MoBass in charge

[tmandoug1]

I know I am gonna get jumped on this one, I will not watch and I will not extend my DTV subscription. I guess i gotta ask this, when I don't get a very good raise should I go to the CEO and shareholders and ask them to open their books and show me why? Look if you wanna makes billions instead of millions then go buy a team. If you can't seem to make ends meet, THEN SELL SIX OF YOUR CARS AND BACK OFF YOUR INSURANCE PLAN. Oh bye the way, if you are really short on cash pull that $200,000 diamond out of your nose and sell it. Freaking Unions. This why I haven't turned on a baseball game in 1`5 years.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by tmandoug1

I know I am gonna get jumped on this one, I will not watch and I will not extend my DTV subscription. I guess i gotta ask this, when I don't get a very good raise should I go to the CEO and shareholders and ask them to open their books and show me why? Look if you wanna makes billions instead of millions then go buy a team. If you can't seem to make ends meet, THEN SELL SIX OF YOUR CARS AND BACK OFF YOUR INSURANCE PLAN. Oh bye the way, if you are really short on cash pull that $200,000 diamond out of your nose and sell it. Freaking Unions. This why I haven't turned on a baseball game in 1`5 years.

Well, I think you're probably making a lot of generalizations. But regardless, not sure that's quite what this discussion is about. Would you watch replacement players?

[tmandoug1]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Well, I think you're probably making a lot of generalizations. But regardless, not sure that's quite what this discussion is about. Would you watch replacement players?

I stated in the post that I would not watch replacements.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by tmandoug1

I stated in the post that I would not watch replacements.

Got it. Must have missed it

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by tmandoug1

I know I am gonna get jumped on this one, I will not watch and I will not extend my DTV subscription. I guess i gotta ask this, when I don't get a very good raise should I go to the CEO and shareholders and ask them to open their books and show me why? Look if you wanna makes billions instead of millions then go buy a team. If you can't seem to make ends meet, THEN SELL SIX OF YOUR CARS AND BACK OFF YOUR INSURANCE PLAN. Oh bye the way, if you are really short on cash pull that $200,000 diamond out of your nose and sell it. Freaking Unions. This why I haven't turned on a baseball game in 1`5 years.

yikes! the unions demanded this, and the owners rolled over and gave in. they are both are at fault. they cant even agree to collusion, because they know one of them will cave. both sides deserve equal blame here. and yes, i will watch replacements. because it will count. and i love the redskins, no matter who puts on that uniform

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by dmek25

yikes! the unions demanded this, and the owners rolled over and gave in. they are both are at fault. they cant even agree to collusion, because they know one of them will cave. both sides deserve equal blame here. and yes, i will watch replacements. because it will count. and i love the redskins, no matter who puts on that uniform

I like that....spoken like a TRUE Redskin fan!
httr

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

Sports Illustrated had a poll and found that 63% of the people polled said they WOULD watch NFL games with replacement players.

Everyone take a deep breath here. Things are still VERY far away from anything like "Replacement Games".

But since there is nothing real to talk about with regard to the NFL at the moment while Judge Nelson is writing her ruling - - I have to think she has made up her mind by now and is simply crafting her decision into legal language - - why not pose the question here:

Would you watch NFL games if they used replacement players?

Before answering, remember what TV viewing options for sports on Sundays exist in the Fall:

1. MLB playoffs and World Series

2. Pac-12 MIGHT put a game of the week on Sunday this year

3. NASCAR

4. Golf

5. Bowling

6. Poker

7. Tennis

8. Rodeo

9. Fishing


Personally, I would probably watch Replacement Games unenthusiastically because the alternatives are even less appealing.

i would not watch replacement games this time around. back in 87 i watched cause 2 or 3 games had already been played by the regulars and the redskins had a team that was a super bowl contender. everyone knew that the scab games were not going to last. i watched mainly cause back then i loved this team. we had a great coach, defensive coordinator, owner, front office. not only did i like the players but the people who coached and ran it. now it's just different and i'm just not as attached to the current team... different time, different era. i'd go play golf or do some house work.

[MTK]

Crazy I know but not every country is interested in being westernized.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Crazy I know but not every country is interested in being westernized.

Yeah I know, there's a lot to the word "westernized." But your right, for a group of countries that have done nothing but fight over a religious beliefs or land would not begin to open their doors to society with welcome arms with the idea that tourism would create more income for both the country and its citizens.

It's a shame though because I'm sure there are some beautiful places, and historical sites. I just don't want to be kidnapped, killed or thrown in prison.

[CRedskinsRule]

As I understand it, the contracts are null till a new CBA grandfathers them in, HOWEVER, if the owners chose to bring in scabs, and all the owners refused to allow any current players to play on their teams(because as we all know - the players want to play:vomit, THEN the owners would be guilty of collusion and even more anti trust violations, thus subjecting them to treble (triple) damages, so the 100 million dollar per team number would jump to $300million and probably over $400 million per team. There will be no replacement players this go around.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

As I understand it, the contracts are null till a new CBA grandfathers them in, HOWEVER, if the owners chose to bring in scabs, and all the owners refused to allow any current players to play on their teams(because as we all know - the players want to play:vomit, THEN the owners would be guilty of collusion and even more anti trust violations, thus subjecting them to treble (triple) damages, so the 100 million dollar per team number would jump to $300million and probably over $400 million per team. There will be no replacement players this go around.

and.... although you bring up a good point, could not the owners incorporate into their agreement with a new CBA that the players will not seek "collusion" or that whatever penalty in regards to that be dismissed in order to reach an agreement?

In any event the the NFL has said "All games will be played." So no worry, if the first 4 games are not played as expected I'm sure the season will simply be extended at the end to finish these games or the whole season will be backed up so the first games played will be the first opponants on week 4. We'll just have to sweat it out the first few weeks.


But knowing all this why would all the teams already announce "Replacement Tryouts" if each owner knows he's breaking the law and could be forced to pay a huge penalty? Somethings not adding up.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

But knowing all this why would all the teams already announce "Replacement Tryouts" if each owner knows he's breaking the law and could be forced to pay a huge penalty? Somethings not adding up.

dot dot dot dot

[MTK]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

and.... although you bring up a good point, could not the owners incorporate into their agreement with a new CBA that the players will not seek "collusion" or that whatever penalty in regards to that be dismissed in order to reach an agreement?

In any event the the NFL has said "All games will be played." So no worry, if the first 4 games are not played as expected I'm sure the season will simply be extended at the end to finish these games or the whole season will be backed up so the first games played will be the first opponants on week 4. We'll just have to sweat it out the first few weeks.


But knowing all this why would all the teams already announce "Replacement Tryouts" if each owner knows he's breaking the law and could be forced to pay a huge penalty? Somethings not adding up.

the 4/1 joke that just keeps giving