League doesn’t rule out replacement players during lockout

It has been widely assumed and explained and concluded that, during a lockout, the NFL teams won’t be able to use replacement players.

The NFL is not yet ready to concede that point.

During an interview earlier this year, NFL outside labor counsel Bob Batterman opted not to comment on the possible strategy.  He didn’t say that it couldn’t happen.

Earlier today, an NFL official indicated that, indeed, a return of the Shane Falcos (and Sean Paytons) of pro football could occur.

Per the NFL official, there is nothing legally preventing the league from using replacement players in a lockout.  The official said that a decision has not been made.

In 1987, the league used replacement players during a strike.  This time around, it could be a much harder sell to hire replacements after the owners locked the doors.

But, hey, replacement football is still better than no football.

120 responses to “League doesn’t rule out replacement players during lockout

  1. “4th and goal, 1 second on the clock… Ryan Leaf takes the snap, he scrambles left… spins out of a sack… scrambles right… throws to the endzoooonneee… TOUCHDOWN! TACO WALLACE! LEAF TO WALLACE! AND THE VIKINGS WIN THE SUPER BOWL!”

  2. “But, hey, replacement football is still better than no football.”

    I’m not so sure about that.
    I’m also not so sure I’d want to see my favorite team inherit the record of some random players when the lockout did end.

  3. Fire all the current players and bring in replacements!

    It would be refreshing to see guys play that actually have a passion for the game and are grateful to be there, rather than a bunch of guys that have a sense of entitlement.

  4. I’m only 45 minutes from the Cardinals stadium… I’ll go over there and try out for somethig. It sounds like fun.

  5. Replacement players = bad football and mushy hearted fans looking for happy ending stories. Bring in replacements and the fans might switch allegiance and be on the players sides.

  6. Quite frankly for this generation who subsists on irony, replacement players might actually be a great PR move to try to get that skinny jeans/hipster demographic.

  7. If the Union is claiming not to be a, you know, “union”, how can the NFL be stopped?

  8. “hey, replacement football is still better than no football.”

    No it is not. Especially if they think they are going to keep what I paid for those season tickets to watch replacements….umm NO.

  9. Though it’s not my preference – slow backyard-style football is still better than no football.

    I also think it’d be funny if replacement players were the first to use the Bills new uniforms that are supposed to reflect their history.

    How fitting.

  10. Yeah. No thanks. just a way for the owners to say there is a season and keep my season ticket money.

  11. I’d rather watch Golden Girls re-runs than watch scabs play in the NFL. I’m beginning to think i’d prefer Golden Girls anyway given the state of pro football in 2011. The viewing experience has been ruined anyway. Be honest, what’s the very first thing we all look for immediately after a big play? A flag. It’s become so common to see flags flying all over the field these days you can’t even enjoy the moment of a big NFL play because you’re half sure it’s going to be negated in 5 seconds anyway. That’s not how it used to be when NFL players were allowed to play pro football the way the game is meant to be played. They’ve tinkered too much with it. And the Golden Goose is on life support. Just let it die. It’s inevitable anyway.

  12. Use replacement players and charge full price. Will season ticketholders get an option for a refund?

  13. This is the best idea yet!!! Everyone needs to stop all of this “I’ll stop watching” crap. You would not. If it is Sunday in September you will watch your team because you are a fan of the team. Not these cry baby players of the NFLPA. BRING EM ON!!!!!

  14. Been there. Done that. Won’t fly. Networks and sponsors will NOT pay for it, either. Lame threat owners. Really lame.

  15. I’ll watch scrubs play ball. All it means is at some point the “real” players will come crawling back to the NFL knowing that they are replaceable and priveledged to play in the NFL

  16. Hell no! No replacement players! I don’t want to watch guys play football for the love of the game, I want to watch the slaves play football!

  17. Sadly, I remember the last time they used guys “who just wanted to play” for the “love”.

    It was a JOKE! And everyone knew it and no one will stomach or pay premium pricing for games that are played by guys who would be 4th or 5th stringers at best (if rosters were that large).

    So what if the players feel “entitled” as long as they perform. Payton Manning GREW UP in the NFL and he works as hard at his profession as most people do. Does HE act entitled. Or is “entitled” a code word for people who make more money than you?

    You don’t think rich kids who become owners who never worked a day in their lives don’t feel ENTITLED to their wealth and scheming and conniving for more? You don’t think the OWNERS have EGOs the size of Mt. Rushmore?

    Really?

  18. werks for me.

    “… and now, welcome to the inaugural game of the Fired Sickout Wisconsin & Michigan Municipal Workers Football League!”

  19. Excellent! I better dust off my old cleats. Here’s my chance at NFL stardom! I’m only 2 years younger than Brett Favre and I promise not to cry.

  20. I would like to see replacement players live out a dream this season just for the singular purpose of seeing how many of them will feel that the NFL is just a form of slavery.

  21. do you think the Networks would even televise such garbage? ESPN will get better ratings with WS of Poker

  22. Let’s see, where can you get replacement players? Undrafted college players, old guys and misfits not good enough for the UFL, and oh yeah, the UFL (for a fee, if that rule is still in place). Yep, plenty of opportunities, heaven help us.

  23. thats the only way the vikes win a superbowl! replacement players would be dumb really how many people would go to a game? ( besides viking fans)? and a few hopeless drunks that have nothing better to do…

  24. Bring em on as a football fan i enjoy football for what it is high school ufl whatever put it on tv ppl who love to play football are a rarity today with all the greed

  25. I think you’ll find it was the Networks that put the kibosh on replacement players.

    The exact quote was “if you think we’re going to pay you gabillions a year to televise replacements you must be as stupid as you look”

    They were, of course, talking to Jurry.

  26. You guys are just kidding yourselves

    If there happened to be replacement players you know you’d watch in the end.

    I’m a Seahawks fan, not a Matt Hasselbeck fan. I don’t watch to see Russell Okung block, I watch to see the Seahawks.

    There’s that saying about players playing for the name on the front of the jersey not the back…being a fan should be the same

  27. Absolutely, bring on the replacements.

    At the end of the day, we cheer for our teams, not the players.

  28. Are you kidding me? I am SO looking forward to this!!

    Gene Hackman MUST be made a coach though. This is not negotiable.

  29. vertekal says:
    Mar 21, 2011 6:08 PM
    What if my replacement Browns end up being better that the real Browns?

    hahhahaa omg comment of the year.

  30. Call Me.. anybody but the Dallas Cowpies.

    I’m a Gonzalez type TE in terms of hands… and Payton Manning in terms of speed. LOL

  31. I can’t believe all the thumbs down for anyone suggesting that replacement player football is worse than no football. Obviously, none of you were watching football in 1987. If you want replacement players, go watch the UFL. I’ll wait until the real game is back.

  32. I l ike it. The phins might actually have a chance then. Bring on the replacements. They’ll do just fine.

  33. I can’t believe the number of people on this site welcoming this…if you really want to watch replacement players turn on the UFL.

  34. The replacements would be coached by the same coaches. I bet the it’ll still be entertaining.

  35. I welcome the idea of replacement players!

    Hit the reset button on the player’s side. The level of play would supper a little bit, but true fans don’t root for players they root for the teams.

    After one season, and a training camp, the level of play will get better. The game will then become affordable again and regular fans can go to games to root for players that aren’t over-paid crybabies.

  36. i’m sure the sentence “but, hey, replacement football is still better than no football” was just a cute tag line. but i couldn’d disagree more. i would much rather see the nfl go dark for a few games at the start of the season than to endure the spectacle of replacement players. then listen to the endless parade of stories ginning up controversy on the whole thing. no, i’ll pass thank you. (plus the chaos it would bring to fantasy football)

  37. don’t even try it you greedy NFL owners us season ticket holders pay way to much to watch a bunch of hacks play football.I am amazed how they continue to want to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs

  38. “At the end of the day, we cheer for our teams, not the players”

    ….and this is why owners can put horrible product on the field year after year and the stadiums are sold out in places like Cleveland and Seattle. OWNERS only listen to MONEY. Keep the money flowing and there is no impetus to change the business model.

    I am a HUGE fan of football (the sport), but not BAD football. I love to see, at whatever level, good teams play. I root for my team, sure, but I won’t spend a dime on anything with their name on it if they suck.

    But you guys go ahead, buy those 80 dollar jerseys, 8 dollar beers, and pay 400 dollars to go to a game. THAT will show those owners what for.

  39. I would be fine watching replacements. I know a lot of college players that didn’t make the NFL that I felt should have, (Todd Blythe comes to mind) and I know those guys would make the most of any shot they could get…

  40. If anyone is replaceable, it’s the owners. Anybody can own a football team. There are more than 31 rich guys in America. I would gladly support a new league with these players.

  41. Translation:

    Replacement players are better than nothing. At least they still wear the shiny helmets and colorful uni’s that the modern day moron, I mean NFL fan, worships.

  42. chapnastier says: Mar 21, 2011 5:57 PM

    This is the best idea yet!!! Everyone needs to stop all of this “I’ll stop watching” crap. You would not. If it is Sunday in September you will watch your team because you are a fan of the team. Not these cry baby players of the NFLPA. BRING EM ON!!!!!
    ___________________
    Yes, many of us would choose not to watch games with replacement players, myself included. How can I be so sure? Simple, I don’t watch the CFL and AFL games I can watch for free on NFLN. At best, replacement players would be similar to the talent in these leagues. Given that those players are already under contract, it could be even worse. Yes, I’m a fan of my team (Eagles in my case), but I’m a fan of the game as a whole as well. I’ll support my team as soon as it takes the field. The real team that is, not some sad mockery of it. It’s a pointless discussion anyway. It won’t happen. Someone simply thought they could scare the players by saying it’s possible. Well, good luck with that. If the league starts back up, all of those contracts they have with the players become active again. That means a whole lot of breach of contract lawsuits because those players are being locked out and the owners aren’t honoring those contracts and paying the players. On top of that, it will anger both the networks who pay for rights to air NFL games and potential sponsors. Neither are likely to want any part of that. They also might as well kiss the PR war goodbye. Bringing in scabs instead of trying to get a deal done with the players? What about season ticket holders? Will they claim these games count and keep the full price season ticket holders pay? Now that would be a rather nice way to anger your most loyal fans.

  43. It would be a bad PR move, but many fans would watch. It might also allow them access to that TV money…since they would be playing the games, just with different players. Replacement players would initially suck but soon, the new kids would gain popularity because fans root for teams more than they root for players. People watched the “scabs” the last time. I think this would actually work against the NFL in the end since there is no way for a locked out player to break ranks and go play. The players strike was a different circumstance. This may be a move (assuming the union gets told the decert is null & void which is what the owners want) to keep the players at the table rather than a strike. If there is a strike, then go get the replacements, without it, deal with no football

  44. yeah yeah I see it clear as day, Rex Ryan will go recruit a team at the state correctional institutions and then prompty declare victory for the season.

  45. “I can’t believe all the thumbs down for anyone suggesting that replacement player football is worse than no football”
    ——————————————–
    agree

    I’m starting to think that the greedy owners are forcing their unpaid interns to monitor this site and vote on anything strike related.

    Scab football would be a bazillion times worse than no football.

  46. Replacement players doesn’t = bad football, it just = football not as good as the NFL currently is

    Football full of college players that played on the highest of stages in college and just didnt pan out in the NFL for one reason or the other…and people are trying to say that’s worse than no football?

    Not to mention…how ‘bad’ would the football be in the end? Its not like it would be replacement players vs the full Green Bay Packers. That would = some bad football. Replacement players vs replacement players all on the equal playing field of being replacement players…thats way better than no football.

  47. True NFL fans would watch. Now you do have alot of dorks that dont know anything about football that might not keep watching because they wouldnt know who to draft in their fantasy league.

  48. Bring on the scabs! Way better than no football. And way better than the crybaby, greedy, over entitled players we have now. I would have no problem with this. And I am a season ticket holder! Course they would have to reduce ticket prices a bit. But I think it would be just as enjoyable. Perhaps more.

  49. “Not to mention…how ‘bad’ would the football be in the end? Its not like it would be replacement players vs the full Green Bay Packers. That would = some bad football. Replacement players vs replacement players all on the equal playing field of being replacement players…thats way better than no football.”
    ——————————————-

    son, I’m sorry you are clearly too young to remember just how horrific scab football was in 1987.

    Some teams literally hired people off the streets who hadn’t played football since high school. It was an utter abomination and completely unwatchable. Not to mention the fact that 3 whole games were wasted which screwed up playoff positioning and in general left fans with an extraordinary bad taste in their mouths given that no discounts were provided for these games which were worse than offseason scrimmages.

  50. As one of the “older” group of posters, I was around for the last “replacements”.

    To anyone who wasn’t around back then and is clamoring for replacement players, trust me, you DON’T.

    Replacement football was horrendous, absolutely horrible, and not at all watchable. This group of players today has no doubt already been told this, and replacements will only make us want them back BAD!!!!

  51. Come on, owners, do it! I’ll be watching just as closely on Sunday afternoons with fresh new guys playing as I would with the greedy old guys. Not only is it still the NFL, but it would be refreshing to watch guys who aren’t a bunch of overpaid prima donnas crying about how poor they are and that they need to make a lifetime’s worth of income in three years of playing a kid’s game to support the rest of their life in luxury, rather than going to work every day for the next 40 years just to get the bills paid each month, like probably 90% or more of the rest of us do. Let’s see, some guy hustling his tail off for a paycheck to feed his family, or Albert Haynesworth deciding he doesn’t feel like putting out that week – oh yeah, I’ll still be watching, every minute of it.

  52. I watch high school football on TV; I watch arena football; I watch college football. I like football, and I like to see these players grow up to become stars. Every great NFL player was once a high schooler and a college player; Brady was a fair player in college and, under a good coach, look what happened to him. Great football players are not born, they are talented young men who are coached into greatness. The same as replacement players would be. And the replacement players are not scabs; there is no union that can picket or try to bargain. If the players are under contract, then enforce their contracts and make them play, with or without a union. If their contracts are valid, then they must play. If the contracts are dependent on being a member of the union (NFLPA), the contracts are now null and void since decertification took place and the union is no more.
    I’ll watch my team play, regardless of who wears the colors; and I’ll watch football every Sunday while Manning and Brady and Brees sit home and count the remainder of their millions.

  53. in all reality isn’t every player a replacement player at some point. Either you are a rookie replacing a vet who got old, or wanted to much money, or a regular starter got injured , and a replacement player started in his place, etc……that is all the league is…eventually every hall of fame pro bowl superbowl ring wearing dude is going to get “replaced”

  54. You can’t have replacement players during a lockout. It’s not allowable.

    That would most certainly be ruled the act of a trust/oligopoly. You are effectively saying that you control the rights of the players you locked out and are now letting new players come in and take their position. If you don’t see how that would be asking for more lawsuits, neither I nor Charlie Sheen’s drug collection could help you.

  55. No, Mike, scab football is not better than no football. Shame, shame, shame on you!! If you’re that desperate, go play Madden with Mike Jr.

    How does a West Virginia guy defend scabs? Some coal miners need to have a talk with you.

  56. I guess I’m the only fan who actually enjoyed the ’87 replacement games. Sure, I was glad to have Marino back on the field but we had a kid named Mackey who was pretty good. So, yeah, I’d watch. I’m peeved with the players right now anyway… heck I’m peeved at all the people involved with this garbage but De Smith is single handledly trying to ruin football and the players have his back (well, except Cormartie who has now become my favorite player – that really is sad, isn’t it?).

    Heck, yeah. I’ll watch. I’ll buy tickets, I’ll support my team no matter who’s on the field (well, except Chad Henne, but that’s a different story).

  57. Yeah, I’d rather watch The Replacements than watch actual replacement players on the field…

  58. The Redskins weren’t ashamed to accept the Lombardi Trophy in 1987 and they were one of the few teams that actually tried to get “quality” players in addition to a few scabs and they won it all. Buddy Ryan, in the meantime wouldn’t stoop to such a level, didn’t try, and thus, the Eagles blew their one chance to win it all. I don’t see an asterisk next to the Redskins championship by the way. As the saying goes, “By any means necessary”.

  59. All of these people saying “I wouldn’t watch it” are full of crap. If nothing else they would watch it just to say “I told you so” but they would watch it……as would I. Bring on the replacement players and have some football. The only thng I would say is if they play replacement players, then they should be able to play the whole season, Super Bowl included. If the guys want to play, let them play.

  60. I would definitely watch replacement players. I love the preseason because you get to see all of the fringe guys play.

    @bigbigodnarb – you are wrong about the owners being more easily replaced. There may be more than 31 billionaires out there but it would be far easier to replace 80% of the players per year than 80% of the owners.

  61. tiredofthestupid says:
    Mar 21, 2011 6:45 PM

    ….and this is why owners can put horrible product on the field year after year and the stadiums are sold out in places like Cleveland and
    But you guys go ahead, buy those 80 dollar jerseys, 8 dollar beers, and pay 400 dollars to go to a game. THAT will show those owners what for.

    ______________________

    Don’t have to spend ANY money. I’d buy nothing, watch it on TV (as I always have)….or – in this ‘day and age” – on computer, and so would you.

    When the owners ALL stop investing money in something that gives them no return, it ALL goes away anyway. I’d much rather give money (if I did) to the people who re invest it (owners, no matter how much / little) then the ones who just take it (players)……or did you not realize the players give you nothing back on what you spend???

    At least the owners invest in order to try to get more of your money……once a player is hurt or gone….you WILL find someone else for your FFL.

  62. bigbigodnarb says:
    Mar 21, 2011 6:53 PM
    If anyone is replaceable, it’s the owners. Anybody can own a football team. There are more than 31 rich guys in America. I would gladly support a new league with these players.

    ____________________________

    Yep, that’s why I’m fighting with all of the other gazillionaires to buy St. Louis…….and why Ross doesn’t want minority owners…….. Owning a team is instant money…..oops.

    The UFL is the UFL for a reason. Owners…….while still making money….aren’t good owners / businessmen…….just people who think like you…….but have money.

  63. joe6606 says:
    Mar 21, 2011 7:32 PM
    “I can’t believe all the thumbs down for anyone suggesting that replacement player football is worse than no football”
    ——————————————–
    agree

    I’m starting to think that the greedy owners are forcing their unpaid interns to monitor this site and vote on anything strike related.

    _________________________

    Dumbest “opinion” (“I’m starting to think”) I KEEP reading on this site from people who don’t get agreement for their “opinion”.

  64. I’m actually cool with the use of replacements. Why do we go to games? To watch our teams win, not see who throws the most touchdown passes or who runs for the most yards. And actually if you look at the NFL today, how many stars came from late in the draft, or undrafted FA. There are roughly 300+ college players who are not drafted each year, and another 100+ that are drafted and cut. So there is competent talent out there, it would almost be like an extension of college ball, I mean if the undrafted an a cut players from the last 3-4 seasons all decided to play we should easily be able to fill a 30-40 man roster per team, and they wouldn’t be all old either. I think the movie, and the 87 fiasco has some of your views skewed. Bring it on, football is football, ill watch but not pay full price…

  65. I was living in Tampa then, where the replacement Bucs had a winning record. Unlike their orange-clad NFL brethren.

    I guarantee you replacement Panthers would be an improvement. (My home team, which didn’t exist in 1987.) Too bad we can’t get a replacement owner.

  66. I enjoyed replacement football in 1987. Bill Walsh brought back the option against Bill Parcells and the look on Bill’s face was priceless.

    I absolutely understand that season ticket holders don’t want to pay the same money for those tickets of course. But I’d watch and root for my team regardless.

  67. I guarantee you would see more effort throughout the game than what you get now. I would LOVE to see replacement players brought in, I cheer for my team not for just individual players. I am so sick of seeing these multi-millionaires half-a$$ing it and going on the DL for turf toes and a broken pinkie. WTF happened to the men that used to play this game? The players now expect to be paid millions, and if they have one good year in 3, then they want to hold out for a better contract. Yet they never offer to give any money back for the seasons where they were garbage. Screw it, bring in the scabs, I’m all for it!

  68. They can hire games & use scabs to play. But Jim Irsay better give me back my damn money for the 2011 season (which, by the way, the Colts demanded by 100% payment by March 1).

  69. Obviously NFL players are posting here and are making all the comments saying scabs are bad. I’m a football addict (well to the NFL, CFL, high school and any level except I-A college football because the BC$ sucks) and will cheer on whoever rocks the orange and blue for the Broncos! Tim Tebow will still play with the scabs because there’s someone who LOVES the game! GO BRONCOS!!!

  70. its not a lame threat ……its the “ace up the sleeve”….networks would still have to honor their contracts ..( they dont choose who plays ) season ticket holders would pay or lose their seats …people would watch ….like they did in the 80s …..players would cave in …at least some would ……owners would still get their billions from TV because they honored their end of the contract……PLAY BALL

  71. To all of you who say you are not going to watch it, I have 1 question for you.. Are you football fans or player fans? I would rather watch my team play on Sunday with no-name players than watch whatever else that is on Sundays(i really dont know what else is on, ive never checked). At one time all big name players were replacements. ie tom brady replaced drew bledsoe, steve young replaced montana etc, you never know maybe the next big star will come from this. If you do not want to watch your team play just because adrian peterson or peyton manning isnt playing then you are not a football fan. I call you a bandwagoner and a poorly dedicated and do not appreciate and love then nature of the game.

  72. Neither Brady or Manning will cross the picket line like Montana did back then. There is another league people would watch. There are other things to do, especially if you are mad at the NFL for being so stupid.

  73. wyofootballfan,

    I’m a fan of the highest level of football. That would be why I don’t go to Franklin State vr Utah A&M football games.

    Replacements was a good movie, but it wasn’t good football. I’d rather watch Ohio State than Replacements.

    There is a reason nobody watches UFL.

  74. @southmo …

    I’m not confusing the men, but the principles are the same. The owners had months to negotiate in good faith and could still be negotiating in good faith. Instead, they chose a Lockout. Screw them!

    And my team wouldn’t be on the field.

    @bayouboy2 …

    I know it’s rare, but some of us do have principles. When I say I won’t watch scabs, I mean I won’t watch scabs. They won’t be my Steelers. They’ll be a bunch of drubs monkeying with our record. I’ll still have the NCAA on Saturday. Roll Tide!

  75. @ Deb

    The players chose to walk away from the negotiating table which caused the owners to force the lockout. That is a simple fact.

    I will take you at your word that you won’t watch scabs but the majority of people posting on here will. Like I have said numerous times, there aren’t many people on this site that can name their teams starters from a year ago let alone further back than that. The fact is, players come and go, the NFL is here for good.

  76. @chap …

    The owners forced this. The players didn’t walk off the job.

    I agree with you that the players come and go but the team is the team. That’s why I wouldn’t bounce from team to team with a player. And free agency is why I no longer let myself get too attached to individual players. But the team is the collection of men the Steelers drafted and hired to play for them in good faith. I’m not going to support the Steelers locking them out and bringing in scabs.

    People have to do what they feel is right. I was young in 1987, and did watch the replacements. They were horrible. My politics have evolved to a different place now, and I can’t do it in good conscience. It’s wrong. But I pray it doesn’t come to that choice for any of us.

  77. Deb, The replacements were not that bad. The owners did not force this – the players tricked the owners into signing the CBA and it’s backfired on the owners. The players need to stop the nonsense here.

  78. @monkeesfan …

    How can someone with such good taste in music be so wrongheaded???? The replacements were lousy. And the only people who could be happy about seeing them again are teams at the bottom of the heap. You could end up with Carolina and Cincy in the Super Bowl.

    The players tricked the owners into signing the CBA??? ROFL … so you believe the guys everyone’s saying are semi-literate and couldn’t get a job if they didn’t play football tricked these billionaire business owners into signing that CBA? That’s rich, monkeesfan. Yeah, that happens every day. I was especially impressed with how the American people tricked Wall Street and Big Banking into tanking our economy and then getting us to bail them out so they could pay themselves billions in bonuses with our money.

    Poor widdle owners. 😆

  79. aaaaannnnnd from the University of Wisconsin- Eau Claire Division IX football, 5’7, 153 pounds, your starting quarterback…numbeerrr Zero, DeeeeeecooonJoneeeees B****SLAP!

    after every TD I throw, on cue, everybody in the crowd slaps a female in close proximity. it’ll be like the new lambeau leap.

  80. @ Deb

    That is my point! You are losing this argument because you believe the owners “forced” this situation. The owners had a proposal that gave the players pretty much everything they were entitled to and more. Instead of negotiating further they got up from the table, walked out and decertified. The owners had no one left to negotiate with!!! How is that so hard to understand!!??!!

  81. @chap …

    I’m not losing the argument. Most polls say a third of fans are with the players, a third are with the owners, and a third find fault with both. The owners could have requested the players resume negotiations, just as the players have repeatedly requested of the owners to no avail. They didn’t have to run out and lock the doors. The proposals wasn’t fair and was a step backward from their previous proposal. The owners could have taken the proposal the players put forward weeks ago that dropped any request to see the books, but they walked away.

    We can go ’round and ’round about this ad nauseum, but we’re not going to agree. You are a diehard conservative and will always back Big Business, Big Banks, and Wall Street over the middle and working classes. No matter how successful I am or how successful anyone in my family is, I know where I came from and who my people are. I support the workers. And in this case, that’s not difficult because, for the most part, the players are in the right.

  82. @Deb: I understand your zeal to support the players based on a political ideology. That is your right, but what I can’t seem to grasp is how you equate the NFL players with the “middle and working classes”. They resemble neither…unless your criteria is simply that they are/were unionized and are not company management or owners. You reference a NFLPA proposal that the owners walked out on. The only one within the last couple months that I can find was shortly after the SB. There are conflicting reports (from the union) as to whether that was a “proposal” or not. The document had the word “proposal” in the title but the union rep (assuming Smith but not sure) siad it was merely an “illustration”. Regardless, I think the point is though the NFL temporarily ended talks and didn’t immediately schedule their resumption, it was the players who walked out of the room, decertified the union and enacted a litigation strategy. To me, that says “we’re done talking” and is the singlemost damaging action taken by either side thusfar. I respect your opinion, but in this case I think you have it wrong

  83. monkeesfan says:
    Mar 23, 2011 2:48 PM
    Deb, The replacements were not that bad.
    **********************

    monkeesfan,

    Did you watch in 1987? They were horrible. Let me remind you of this statement, “The Juggernaut Gary Hogeboom.”

    Hogeboom was one of the few players who crossed the picket line. He was a well below average quarterback in the NFL… during strike football he was the best player in the league. ESPN nicknamed him “The Juggernaut” In the first pre-season game he threw for 5 touchdowns!

    Replacement football equals the 4th pre-season game. That would be the players we’re talking about.

  84. chapnastier,

    Your blind loyalty to the owners is misguided.

    You place no fault with the owners at all. From your posts one is to believe that you feel the current labor situation is 100% the fault of the players.

  85. joe6606 says: Mar 21, 2011 8:21 PM

    son, I’m sorry you are clearly too young to remember just how horrific scab football was in 1987.

    _____________________________________

    I went to a replacement game back in 87 with some friends and had a great time. There were virtually no lines at the beer counter or rest rooms…..

  86. @FinFan68 …

    My zealous support of players is partly based on political ideology. But while I’ll always support the right of workers to organize and bargain collectively, I also believe America’s unions have engaged in some foolish strategies, creating many of their own problems and many economic problems for the nation. So I’m not a blind labor supporter. I simply recognize that Corporate America, Big Banking, and Wall Street will never act in any interest but their own. They really believe “greed is good.” And I really believe “the love of money is the root of all evil.” So we are … incompatible.

    Players make good money, but they’re not the power in the relationship–nor do most of them come from a power background. And I support them because I believe they’re in the right.

    Players are only recently well-compensated for their skills. Rod Woodson was the first Steeler to receive a $1 million salary, and that was in the 1990s. Players were exploited for generations. For most, the game still takes more than it gives.

    When free agency was introduced, guys like Snyder, Allen, and Jones overbid for players like they were prize stock at auction. Now they see how they’ve screwed themselves and expect the players to understand their double-talk. They’re going to have to do a better job of explaining the Big Picture–and that means using accurate revenue projections.

    The owners haven’t been playing straight with players or fans. They’ve done nothing but talk about and prepare for a lockout. Mike covered the players’ proposal in an earlier article. The owners weren’t interested. They made no attempt at meaningful progress until the ninth hour, then secured an extension only to take a step backward. That’s why the players walked away. Better to challenge the lockout now than keep being pushed back until the owners’ strategy would definitely kill the season. But the players have said they’ll keep talking while awaiting the court date and the owners refuse. Again, decertifying did not require the owners to shut down the league. That was their choice. Talks can resume anytime they choose.

  87. Wait just a minute all of you Nay sayers who say you would not watch because the caliber of players is less than current player status.You watch college football, which is of a lesser caliber.Why not watch the best that is offered.For those of you who have payed for psl and season tickets, demand a partial refund as would only be fair under the circumstances.

  88. tuckercarlsonisthevoiceofreason says:
    Mar 21, 2011 5:41 PM

    It would be a huge PR disaster for the NFL to tell the real players they can’t play and then invite a bunch of phony players to play.

    *****************************************

    The NFL did not tell them “they can’t play.” They simply refuse to pay them more than a certain amount to play. The “real players” can come back any time if they agree to terms.

    Bring in replacements and let’s show the “real players” what they are really worth to the fans.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!