PATSNUTme

There has been almost nothing heard from the players. No statement of support for Upshaw and no statement of anger toward the owners. Hardly nothing at all from the players.

Yet , it is there salaries and benefits that are on the line.

Very strange indeed.

Pats726

Yes...in Gene we trust....I think..although I think some players have spoken out..Birk did in Minnie.... I agree it is rather odd ezpecially if it tumbles all apart...their well being is on the line..which all seems to make it very surreal..maybe when it all goes down the tubes they will have more to say.

mtbykr

I don't think that the players really care what's going on. I think they feel that a deal will eventually get worked out, so why bother worrying about it. Besides, i am sure that they like Upshaw about as much as the rest of us

__________________
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits". - Albert Einstein

Miguel

Why should the players say anything?? The argument is truly between the owners. The players already know that teams have another $320 million to spend on them this year as compared to 2005. They also know that the owners actually have another 12 months to come to an agreement between themselves. There is nothing to prevent the owners from accepting the players' offer a month from now, 11 months from now.

__________________
My youngest sister's best friend is on the board of directors of a food pantry in Malden, Massachusetts that distributed 285,000 meals and meal equivalents in 2005. I am asking that if you have found my salary cap pages useful that if you are able to do so, please make a donation to it. Please contact me for more information.

Murphys95

You're right, there is certainly no sense of urgency on their part, but there is a sense of apathy.

PATSNUTme

Disagree- some players are going into FA now and if a deal isn't struck, a lot of them are not going to get the payday that they were looking for. Some players will or have already been cut for cap reasons, if no deal is done.

If they go into and uncapped year in 2007 some who thought that they were FA's are not. And what about the 401K and medical benefits?

There is a lot for them to be concerned about. Yet almost nothing from them.

And if they owners can't agree now, what makes you think that they will agreee 12 months from now?

MoLewisrocks

But if they really believe Gene, there is.... Remember his lone card that he's overplayed throughout is if we get to the uncapped year - and he deems that happening on the first day of the 2006 league year in the absence of a new deal - the cap never gets back on the table. Gene has some of them, but not all of them, convinced it's better to roll the dice and take $320M now and no cap ever again than to take $577M now and a guarantee the industry will still be issuing uninterupted paychecks in 2008 and beyond. He also has some of them convinced that ownership fears a capless future more than they fear nuclear winter.

So maybe they just don't believe Gene either, or maybe they're just dumb jock sheep and they not only believe him, they trust he is right. They belong to a union they have no functional control over, so what does that tell you. They increasingly entrust lifechanging decisions to comission agents whose agendas are basically cash driven and are stunned when those decisions backfire and make them miserable. For a 100% college educated workforce it is just mindnumbing.

PATSNUTme

Let me phrase it another way. Where is the words of support from the rank and file for the unions position.

In almost every other sport where contract negotiations are going on, the player reps are always out front and center supporting the union. Not here, not yet.

Miguel

A high percentage of the cut players were let go not because of the cap but because the perceived 2006 production was less than their cap value warranted. See Isaac Bruce who was cut even though the Rams were under the cap by $10 million.

If the owners can't agree between themselves, then the only thing that the players can do i to make the deal happen is not to talk but to take a whole less money and to agree to a situation that will limit the number of teams competing for their services in the future. If I were a NFL player, I would not want a system that greatly favors the high-revenue teams becuse that limits the numbers of teams bidding for my services. I do not expect that players to say that we are willing to take less money in order for the ultra-rich owners to continue to maximize their profits. That's a lousy negotiating tactic.

If the owners can't agree now, why should the players speak up now??

__________________
My youngest sister's best friend is on the board of directors of a food pantry in Malden, Massachusetts that distributed 285,000 meals and meal equivalents in 2005. I am asking that if you have found my salary cap pages useful that if you are able to do so, please make a donation to it. Please contact me for more information.

PATSNUTme

It's called supporting the union that is suppose to be working in your interest.

Would it do any good in the negotiations? I don't know. But,support of the union would show the public that they are behind it.


Don't get me wrong- I want a deal done. But, I don't want a deal that is going to hurt the Partiots or Bob Kraft.


But I do find it very strange that the most vocal of the players was dissing on Upshaw.