ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
I like the idea of going under rules of last CBA for training camp and getting the players into camp to get in playing shape, practice and learn the playbook......let the lawyers sit on their fat azzes and put it in to the final document while the players get ready to start the season.....
Enough with this BS...
Lets Play FOOTBALL
__________________
My guns are no threat to anyone who isn't trying to deprive me or my family of life,liberty or property. They are,however, EXTREMELY dangerous to anyone who threatens to take those things.
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
I like the idea of going under rules of last CBA for training camp and getting the players into camp to get in playing shape, practice and learn the playbook......
+1. IMHO, there's a good chance we could see that happen because the rules of training camp are not really the primary bones of contention in these negotiations. It would be in everyone's best interests to get to camp ASAP and start getting ready for September 8. (Yes, I know both sides have squabbled over how long training camp can be, how many workouts can be scheduled into a 24-hour period and so forth, but those issues are not the major hang-ups of this new CBA.)
I like the idea of going under rules of last CBA for training camp and getting the players into camp to get in playing shape, practice and learn the playbook......let the lawyers sit on their fat azzes and put it in to the final document while the players get ready to start the season.....
Enough with this BS...
Lets Play FOOTBALL
Assuming FA rules return to norm (4 years) or less you then have guys in training camp with one team who become FA once the deal is done and they can go to another team and sell secrets...LOL
Not to mention until the language is etched in stone you can't be sure what kind of contract terms you can sign a rookie or FA to without screwing yourself up cap wise going forward... The league's executive committee reviews every trade for terms and contract for language before signing off on them. Can't do that operating on blind trust...
Assuming FA rules return to norm (4 years) or less you then have guys in training camp with one team who become FA once the deal is done and they can go to another team and sell secrets...LOL
Not to mention until the language is etched in stone you can't be sure what kind of contract terms you can sign a rookie or FA to without screwing yourself up cap wise going forward... The league's executive committee reviews every trade for terms and contract for language before signing off on them. Can't do that operating on blind trust...
Enough with the BS is right...
The more I read your posts, the more it seems you don't really understand what an "agreement in principle" actually is. You're trying to work out all sorts of scenarios where teams would have total uncertainty over things, like whether or not a player can become a free agent, or how such-and-such a signing would affect the new salary cap.
You need to understand that all those things would have already been decided beforehand. That's what an agreement in principle is..!! The teams would know how much cap space they'll have available, what the free agency status of their players will be, etc, etc.
There's no "blind trust" about the whole thing. It's a situation where all the bones of contention have been resolved, all major disputes settled, and everyone knows where they will stand going forward.
I'm beginning to think Mo is a lawyer...or paralegal of sorts
If they can agree in principle to the terms...get the players to camp....
Let the lawyers dicker over the wording....
AMEN
__________________
My guns are no threat to anyone who isn't trying to deprive me or my family of life,liberty or property. They are,however, EXTREMELY dangerous to anyone who threatens to take those things.
I'm beginning to think Mo is a lawyer...or paralegal of sorts
If they can agree in principle to the terms...get the players to camp....
Let the lawyers dicker over the wording....
AMEN
I'm going to be honest; I've never heard anyone use the word "dicker" before. Bicker, sure. Dick, sure. Dicker? No, but I like it. Vocabulary: expanded.
price "dickering" is as New Englandish as clam chowdah...you dicker the price of a new car...you dicker at the flea market...you try to dicker with your wife over finances (but end up with your nuts in a vise)..yes,dicker is part of the lexicon hereabouts...as is "dicked", which carries very negative connotations...
The more I read your posts, the more it seems you don't really understand what an "agreement in principle" actually is. You're trying to work out all sorts of scenarios where teams would have total uncertainty over things, like whether or not a player can become a free agent, or how such-and-such a signing would affect the new salary cap.
You need to understand that all those things would have already been decided beforehand. That's what an agreement in principle is..!! The teams would know how much cap space they'll have available, what the free agency status of their players will be, etc, etc.
There's no "blind trust" about the whole thing. It's a situation where all the bones of contention have been resolved, all major disputes settled, and everyone knows where they will stand going forward.
The more I read your posts the more I think your the one who really doesn't understand what an agreement in principle would even entail in this instance. People here are confusing the sides gradually actually closing the gap on what observers have long held were the principle issues from a financial standpoint with having already achieved an agreement in principle...
Quote:
Now the devil is in the details on these things, and owners and players are working to get closer on them.
Look for the talks to continue this week, somewhere. But don't expect a resolution imminently. The CBA is long and tedious, and each side is going over every sentence, even without the lawyers in-house. "It'd be a mistake to think it's certainly going to happen,'' said one source. "There's a long way to go. But instead of people yelling at each other, trying to score debating points, now people are sitting down and talking to each other, trying to solve a very involved case. That's progress.''
I said in SI the other day my over-under for a deal is July 4. I might say July 10 now, but I still think chances are better there will be a deal than there won't -- and that deal will come within a month.
The more I read your posts the more I think your the one who really doesn't understand what an agreement in principle would even entail in this instance. People here are confusing the sides gradually actually closing the gap on what observers have long held were the principle issues from a financial standpoint with having already achieved an agreement in principle...
Like I said, you seem genuinely not to know what an "agreement in principle" is. In a prior post you essentially asked (paraphrasing) "even if they have an agreement in principle in place, how can teams sign players since they won't know the salary cap rules?"
The whole point of an agreement in principle is that all those things will have been agreed to. Hence there would be no reason to continue the lockout whilst the minute details and legalese gets put to paper and the union officially recertifies.
It all depends on the timing of any such agreement. It seems July 15 is the date by which players need to report to camp without interrupting the preseason. If they came to this agreement by, say, the end of June then there would be a couple weeks worth of time to iron out the details so there's no rush. But if they had this agreement on, say, July 13, then there's no reason why the league couldn't lift the lockout and conduct camp on the 15th while the lawyers do their lawyering.
8Likes
Re: Bill Burt: One source says lockout is over
Re: Bill Burt: One source says lockout is over
Linear Mode
