Lock Out was good for the NFL

[Ring 6]

The Lock Out kept the NFL in the news all off season.
Now, they will compact months of Free Agency into a few furious days, and preseason games will start right after, putting more attention than ever on preseason games to assess all of the recent signings.
Discussion over which teams improved or declined and preseason predictions will also be condensed to a month and a half.
There will be more interest in Free Agency and in the preseason than ever before.
Ultimately, the lock out was a very positive thing for the league.

Thoughts?

 

[Bill B.]

I think you will see the veterans getting more playing time, with rookies playing minimally, at least in the first half of the season. There is too much playbook to absorb for a rookie to make much of an impact especially when they haven't had any real contact with the coaching staff and time in the OTAs. I think the exception will be rookie running backs, as this is usually the easiest position to learn in the NFL. Hmm... You think maybe that Belichick took this into consideration when he drafted 2 RBs?

 

[TheSolderKing]

the lockout suc ked b/c it stunted player development mostly in rookies and 2nd year players. They could NOT use Patriot Training facilities and that is bull-****. Our rookies took a huge beating. I don't care about other teams FYI so don't throw out they were effected as well :bricks:

 

[IndyKen]

I think the lock out was terrible p/r for the league. Instead of an off season chock full of talk about F/A & UDFA signings, mini camp discussions, etc. - it was filled instead with lawyer talk and contract negotiation speculation - highly boring stuff. I dearly hope we can soon put this nauseating past 4 months in the rear view mirror very, very, quickly!

 

[BAM!]

I think the lockout was bad, very very bad for the nfl. As the solder boy said, it stunted player development, it caused the players and owners to fight and probably caused mistrust between the two. Fans had to watch while million and billionaires fought over money in an economy that has over a 9% unemployment rate. While everything after will be fast and furious, it hardly means that the lockout was a good thing.

 

[Sciz]

I think the lock out was terrible p/r for the league.

It's very very good relative to the NBA, though!

 

[Frezo]

The best thing about the LO is that the new CBA will stabilize the NFL for the foreseeable future.

 

[Ring 6]

I think the lock out was terrible p/r for the league. Instead of an off season chock full of talk about F/A & UDFA signings, mini camp discussions, etc. - it was filled instead with lawyer talk and contract negotiation speculation - highly boring stuff. I dearly hope we can soon put this nauseating past 4 months in the rear view mirror very, very, quickly!

There is going to be so much frantic attention in the next 60 days that any negatviity will be forgotten.
They stayed in the headlines, they won't miss a game. The draft happened, FA will be followed more closely, and the preseason will draw more attention. The ESPNs and NFL Networks will have more news than they can handle and the league will get more attention than ever.
As negative as the attention was, it was attention, and ultimately that becomes a positive.

 

[Ring 6]

The best thing about the LO is that the new CBA will stabilize the NFL for the foreseeable future.

I am talking about from a popularity and attention standpoint.
By opening weekend the NFL will be more popular and will have gotten more attention than it there had been an offseason of labor peace.

 

[Ring 6]

I think the lockout was bad, very very bad for the nfl. As the solder boy said, it stunted player development, it caused the players and owners to fight and probably caused mistrust between the two. Fans had to watch while million and billionaires fought over money in an economy that has over a 9% unemployment rate. While everything after will be fast and furious, it hardly means that the lockout was a good thing.

I mean the end result was that the league will end up more popular because of the lockout than if it had never happened.
Player development, mistrust between owners and players and seeing a dispute that ultimately was resolved before any consequences occured wont have near the negative impact that being in the news all off season and an artificially created FA frenzy will add to the popularity.

 

[Frezo]

I am talking about from a popularity and attention standpoint.
By opening weekend the NFL will be more popular and will have gotten more attention than it there had been an offseason of labor peace.

So do you think the NFL will see increased revenues or an expanded fan base? Is this just more ice cream for the current fans?

 

[Ring 6]

So do you think the NFL will see increased revenues or an expanded fan base? Is this just more ice cream for the current fans?

Yeah, I think they attracted and will attract more fans than they lost.
Being in the news 24/7/52 can never hurt. The FA frenzy will make preseason more popular than ever.
Nothing was lost, and a lot of extra exposure was gained. That has to have a positive result.
Let me put it this way. Anything that elevates the interest level of current fans will always attract more new ones.

 

[Frezo]

Yeah, I think they attracted and will attract more fans than they lost.
Being in the news 24/7/52 can never hurt. The FA frenzy will make preseason more popular than ever.
Nothing was lost, and a lot of extra exposure was gained. That has to have a positive result.
Let me put it this way. Anything that elevates the interest level of current fans will always attract more new ones.

If training camp and pre-season games start when they usually do, I don't think they'll lose any fans. At least nothing meaningful. Will they gain any? I'm not so sure. The NFL's cash cow is the casual fan, not hard cores like the people here. The casual fan probably doesn't pay much attention until the games start. They'll know there was a legal battle of some kind, but I can't foresee new fans coming on board. OTOH if there is a basketball lockout I would likely watch the first reg season game out of curiosity so maybe you have a point.

 

[crowell33]

I think the lockout was bad, very very bad for the nfl. As the solder boy said, it stunted player development, it caused the players and owners to fight and probably caused mistrust between the two. Fans had to watch while million and billionaires fought over money in an economy that has over a 9% unemployment rate. While everything after will be fast and furious, it hardly means that the lockout was a good thing.

Yes, 100 percent agree.

 

[SteveBsFan]

The best thing about the LO is that the new CBA will stabilize the NFL for the foreseeable future.

Agreed. If they're talking 8-10 years, that will be nice to not hear about yet another looming lockout from one of the big four leagues for awhile.

I also hope this deal made both sides very happy so in 8-10 years there isn't another dumb lockout. I'm tired of that word coming up every time a new CBA looms for any sport.

When was the last time a CBA was extended early without even a hint of a strike or lockout from any sport?

 

[ausbacker]

I mean the end result was that the league will end up more popular because of the lockout than if it had never happened.
Player development, mistrust between owners and players and seeing a dispute that ultimately was resolved before any consequences occured wont have near the negative impact that being in the news all off season and an artificially created FA frenzy will add to the popularity.

Unless you're a soothsayer this mentality is just speculation. It's too difficult to know how it's going to play out with relations between ownership-players and the NFL-average fan.

It would be better to see things move forward earlier in the piece than leaving it to the 11th hour to consummate a deal.

 

[spacecrime]

Unless you're a soothsayer this mentality is just speculation.

Well, yeah. It isn't like a math problem with only one answer. We all look at the data, and form an opinion of what it means going forward.

That's how it was couched, as his opinion (that the lockout was good for the NFL).

I tend to agree. Didn't help the rookies as someone said, but the new CBA isn't good for the rookies, either (rookie cap). It would be tough saying a new CBA is bad for the NFL because it is bad for the rookies.

So I think it is fair to say that it being good or bad for the NFL is not dependent on whether it was good or bad for the rookies.

June and July (after rookie mini-camp and before training camp) is typically a dead time for the NFL. Now it was in the news every day, and people are anticipating a wild and furious two weeks of free agency, cuttings and signings.

Assuming they agree by July 21, no games will be lost and there is heightened awareness of preseason games.

 

[Ring 6]

Unless you're a soothsayer this mentality is just speculation. It's too difficult to know how it's going to play out with relations between ownership-players and the NFL-average fan.

It would be better to see things move forward earlier in the piece than leaving it to the 11th hour to consummate a deal.

Of course it is speculation, but you cannot deny it has increased exposure and will increase interest as FA is packed into a short window, and preseason games will hold more interest because of that.
Exposure=increase in popularity and that isn't really questionable.

 

[Ring 6]

Well, yeah. It isn't like a math problem with only one answer. We all look at the data, and form an opinion of what it means going forward.

That's how it was couched, as his opinion (that the lockout was good for the NFL).

I tend to agree. Didn't help the rookies as someone said, but the new CBA isn't good for the rookies, either (rookie cap). It would be tough saying a new CBA is bad for the NFL because it is bad for the rookies.

So I think it is fair to say that it being good or bad for the NFL is not dependent on whether it was good or bad for the rookies.

June and July (after rookie mini-camp and before training camp) is typically a dead time for the NFL. Now it was in the news every day, and people are anticipating a wild and furious two weeks of free agency, cuttings and signings.

Assuming they agree by July 21, no games will be lost and there is heightened awareness of preseason games.

I probably should have been more clear, but I was saying good from the perspective of increasing exposure, interest, awareness and fan base.
And by good for the NFL I mean league, owners, and players.

 

[Joker]

My opinion is the Omissioner immediately fires off a memo to NFLN to start running Hard Knocks marathons over and over featuring Blabbaguts and the rest of the Green Goblins, while also making sure ESPN runs highlight clips of the Jets beating the Patriots in the playoffs last year over all other highlights by a 10/1 ratio...add to that the re-emergence of the catch phrase "spygate" which Michael Holley uttered at least a dozen times this afternoon on WEEI and the whole business of NFL football will be right back on the front burner faster than you can say "Harrison's mouth should be sewn shut with steel wire"

Of course the Omish wouldn't be the fawning obsequious d-bag he is without an entire "Peyton Comes Back!" campaign running all preseason.What I really cannot wait for though,and thank God the strike is settled, is the opening salvo delivered by that ace genius of the ESPN pantheon, Mark Schlereth tying the whole strike to the devious, underhanded machinations of Bob Kraft and Bill Belichick...complete with step by step ,day by day accounts of this skullduggery as reported to him by his "reliable" sources.