KDPPatsfan85
Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2008
- Messages
- 7,686
- Reaction score
- 10,709
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.They should be fighting to remove article 47I can't believe this is being done so easily considering how bad a deal NFL players have.
While I don’t think most players give a crap about article 46 (since it only impacts what? 1 or 2 players per year, if that?), PFT did have an article which said “most” discipline matters will go to a neutral arbitrator. I’ve been trying to find clarity on what that meant though...They should be fighting to remove article 47
They should be fighting to remove article 47
Here is another take : -1- this union has NEVER shown any solidarity (even great players broke ranks when replacement players were used way back when) -2- the players have very short careers and that weighs heavily -3- poor financial decisions run rampant within their ranks -4- so, so many players are on the lower income spectrum (for them) and the boost in minimum pay could really play a big role.I can't believe this is being done so easily considering how bad a deal NFL players have.
If it would cost a player, say $50K, (because of concessions that would have to be made to get the change) to have disciplinary stuff go to a truly independent arbitrator instead of the Omissioner, the players are 100% right not to make it a priority. And they'd still be right even if the cost was less than $50K.If you're talking about the commissioners powers (which I think is article 46?), I'm not sure the majority of players really care about that, given it only impacts a small percentage of them. Sure, it could potentially screw any of them at any time, but a lot of people (not just NFL athletes) have a mentality of "Yeah but that won't happen to ME". It's hard to tell a player who, in his mind, has never done anything wrong, that they should hold out to remove the commissioners power to arbitrarily punish people who have. Not saying it's right, it's just all about what the majority of players will prioritize.
They should be fighting to remove article 47
It's really not worth fighting for for the vast majority of players (assuming you meant article 46).They should be fighting to remove article 47
Same is true of the franchise tag. Players who get tagged hate it, but for hundreds of players, getting tag would practically be a dream come true compared to what they are earning.It's really not worth fighting for for the vast majority of players (assuming you meant article 46).
what has to be done is Goondell has to be removed , then brought before a federal magistrate, charged,tried and convicted for a plethora of RICO violations, sentenced to 20 years in federal prison and introduced to Bubba and Buford in the laundry back room of Leavenworth penitentiary.
I can’t remember the last time a CBA was negotiated in the NBA/MLB/NFL with this little disruption or fanfare.
2011 was a walk in the park compared to many past negotiations across various sports. We missed what? All of 1 exhibition game?I was too young to understand what was going on during any CBA negotiations before the 2011 ones, but those 2011 negotiations were so brutal I assumed that was how it would always work.