[wbondarmunw]

You realize that there is a huge difference between police and firemen or teachers for that matter and NFL owners and players right? I doubt you'll figure out the difference, but I'd be interested in seeing you try.

And as Mad already pointed out, a judge has determined that the owners did not negotiate in good faith and they can't collect the money they set aside for the lockout. So yes, that is part of the deal.

Nope, i don't know a F'ing thing about unions and the politics they play.

Police and fire/safety unions are similar in that they've unionized so that they won't be abused by their employers- in their cases usually several city councilmen or Aldermen.

The NFL players unionized because they felt they could keep from getting abused as players and to thwart any 'abuse' a team's owner might inflict ('abuse' meaning lots of things...lack of playing time, fines that weren't spelled out etc, etc, etc.).

Now, you brought in the proverbial 'teacher'. Teachers unions exist to get into a city's pocket and drag whatever coin they can out of the city council/county supervisor's pocket without regard for the budget or city as a whole. Truly a bad example if you were trying to draw an analogy. Great analogy for me, though.

And now the player don't want this union representing them why????

So they can sue to get more than the owners had already agreed to.

[ligeplodore]

Nope, i don't know a F'ing thing about unions and the politics they play.

Police and fire/safety unions are similar in that they've unionized so that they won't be abused by their employers- in their cases usually several city councilmen or Aldermen.

The NFL players unionized because they felt they could keep from getting abused as players and to thwart any 'abuse' a team's owner might inflict ('abuse' meaning lots of things...lack of playing time, fines that weren't spelled out etc, etc, etc.).

Now, you brought in the proverbial 'teacher'. Teachers unions exist to get into a city's pocket and drag whatever coin they can out of the city council/county supervisor's pocket without regard for the budget or city as a whole. Truly a bad example if you were trying to draw an analogy. Great analogy for me, though.

And now the player don't want this union representing them why????

So they can sue to get more than the owners had already agreed to.

You're so wrong on so many levels.

But that's not surprising.

[Grenader]

God you can be dense. The owners signed a contract and then violated that contract. That's *not* good for them. That's pretty much why things are where they are right now.

At this point now, the players are making their power play, because the leverage shifts to them. The owners done messed up, and they know it, otherwise they wouldn't have made any concessions in their most recent offer.

But the good news is, we should have football as scheduled.

The owners negotiated the way they wanted to. You- already being on the side of the players- crack me up with this whine that the owners didn't grab as much money as they could. Did any players have to take home less than they negotiated or receive a bounced check this past season?????

Nope.

Yes, the players are making their 'power play'- and doing it in the court of public opinion as well. They had already agreed to lengthen the negotiations and see what else they could get and decided to walk away from any further negotiation and take their talents to South, er the courts.

[Grennios]

You're so wrong on so many levels.

But that's not surprising.

I'm capable of seeing many issues from more than just the 'blue collar' side.

Not a damn thing wrong with that.

[vqIo7X2U]

Actually, it was a bad deal and that's the problem. They took LESS total money than they should have just so they would have revenue during a lockout so they could do their best to break the union. That was their plan all along. But yeah, this is all on the players.

The union has been decertified by its own members.

How did the players win there????

Oh ya, they can now sue as individuals.

[bobibnoxx]

The owners negotiated the way they wanted to. You- already being on the side of the players- crack me up with this whine that the owners didn't grab as much money as they could. Did any players have to take home less than they negotiated or receive a bounced check this past season?????

Nope.

Yes, the players are making their 'power play'- and doing it in the court of public opinion as well. They had already agreed to lengthen the negotiations and see what else they could get and decided to walk away from any further negotiation and take their talents to South, er the courts.

Good God man, this has to be an act. I find it hard to believe that anyone can really be this stubborn.

A federal fucking judge has ruled that the TV contracts that the owners negotiated violated the CBA that the owners themselves agreed to do business under. Yet you continue to argue that the owners did nothing wrong, when a federal fucking judge has already ruled that they did. Seriously?

[mikefertynnz]

The owners negotiated the way they wanted to. You- already being on the side of the players- crack me up with this whine that the owners didn't grab as much money as they could. Did any players have to take home less than they negotiated or receive a bounced check this past season?????

Nope.

Yes, the players are making their 'power play'- and doing it in the court of public opinion as well. They had already agreed to lengthen the negotiations and see what else they could get and decided to walk away from any further negotiation and take their talents to South, er the courts.

I'm not on the side of the players. Now it is their turn to be greedy. I'd lecture you on the dangers of assuming, but whether you assume or not, your status remains the same.
I am in favor of having a football season, which is what we now get. So yay for that.


The owners negotiated the the TV contracts the way they wanted to. Yes. However, they violated their contract in doing so. Boo. The players could have taken home even more money. How many checks would the players have NOT received had they not decertified and allowed the league to lock them out?

The players are taking a PR hit doing what they are doing, because the general public looks at it like they are walking away from the deal.

My point before stands. Public opinion is invalid and immaterial in this now. It all comes down to the actual courts, and law.

Sorry Straw, you are wrong. It's ok. You'll bounce back to be wrong again.

[isopsmypovA]

God you can be dense. The owners signed a contract and then violated that contract. That's *not* good for them. That's pretty much why things are where they are right now.

At this point now, the players are making their power play, because the leverage shifts to them. The owners done messed up, and they know it, otherwise they wouldn't have made any concessions in their most recent offer.

But the good news is, we should have football as scheduled.

That's especially rich coming from the very guy who put Delhomme, Warner, and Tom Brady on-par with each other.

Jeeebus.

[PypeMaypetasy]

Good God man, this has to be an act. I find it hard to believe that anyone can really be this stubborn.

A federal fucking judge has ruled that the TV contracts that the owners negotiated violated the CBA that the owners themselves agreed to do business under. Yet you continue to argue that the owners did nothing wrong, when a federal fucking judge has already ruled that they did. Seriously?

It never happened, Clammy. You just got that info from wikistupidia.

[DghtRdc]

I'm capable of seeing many issues from more than just the 'blue collar' side.

Not a damn thing wrong with that.

From "more than just" the blue collar side?

Damn you are a funny little man, Straw.

[denyffishh]

That's especially rich coming from the very guy who put Delhomme, Warner, and Tom Brady on-par with each other.

Jeeebus.

Never did that either.

See, I told you you'd be wrong again.

Just like you were on how awesome of a story Kurt Warner was, in comparision to other players.

But nice deflection attempt anyway.

[Yarmark]

I'm not on the side of the players. Now it is their turn to be greedy. I'd lecture you on the dangers of assuming, but whether you assume or not, your status remains the same.
I am in favor of having a football season, which is what we now get. So yay for that.


The owners negotiated the the TV contracts the way they wanted to. Yes. However, they violated their contract in doing so. Boo. The players could have taken home even more money. How many checks would the players have NOT received had they not decertified and allowed the league to lock them out?

The players are taking a PR hit doing what they are doing, because the general public looks at it like they are walking away from the deal.

My point before stands. Public opinion is invalid and immaterial in this now. It all comes down to the actual courts, and law.

Sorry Straw, you are wrong. It's ok. You'll bounce back to be wrong again.

Do yourself a favor and at least be honest with yourself.....for once.

Yes, i realize that Sconi has a publically-owned team and as such you can make yourself appear even-handed all while not really being that.

What's the risk to the citizens of WI versus the risk to say the owner of the Cleveland Browns or Chargers or any other number of teams where there's an ownership group of investors who actually put their butt on the line???

[indartwm]

Never did that either.

See, I told you you'd be wrong again.

Just like you were on how awesome of a story Kurt Warner was, in comparision to other players.

But nice deflection attempt anyway.

You did. *You* brought up Delhomme, Warner, and Brady all in your same post.

To date, no other SB'er has yet to configure all three in some 'they're all alike' way like you tried to.

But keep playing shell games.

[RaicickKida]

Do yourself a favor and at least be honest with yourself.....for once.

Yes, i realize that Sconi has a publically-owned team and as such you can make yourself appear even-handed all while not really being that.

What's the risk to the citizens of WI versus the risk to say the owner of the Cleveland Browns or Chargers or any other number of teams where there's an ownership group of investors who actually put their butt on the line???

What the fuck are you talking about now?

I am in favor of pretty much everything the league wanted...A rookie cap. Continuation of the draft, free agency, and franchise tags. I'm even down with an 18 game season.

See, Straw, most people, when wrong, just admit it and move on. But you gotta go for the gusto.

I'M NOT ON THE PLAYERS SIDE

However, the league violated contracts and put us in the current position. I'm scared to death, as a Packer fan, of a league without a cap and revenue sharing. That is the *risk* that the *owners* of the Green Bay Packers are facing currently.

[Talicoabilk]

From "more than just" the blue collar side?

Damn you are a funny little man, Straw.

So there's only one side to view things from, Mr White-collar/business-owner Hater???

I could've sworn DOM just entered the room.

[kranfid]

So there's only one side to view things from, Mr White-collar Hater???

Are you talking to me?

[fudelholf]

You did. *You* brought up Delhomme, Warner, and Brady all in your same post.

To date, no other SB'er has yet to configure all three in some 'they're all alike' way like you tried to.

But keep playing shell games.

Let me spell it out to you once more. I'll try to type bigger, so that maybe you can understand it.

Bagging Groceries did not make Kurt Warner any more of a gripping story than Brady or Delhomme

And that's the only point I was making. You are the one trying to spin it that I somehow think the players are all equal, or whatever that shit you are making up is.

And this is the last post in this thread I'll be addressing that topic in, as I'm not allowing you to bring up old shit to deflect from your current idiocy.

[CxofxJFm]

What the fuck are you talking about now?

I am in favor of pretty much everything the league wanted...A rookie cap. Continuation of the draft, free agency, and franchise tags. I'm even down with an 18 game season.

See, Straw, most people, when wrong, just admit it and move on. But you gotta go for the gusto.

I'M NOT ON THE PLAYERS SIDE

However, the league violated contracts and put us in the current position. I'm scared to death, as a Packer fan, of a league without a cap and revenue sharing. That is the *risk* that the *owners* of the Green Bay Packers are facing currently.

So now you're doubting a group of owners who have more at risk than some strip-club dolla-throwin' playuh????


No, the players won't run roughshod on you, little publicly-funded team guy.

When all's said and done you'll have your cap and such. Not just a guess. There won't be an NFL any way else. It can't exist with skyrocketing salaries and guaranteed contracts like in the MLB.

But funny that you wanna put the Cheeseheads on-par with teams that have a real owner/ownership group of private-sector individuals and not some publicly-funded/PBS type of deal.

Silly ducks.

[Sawyer]

Quick Recap, for those who are interested:

Mad: Wants what the owners wanted, not happy with decertification, but understands the reasoning behind it.

Straw: Wrong

The End.

[QzVyZbTg]

Let me spell it out to you once more. I'll try to type bigger, so that maybe you can understand it.

Bagging Groceries did not make Kurt Warner any more of a gripping story than Brady or Delhomme

And that's the only point I was making. You are the one trying to spin it that I somehow think the players are all equal, or whatever that shit you are making up is.

And this is the last post in this thread I'll be addressing that topic in, as I'm not allowing you to bring up old shit to deflect from your current idiocy.

Riiiight.


No need to deflect anything. Only idiot here seems to be you and this claptrastic notion that the NFL will suddenly appear sans a cap and that the Fudgesters will be left with nada.

Let the drama play out and you'll see that in the end, the players were trying to do what the union taught 'em to do- get into the owners' pockets.

Nuthin' more.