NFL 2011 Season LOCK DOWN! :(

[Mac the Knife]

I read the lawsuit filed yesterday in Minnesota in conjunction with the decertification filing. Brady v. NFL is what the case will be known as, and as I went through it there wasn't a single argument posed that I didn't either say, "Yeah, the owners are guilty of that," or "Yeah, now that the CBA has expired, the owners are guilty of that."

Personally what I'd like to see is the members of the NFLPA (it still exists, it's just no longer their union) decide to form their own, "Players League," and cut the NFL out of the equation. The league's network TV deals expire after 2011 - just have the 2011 free agent group announce they're going to form their own league as a limited liability company, with all NFLPA player-members as partners. Announce that as the player's contracts expire, they're going to move over to this new league, adding expansion franchises as they go.

This tactic would not only be unprecedented, but it'd make the NFL $#!+ its pants. Why? Because unlike the WFL, USFL, XFL and UFL, such a move would ultimately spell the death of the NFL. Not only would it have lost its marquee player talent, but no matter the contract you throw in front of a potential rookie standout, it pales by comparison to a direct ownership stake in the team itself.

[Saintsfan]

Problem is if you break the NFL, you kill Football. The NFL knows that, the players know that, fans know that, deep down.You can't buy the history and loyalty bound up in the NFL and it's teams.

Part of the problem with the players lawsuit, to some extent, is that the courts have tended to allow sports to carry on as they want. That's how the reserve clause in Baseball could last so long, for instance.

[Drakonius26]

Problem is if you break the NFL, you kill Football. The NFL knows that, the players know that, fans know that, deep down.You can't buy the history and loyalty bound up in the NFL and it's teams.

Part of the problem with the players lawsuit, to some extent, is that the courts have tended to allow sports to carry on as they want. That's how the reserve clause in Baseball could last so long, for instance.

That's true too, but Mac presents an interesting theory. Think about it. There are a ton of hardcore football fans that can't live without their football fix, and the players could form a successful league if this lockout drags out long enough, because America and the rest of the world who follow American Football/Gridiron would know of the Tom Brady's, Peyton Manning's, and Drew Brees', just as they would the other stars who follow suit. Quality football is quality football, you don't need some stupid NFL shield to validate it, and while some people would be like... "I only will watch NFL-related football, anything else is not TRUE football." If Tom Brady, Chris Johnson, Roddy White, and Antonio Gates decide to team up and play together on the New York Knights in a Player's League, I seriously doubt most football fans will boycott it. Perhaps, this is the NFLPA's way of copying the NBA players, by acting like... "No. We ARE your league, and without US you are nothing." Just my two cents.

[Saintsfan]

Problem is if you break the NFL, you kill Football. The NFL knows that, the players know that, fans know that, deep down.You can't buy the history and loyalty bound up in the NFL and it's teams.

Part of the problem with the players lawsuit, to some extent, is that the courts have tended to allow sports to carry on as they want. That's how the reserve clause in Baseball could last so long, for instance.

That's true too, but Mac presents an interesting theory. Think about it. There are a ton of hardcore football fans that can't live without their football fix, and the players could form a successful league if this lockout drags out long enough, because America and the rest of the world who follow American Football/Gridiron would know of the Tom Brady's, Peyton Manning's, and Drew Brees', just as they would the other stars who follow suit. Quality football is quality football, you don't need some stupid NFL shield to validate it, and while some people would be like... "I only will watch NFL-related football, anything else is not TRUE football." If Tom Brady, Chris Johnson, Roddy White, and Antonio Gates decide to team up and play together on the New York Knights in a Player's League, I seriously doubt most football fans will boycott it. Perhaps, this is the NFLPA's way of copying the NBA players, by acting like... "No. We ARE your league, and without US you are nothing." Just my two cents.

I don't think people would boycott a new league, and I am sure initially it would do well to start with. But over time the 'falseness' of the new league would become apparent, new players would be given huge contracts by the NFL and the old order would slowly be restored. It's a bit different, because players are paid so much more now, but baseball players tried something similar a century or more ago and it flamed out.

[crashcarson15]

Spring football is right around the corner, what are you talking ab-Oh.

[/southern football fan]

You mean spring (indoor) football started tonight on NFL Network? Arena Football League!

In reality though, the "WHOLE WORLD REVOLVEZ AROUND DUH NFL!!!!!111" is what's turned me away from the NFL and pushed me towards the CFL more to be honest. I care as much probably about the CFL as the NFL at this point.

/maybe fans can look at real football during this lockout... nah that's a "European" thing

Who's your CFL team, Sizemore?

Winnipeg!

[BBTV]

I read the lawsuit filed yesterday in Minnesota in conjunction with the decertification filing. Brady v. NFL is what the case will be known as, and as I went through it there wasn't a single argument posed that I didn't either say, "Yeah, the owners are guilty of that," or "Yeah, now that the CBA has expired, the owners are guilty of that."

Personally what I'd like to see is the members of the NFLPA (it still exists, it's just no longer their union) decide to form their own, "Players League," and cut the NFL out of the equation. The league's network TV deals expire after 2011 - just have the 2011 free agent group announce they're going to form their own league as a limited liability company, with all NFLPA player-members as partners. Announce that as the player's contracts expire, they're going to move over to this new league, adding expansion franchises as they go.

This tactic would not only be unprecedented, but it'd make the NFL $#!+ its pants. Why? Because unlike the WFL, USFL, XFL and UFL, such a move would ultimately spell the death of the NFL. Not only would it have lost its marquee player talent, but no matter the contract you throw in front of a potential rookie standout, it pales by comparison to a direct ownership stake in the team itself.

The players certainly don't have the capital to get a league of this magnitude off of the ground, and I doubt that many of them have the business sense to pull it off anyway. For it to be worthwhile to them, it would have to generate the types of revenue that they're used to (or at least whatever their share was, plus overhead) so it would have to be a pretty big deal. They would still need investors to come in as owners (though they could organize as a single entity if so desired) and someone to actually manage / run it, and eventually, it would just devolve into what we have now. Because it has to. There will always be a management side, and there will always be a labor side. The labor could try to put together their own league without involving unions, but they'll just end up requiring management, who would eventually realize that they're investment isn't working out because the whole thing was organized from day one to hook up the players, and they'll start taking action, the players would unionize again, and we'll be right back to where we are now.

[Lights Out]

BBTV is absolutely correct. The NFL doesn't need a player's league to settle this, they need a serious competitor like the AFL or USFL briefly were to make them settle their differences and improve the product.

[BBTV]

That's not what I'm saying. I'm not sure how the presence of a competitor would solve this, as if it was a true competitor, whatever CBA there is would likely be negotiated with the management of both leagues as a consortium. I'm just saying that I don't think the players could pull off their own league, nor would it fix this either. Pretty much, I don't think there's any way to fix this other than what they're doing.

[rangerfan94]

There was a comment on ESPN this morning, about plans for an Eight game season. That would suck.

[rams80]

I read the lawsuit filed yesterday in Minnesota in conjunction with the decertification filing. Brady v. NFL is what the case will be known as, and as I went through it there wasn't a single argument posed that I didn't either say, "Yeah, the owners are guilty of that," or "Yeah, now that the CBA has expired, the owners are guilty of that."

Personally what I'd like to see is the members of the NFLPA (it still exists, it's just no longer their union) decide to form their own, "Players League," and cut the NFL out of the equation. The league's network TV deals expire after 2011 - just have the 2011 free agent group announce they're going to form their own league as a limited liability company, with all NFLPA player-members as partners. Announce that as the player's contracts expire, they're going to move over to this new league, adding expansion franchises as they go.

This tactic would not only be unprecedented, but it'd make the NFL $#!+ its pants. Why? Because unlike the WFL, USFL, XFL and UFL, such a move would ultimately spell the death of the NFL. Not only would it have lost its marquee player talent, but no matter the contract you throw in front of a potential rookie standout, it pales by comparison to a direct ownership stake in the team itself.

The players certainly don't have the capital to get a league of this magnitude off of the ground, and I doubt that many of them have the business sense to pull it off anyway. For it to be worthwhile to them, it would have to generate the types of revenue that they're used to (or at least whatever their share was, plus overhead) so it would have to be a pretty big deal. They would still need investors to come in as owners (though they could organize as a single entity if so desired) and someone to actually manage / run it, and eventually, it would just devolve into what we have now. Because it has to. There will always be a management side, and there will always be a labor side. The labor could try to put together their own league without involving unions, but they'll just end up requiring management, who would eventually realize that they're investment isn't working out because the whole thing was organized from day one to hook up the players, and they'll start taking action, the players would unionize again, and we'll be right back to where we are now.

Additionally, I think the "give the players an ownership stake" tactic has been tried before-albeit on a smaller scale. I'm pretty sure some of the contracts that the bigger names in the ABA and WHA signed included ownership stakes in their franchises as part of the compensation.

[Lights Out]

That's not what I'm saying.

My bad, I should clarified. The competitor thing is my opinion. Let the free market work - if a competitor starts delivering a better, more affordable product than the NFL, the fans, coaches, and college players will flock to that league. Then it's up to the NFL: either improve or fold.

[Saintsfan]

That's not what I'm saying.

My bad, I should clarified. The competitor thing is my opinion. Let the free market work - if a competitor starts delivering a better, more affordable product than the NFL, the fans, coaches, and college players will flock to that league. Then it's up to the NFL: either improve or fold.

No, players, coaches, front office staff will go where the money is, not the league that is trying to keep costs down.

[Viper]

That's not what I'm saying.

My bad, I should clarified. The competitor thing is my opinion. Let the free market work - if a competitor starts delivering a better, more affordable product than the NFL, the fans, coaches, and college players will flock to that league. Then it's up to the NFL: either improve or fold.

No, players, coaches, front office staff will go where the money is, not the league that is trying to keep costs down.

And the fans, given the choice between some Johnny-come-lately upstart with a physical presence in only a handful of middling markets and the established brand name that their parents, grandparents, etc. have been following for almost a century, with a footprint that pretty much covers the entire Lower 48, will overwhelmingly choose the latter.

[Gothamite]

Exactly. This "players' league" wouldn't last a full season, much less seriously challenge the NFL.

The NFL players are hampered by the fact that in all pro sports, Seinfeld is right - fans root for laundry. This is especially true in the NFL, with its combination of relatively limited player movement and players-obscured-by-helmet factor.

There's not enough player "star power" in the world to overcome the NFL. Even if they had the money to create a league. Which they don't.

[BBTV]

Maybe if I'm Comcast / NBC, I try to start a league and bring these players into it.

[DEAD!]

Maybe if I'm Comcast / NBC, I try to start a league and bring these players into it.

... and I guess you could use a pro wrestling promoter to help out...

[BBTV]

Maybe if I'm Comcast / NBC, I try to start a league and bring these players into it.

... and I guess you could use a pro wrestling promoter to help out...

He didn't have access to top-flight talent. With said talent, they wouldn't need all kinds of crazy gimmicks to try and get people to watch. They could do it more like a legit league.

[Saintsfan]

Problem is there are a bunch of guys with long contracts in place. It's not like Brady et al are free to play for whoever they want now, so most of the star talent is locked up for 4,5,6 + years. And the contracts are so big that buyouts aren't really an option.

Interesting little thing to watch is how advertising revenues of players are effected. And how the big name stars that advertisers like (Brady, Manning etc) react when those who don't bring advertising bucks start getting antsy about needing some money.

[infrared41]

Exactly. This "players' league" wouldn't last a full season, much less seriously challenge the NFL.

The NFL players are hampered by the fact that in all pro sports, Seinfeld is right - fans root for laundry. This is especially true in the NFL, with its combination of relatively limited player movement and players-obscured-by-helmet factor.

There's not enough player "star power" in the world to overcome the NFL. Even if they had the money to create a league. Which they don't.

Didn't the NFLPA try playing some sort of "all-star" game during the '82 strike? If memory serves, it was a miserable failure.

Anyway, a new "players" league would be a colossal flop. I'm not a Peyton Hillis or Josh Cribbs fan, I'm a Cleveland Browns fan. Who wears the uniform isn't nearly as important to me as the uniform is. Those of you who claim you'd be interested in "players" league would follow it for about a week. After that you'd all be right back here bitching about how awful it is.

[JeffreyDahmersHorse]

I think the Colts will do GREAT for the 2011 Season IF WE GET ALL OUR STARTERS BACK IN.

The Colts are a great team, where're just beat up. I won't say they'll be in the Super Bowl,

Even if we had all our starter playing.

The NFL 2011 season is far from now though.