Boycotting the draft has little to do with the owners (unlike the negotiations). It has everything to do with Gooddell. I wouldn't blame him (PP) for doing either, and I don't think these guys would be alienated if they chose to attend. The NFLPA is basically unified in saying those 20 or so elite guys deserve their chance and can't be blamed for choosing to attend. But I don't think the NFLPA is being petty either. If Gooddell was not the one on the stage, they'd be singing a different tune. The players hate that dude and it is such a unified hate that it's pretty obvious the guy needs to be removed from "power."
really, you think all the players hate the commish? I did read that San Diego guy Burnett's comments about him, do the majority of the players feel the same?
No doubt. These guys have "been on stage" all their lives and understanding THIS is the pinnacle of the sport (not really imo but ya know) it's not exactly running out onto the field as a starter, yet, either.
Really???? Where did you get that stat from? I know their bodies get beat up and many of them are juiced up on supplements ( and/or the "real" ) and they often eat like beasts when training and trying to put on weight...... ......but you think, being an elite athlete, the best of the best, that they would tend to be healthier for longer. Concussions, sprains and strains, contusions, fractures, muscle and tendon injuries, etc don't seem like such a huge deal, but I guess the wear and tear on your body builds up over time. By the time most NFL players retire, most have probably been playing full-contact football for 25+ years.
I'm absolutely sold on the idea that humans = selfishness, greed. Not showing up at the draft day extravaganza is going to be perceived as petty and vindictive by all football aficionados. My advise to the plethora of Alabama players in the first round, go, enjoy yourself. Watching Alabama, your senior year, go for another NC, may be as good as it gets.
Sports: A huge problem NFL is killing its players, and league doesn't care - NFL - CBSSports.com Football
someone i know had a very good take on it when they likened it to a graduation ceremony. some players may not care if they walk across the stage or not, but to some it may be an important symbol of their accomplishment, and an even bigger symbol of accomplishment and recognition to their parents who have helped them get there. it is an event. it has no bearing on the dispute, one in which, imo, both sides are acting like asses.
Yeah, they do. The player leadership (which includes Brees, Brady, Manning, Mike Vrabel, Brian Dawkins) has gone on record stating they would be more than happy to negotiate with Jerry Jones, Bob Kraft, and Bill Polian, who represent team owner leadership, but they would not sit at the negotiating table with Gooddell or the league attorney. They feel lied to and betrayed by him. I think both sides are being petty as well, but at the same time, I completely understand the players. The package is $10 billion, of which the owners take $1 billion off the top before anything else is dispersed. Theoretically, the players get the rest, but that's not totally true either. So from the beginning, you have this: $1 billion/32 owners = $31,250,000 $9 billion/1700 players = $5,294,117 The owners now want to take an additional billion off top leaving this: $2 billion/32 owners = $62,500,000 $8 billion/1700 players = $4,705,882 In addition, the owners, from the pushing of Gooddell, want an 18 game schedule to increase revenues, when the players insist revenues can be increased by leaving prime-time games as "pick-ems" after the mid-point of the season. In other words, follow a schedule for the first 9 weeks. By that time, every time has played at least 8 games, and you know who the contenders are for the most part. Let the networks decide who plays Sunday and Monday night football...thereby increasing viewership, ticket sales, etc. But beyond that, don't take money out of my pocket, make me play more games, AND support a system designed to fine the **** of me for playing hard-nosed football. The NFL should be heavily investing in research to better protect players, not changing all the freaking rules. You change the way guys play when you do that. No doubt, some are necessary, but limiting kickoff returns under the guise of protecting players? **** like that is taking it too far...especially for guys like Josh Cribbs, Leon Washington, Devin Hester, etc., who only make the money they make because of their return ability. Everything being done recently is under the guise of protecting players, but it comes off as protecting the owners already fat bank accounts. The players want the incoming rookies to think about the fact that going to the draft, while a monumental moment for about 20 guys, represents shaking hands with a man who wants to limit their early career earnings, make them play more games in a year thereby shortening their career exponentially, and fine the shlit out of them if they sneeze some snot on the refs shoe (lol). It's not an issue of players vs. the league. It's an issue of being aware of who you're standing with. I'm sorry. I side with the players on this one. The owners are banking on the known fact that the players need them more than they need the players...and for the most part that's true in the short term. But if the owners feel they're fine without football money (which they still get by the way...per the terms of tv contracts that account for most of the money they're negotiating), why do they need to double what they get off the top? That money doesn't account for other football related revenues either. We complain about rich players, but these owners have lost more on a horse race (and didn't blink about it) than many of these players will make in a career. The owners feel they have a right to make more money, even though most of them make more in a year than their entire player payroll combined. And they should be able to make more money, but not at the expense of less money for the players. That's not fair.
