If there is a lockout next year, will scabs play or will there just be no football?

[Peyton]

The biggest reason that there won't be replacement players is because this would be a lock out instead of a strike. Last time the players were refusing to come to work, so they were replaced. This time it would be the exact opposite.

I am finally confident a deal is going to get done. The NFLPA is going around taking votes on decertifying the union, and that will insure there is no shut down of the league.

[papachaz]

(09-17-2010 09:11 AM)Peyton Wrote:  The biggest reason that there won't be replacement players is because this would be a lock out instead of a strike. Last time the players were refusing to come to work, so they were replaced. This time it would be the exact opposite.

I am finally confident a deal is going to get done. The NFLPA is going around taking votes on decertifying the union, and that will insure there is no shut down of the league.

i'm not sure i understand what does decertifying the union help? wouldn't this give the players no vote on a contract? that doesn't make sense to me at all.

but whoever said last time was a strike, where the players refused to play is why there were replacement players is right, this time it would be the owners not letting the players in, so why would they get other players? wouldn't that be like firing everyone and replacing them, making literally every player a free agent?

[Peyton]

(09-17-2010 09:16 AM)chazmataz Wrote:  i'm not sure i understand what does decertifying the union help? wouldn't this give the players no vote on a contract? that doesn't make sense to me at all.

but whoever said last time was a strike, where the players refused to play is why there were replacement players is right, this time it would be the owners not letting the players in, so why would they get other players? wouldn't that be like firing everyone and replacing them, making literally every player a free agent?

This excerpt from Chris Mortensen describes it OK. Decertifying will threaten the NFL' s exemption from antitrust laws. It's how the last deal got done.

The union expects to complete the process with all 32 teams by Thanksgiving.

Under decertification guidelines established by the National Labor Relations Board, the union would no longer be able to represent the players in collective bargaining.

It is an action the union took that enabled individual players to seek antitrust lawsuits against the NFL and eventually provided the leverage that led to a new era of free agency in 1993.

On the NFL players association website in 2008, NFLPA general counsel Richard Berthelsen warned of the potential union action to prevent the NFL from locking out players in 2011.

"The NFLPA would sooner go out of business as a union," Berthelsen said. "This is not just a threat, it's a reality because we did it once before."

Link

[Dyoshot]

I haven't seen anyone bring this up before, but do you think some NFL guys would go to the UFL to get a check? I'm not talking about the Drew Brees, Tom Brady, or Manning type guys, I'm talking about the backups and such that don't make as much money?

[BirdsOfPrey]

[Gritz]

I think that all of the parties involved (players, owners, Goodell and his minions) are woefully underestimating the detrimental effect this would have on the league.

Attendance figures from some teams are already down a bit, so outside of the huge television contracts the revenue stream(s) are diminishing slightly due to the economy. A work stoppage or lost year when everyday fans are struggling to pay their own bills?

Extremely stupid and would show how far out of touch this league is with its fans.

[BadMoonRising]

(09-17-2010 10:03 AM)Gritblitzer Wrote:  Extremely stupid and would show how far out of touch this league is with its fans.

A lot of political organizations, manufactures, media sources, and entertainment sources in the world are currently making that mistake.