Results 61 to 72 of 240
Thread: Player collusion in Seattle?
-
03-30-2013, 04:20 PM #61
-
-
03-30-2013, 06:49 PM #63Pro Bowl Poster
- Join Date
- Feb 2013
- Location
- Kent Island
- Posts
- 1,096
Re: Player collusion in Seattle?
I don't think this is collusion at all, I think it's the logical endpoint of the union's stupid and short-sighted embrace of the rookie wage scale. By making rookies dirt cheap relative to veteran role players, the union created a market wherein the price of elite players/established QBs went way up, while "proven veterans" were squeezed out by the cost difference with rookies. This was entirely predictable to anyone who wasn't an NFL player who doesn't understand that no one gets paid for "what they've done."
-
04-01-2013, 08:56 AM #64Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
- Posts
- 4,610
Re: Player collusion in Seattle?
So your premise is that this off season the owners decided to collude against defensive players? It has nothing to do with the collective bargaining agreement because as you just pointed out last year there were big contracts for defensive players. A few basic questions: Why would the owners collude against defensive players? What is the benefit to them?
NFL owners and GMs are not going to collude on how to spend their money under the cap. They are going to do everything they can to win. They colluded under the uncapped year because they wanted a collective advantage when negotiating with the NFLPA. That is over and done with and in signing the agreement the NFLPA forfeited the right to pursue collusion.
-
Re: Player collusion in Seattle?
Asomugha. 1 year $3M dollar deal.
Two years ago he was the top free agent and got paid over $10M per. I think closer to $12M per.
His value dropped 75% in two seasons.
-
04-02-2013, 06:32 PM #66Steve Flacco, Apparently
- Join Date
- Sep 2010
- Location
- Pikesville
- Posts
- 4,300
-
-
Re: Player collusion in Seattle?
I heard a very interesting interview with Drew Pearson the Cowboys receiver. Pearson contends that teams are so worried about the concussion issue that they don't want players over 30 except for QBs where they have enough trouble finding good players. Pearson's contention is that you are going to see a lot more of these 1 and 2 years deals and for many players over 30 there will be no deals. I'm not sure if he's right but it makes a lot of sense.
-
04-02-2013, 08:52 PM #69Pro Bowl Poster
- Join Date
- Feb 2013
- Location
- Kent Island
- Posts
- 1,096
-
04-02-2013, 10:35 PM #70
Re: Player collusion in Seattle?
I think reaching the conclusion of collusion because market is "depressed" this year is tenuous at best. First, that theory ignores that the cap has not increased this year and most likely will not increase until the new TV contract in 2016 (I believe). Teams are close to the cap. Second, it is ignoring that this is a young mans league. With the new rookie salary scale, younger players are going to get the contracts to keep costs down, and allow talented veterans get paid. Third, for their to be collusion among the owners and gm presumes the theory that people can keep a secret. Sorry, that is where this all falls apart. People can't keep secrets. Someone on a staff would be a whistle blower. Also, Teams are about winning now. They are not going to lose to keep the market down for the greater good of the NFL.
-
Re: Player collusion in Seattle?
Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.
-
04-03-2013, 10:37 AM #72
Bookmarks