Results 169 to 180 of 240
Thread: Player collusion in Seattle?
-
04-04-2013, 02:20 PM #169
-
04-04-2013, 02:21 PM #170
-
04-04-2013, 02:22 PM #171
Re: Player collusion in Seattle?
Abraham is ancient. Huff graded out much worse than he actually is because he was playing out of position in the middle of a terrible defense. And as you pointed out yourself, those guys were All Pros THREE SEASONS AGO. Look who got paid: QBs, WRs, and young, up and coming defensive players. Just because older defensive veterans are not getting the contracts they used to have doesn't mean the owners are somehow colluding to spend less. It just means they are spending differently. Literally all evidence shows this to be true.
-
-
04-04-2013, 02:23 PM #173
Re: Player collusion in Seattle?
Which was .... drum roll ..... THREE YEARS AGO. I knew you would bring up Huff, a player who's universally considered to have not come close to his potential. News flash: he's not an All Pro; he's a one-time FORMER All Pro.
What would convince me is a logical argument backed up with facts. You've presented neither."This space for rent" - Roger Goodell
-
04-04-2013, 02:25 PM #174Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 4,553
Re: Player collusion in Seattle?
His questions are entirely moot in terms of this issue anyway.
The CBA is what governs the players ability to seek redress here, not the Sherman Act.
This is why the NFLPA had to decertify in order for players to sue the NFL on antitrust grounds during the recent labor fight (Brady vs. NFL).
The CBA, however, does include language that forbids collusion by owners to depress players' salaries. But this is obvious.
As you know (but he may not know), no one here is defending the owners' non-existent rights to collude, we are simply saying there is no evidence of collusion (currently).
-
-
04-04-2013, 02:27 PM #176
-
-
04-04-2013, 02:30 PM #178
Re: Player collusion in Seattle?
agents complaining becuase their paychecks are shrinking proves ZERO.
ZERO. had to say that twice for impact.
So MIA is not part of the "collusion"
I guess Cleveland is exempt as well. Basically all the teams with substantial capspace are not par tof the collusion? Only those tight against the cap are colluding?
-
Re: Player collusion in Seattle?
Indeed. But once they decertify the applicable law is...the Sherman Act.
Yet.
Perhaps there is a major misunderstanding.
All I am saying is that the current comments by the likes of Aaron Wilson and this new letter by D Smith support my suspicion of collusion. Is there acutal collusion? I cannot say - I am not the one fielding offers from the various teams.
Would I be suspicious if I talk to 5 different teams and they all just so happen to arrive at a similar deal?
Is that a mere coincidence?
Is the teams parallel conduct independent, or concerted?
-
04-04-2013, 02:32 PM #180
Re: Player collusion in Seattle?
maybe it's age based discrimination??? Are the owners colluding against the older players? that would be more palatable.
It's a young man's game... money is only being spent on players coming off their Rookie deals. I thoguth that was obvious, and is no basis for collusion, it's a CHOICE to spend on younger players.
Bookmarks