PDA

View Full Version : DEAR NFL....as a Packer Fan....I say.......""""""""LOCK EM OUT """"""""""""



Bretsky
02-09-2011, 09:19 PM
I'm all for it

There absolutely WILL be a NFL Season next year; you can take that to the bank.
The owners have too much to lose and the players do as well. This will get done

So now I'm going into selfish mode.

It's hard for me to believe there is a team that would benefit from a lockout more than the Green Bay Packers.

This team is built through the draft; we're not looking at any expensive free agents. We're absolutely worried about losing several valuable players for the Super Bowl Run to free agency.

Jenkins is going to get money
Colledge seems like the guy who is going to look for the best money out there....aka....Mike Wahle
And the line is long

An extended lockout is going to hurt teams the teams the most who are looking to make a splash in free agency. And it's going to hurt the free agents looking to strike it rich.

Who would be hurt the least.........teams like Green Bay and Pittsburgh....who build through the draft and hope they don't lose too much this offseason.

I say..........LOCK EM OUT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Interesting article today in JS that relates to the above. Here it is

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/115676514.html

Green Bay - I wrote about the Packers' prospective free agents in the paper today, but some of it didn't make it there or online, so I wanted to provide a little more insight into how those players view things.

Most of them are confident in their ability to earn big contracts somewhere and are looking to be included among the group of players who have had their contracts extended during the season. Some of them will be rewarded and some will be disappointed.

Here's the full list of free agents under the normal rules of free agency:

Unrestricted: K Mason Crosby, S Atari Bigby, S Charlie Peprah, RB John Kuhn, RB Brandon Jackson, FB Korey Hall, LB Matt Wilhelm, OL Jason Spitz, OG Daryn Colledge, DE Cullen Jenkins, WR James Jones, S Anthony Smith.

Exclusive rights: WR Brett Swain, TE Spencer Havner.

“I understand it’s a business,” said Jenkins, whose agents had some talks with the Packers during the season but never got close to a deal. “Hopefully, there’s not a lockout and even if there is not, we can get something done. Hopefully, we can get it ironed out quickly.”

But Jenkins also touched on the reality that if nothing has been done by now, there's a good chance it won't be done at all and he'll be on the free agent market. Jenkins said he's prepared to have to hit the market and see what's out there.

The Packers will have until midnight March 3 to have exclusive negotiating rights with their unrestricted players. After that, the free agents will have an opportunity to shop themselves around to the rest of the 31 teams.

The only qualification is that there must be a new collective bargaining agreement in place for free agency to occur. If it expires on March 3, there will be a “lockout”, which essentially puts a halt to all NFL activity except the 2011 draft.

Most players will know what team they’ll be with when the lockout ends, but free agents will spend the entire time unsure where they’re going to wind up.

“You just have to see where the process takes you,” Crosby said. “I think I’ve been building up to this through a process and each step like this is part of it.

“I want to be a Packer. We’ll see how everything works out. It’s going to be interesting.”

Colledge, Jackson, Crosby and Jenkins all feel they have proved themselves worthy of substantial contracts and are hoping the Packers see things the same way.

“I felt like I had a great year,” Colledge said. “I was excited that I was healthy enough to play all 16 games and then four more. I feel like I played my best football.”

Said Jackson: “All year long I felt that I was good enough to be the starter. I had the potential to be the starting running back. It just didn’t turn out that way.”

Added Crosby: “I think we have a very stable operation and I was feeling very comfortable. The second half everything was automatic with the exception of one hiccup on a short one. Everything else was great. I was 90% the second half. I felt great with how I was kicking.”

In addition to the free agents, the Packers will also have to deal linebacker A.J. Hawk, who has a $10 million base salary next year, which the Packers will either renegotiate into a long-term deal or take off the books by releasing him.

There’s also the issue of whether to keep both him and Barnett, which would create a logjam at inside linebacker with Desmond Bishop and Brandon Chillar under contract. Barnett has two years left and is due $6 million next season.

“I think it will be hard to deny my hunger going into training camp,” said Barnett, who is close to having pins removed from his injured wrist after spending most of the season on injured reserve. “I’ve got to play in a Super Bowl. The linebacker situation will be handled.”

As for players like Peprah, Jones, Bigby, Kuhn and Spitz, the market bears many uncertainties. Who will get an offer he didn’t expect? Who won’t get any offers? Who will come back for a shot at being a repeat champion?

Those are questions that will be answered when the Super Bowl dust settles.

Bretsky
02-09-2011, 09:39 PM
Unrestricted:
K Mason Crosby---He sounds like he's looking to get paid. I think TT extends him to the ire of a few here in PR
S Atari Bigby--------My gut tells me somebody pays him and he goes; we keep him if he comes very cheap and others are not too interested
S Charlie Peprah---Reliable, assignment sure, and intelligent. TT keeps this guy
RB John Kuhn-------He really wants to stay. He's too much a Packer person. I think TT extends him
RB Brandon Jackson--No strong feeling. He sounds like he wants a shot to start. He's a solid #3 back and blocker. If a team makes a strong pitch he's gone but gut says nobody will
FB Korey Hall-----------Time for this one to move on and the three fullback monster might be gone
LB Matt Wilhelm--------Goodbye
OL Jason Spitz----------No clue; if Colledge leaves I could see TT signing him as insurance and a nice wildcard backup. If somebody throws big money at him he's gone
OG Daryn Colledge----He goes to whoever gives him the most money. Lockout be alive...it would hurt Colledge. With a long lockout a one yr deal would not surprise me.
DE Cullen Jenkins------Thanks for the good memories Cullen. Best of luck with your new team at about 89 mil per year
WR James Jones--------I just don't know....but....gut says TT extends him rather than letting him go for nothing,
S Anthony Smith--------Goodbye


As an exercise it would be interesting to rate all of this in order of most to least likely to stay

Joemailman
02-09-2011, 10:07 PM
No way Jenkins gets 89 mil per year. You heard it here first.

Tony Oday
02-09-2011, 10:08 PM
Unrestricted:
K Mason Crosby---Take him out back and beat him with a hose then say SEE YA!
S Atari Bigby--------Cheap guy because he is hurt every other game
S Charlie Peprah---Wont keep because I think he might actually get one of those "are you kidding me?!" contracts
RB John Kuhn-------He really wants to stay. He's too much a Packer person. I think TT extends him...ditto
RB Brandon Jackson--bye
FB Korey Hall-----------...dunno...I like him on ST but is that enough?
LB Matt Wilhelm--------Goodbye
OL Jason Spitz----------No clue
OG Daryn Colledge----Bye he goes for big money somewhere else.
DE Cullen Jenkins------Thanks for the good memories Cullen. Best of luck with your new team at about 8-9 mil per year(thanks for the 89 per year Bretsky!)...I would add though, "do you want another title for a little less?"
WR James Jones--------See you bye Furgie II
S Anthony Smith--------no idea

Tony Oday
02-09-2011, 10:09 PM
No way Jenkins gets 89 mil per year. You heard it here first.

lol with Skeletor in Oakland you NEVER know

Bretsky
02-09-2011, 10:09 PM
No way Jenkins gets 89 mil per year. You heard it here first.

OOOOOOPS

I meant to say 8-9 MIL per year....lol

swede
02-09-2011, 10:15 PM
OOOOOOPS

I meant to say 8-9 MIL per year....lol

I still heard he wasn't getting 89 million there first. And you may be right.

Bretsky
02-11-2011, 08:19 AM
nasty meeting a couple days ago where reportedly the owners ended the meeting after the players made an offer they considered to be silly.....draft is coming...then could be a long offseason

gbgary
02-11-2011, 09:46 AM
git 'er done!

Kiwon
02-11-2011, 11:19 AM
Apparently, one of the baselines for the negotiations is that the NFL will grow from a current $9 billion business to a $20 billion business in the next 10 to 12 years.

I wonder how realistic these expectations are? Where will all this additional money come from? The government is drowning in debt, the population is getting older and retiring, government entitlements are growing, unemployment, mortgage defaults, and personal bankruptcies are at recent record highs.

Yeah, the overall economy will eventually recover, but how much and how fast? Enough to double the value of the whole NFL in just ten years?

The teams are located in urban centers, some in cities and states that are near bankruptcy. Count me as a skeptic as to whether things will improve enough for the NFL to meet their growth expectations.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/US_National_Football_League_Teams_Location-en.svg/500px-US_National_Football_League_Teams_Location-en.svg.png

Patler
02-11-2011, 11:36 AM
Apparently, one of the baselines for the negotiations is that the NFL will grow from a current $9 billion business to a $20 billion business in the next 10 to 12 years.

I wonder how realistic these expectations are? Where will all this additional money come from?

From some form of "pay per view". Ten years ago, the NFL started building toward a model in which we will all have to pay to watch or listen, in some way or another. There was an interview with a league marketing guy a couple years ago. I have wondered if he was fired for doing it, or if it was intentional as an ice-breaker of sorts. Basically, he said it is not fair that one fan pays $100 to watch at the stadium, and another sits at home and watches for free. As he asked, shouldn't it be worth a couple dollars for any fan to watch or listen? He even mentioned pay per listen radio.

They are heading that way. I suspect more and more games will go to the NFL Network, and subscription radio will start getting games. As the momentum builds, the cost to have it will increase. Currently, cable providers pay relatively low fees for NFLN. That will change.

CaptainKickass
02-11-2011, 06:54 PM
From some form of "pay per view". Ten years ago, the NFL started building toward a model in which we will all have to pay to watch or listen, in some way or another. There was an interview with a league marketing guy a couple years ago. I have wondered if he was fired for doing it, or if it was intentional as an ice-breaker of sorts. Basically, he said it is not fair that one fan pays $100 to watch at the stadium, and another sits at home and watches for free. As he asked, shouldn't it be worth a couple dollars for any fan to watch or listen? He even mentioned pay per listen radio.

They are heading that way. I suspect more and more games will go to the NFL Network, and subscription radio will start getting games. As the momentum builds, the cost to have it will increase. Currently, cable providers pay relatively low fees for NFLN. That will change.

The subscription model already exists everywhere except the US because of Direct TV's exclusive contract for the "Sunday Ticket". If you're outside of the US you can buy the whole season and watch live, as well as have access to re-watch every game all season long.

I got the "dumbed down" US version called "NFL Rewind" this year. They charge like $40.00 which allows you to watch any game about 24 hours after it's over, and then whenever you want after that until the reg season is over. Yes you gotta pay extra if you want the same deal for the playoffs. I opted out of the playoffs.

MJZiggy
02-11-2011, 07:34 PM
I hope they're not counting on my money, because I'm canceling DirecTV this year.

MJZiggy
02-11-2011, 07:47 PM
From some form of "pay per view". Ten years ago, the NFL started building toward a model in which we will all have to pay to watch or listen, in some way or another. There was an interview with a league marketing guy a couple years ago. I have wondered if he was fired for doing it, or if it was intentional as an ice-breaker of sorts. Basically, he said it is not fair that one fan pays $100 to watch at the stadium, and another sits at home and watches for free. As he asked, shouldn't it be worth a couple dollars for any fan to watch or listen? He even mentioned pay per listen radio.

They are heading that way. I suspect more and more games will go to the NFL Network, and subscription radio will start getting games. As the momentum builds, the cost to have it will increase. Currently, cable providers pay relatively low fees for NFLN. That will change.

I'm curious about this because the NFL is skating awfully close to monopoly laws and the government has been letting them get away with it, wagging their fingers all the while. I wonder what happens if they take the only game in town and shut down non-paid access to it.

ThunderDan
02-11-2011, 08:15 PM
From some form of "pay per view". Ten years ago, the NFL started building toward a model in which we will all have to pay to watch or listen, in some way or another. There was an interview with a league marketing guy a couple years ago. I have wondered if he was fired for doing it, or if it was intentional as an ice-breaker of sorts. Basically, he said it is not fair that one fan pays $100 to watch at the stadium, and another sits at home and watches for free. As he asked, shouldn't it be worth a couple dollars for any fan to watch or listen? He even mentioned pay per listen radio.

They are heading that way. I suspect more and more games will go to the NFL Network, and subscription radio will start getting games. As the momentum builds, the cost to have it will increase. Currently, cable providers pay relatively low fees for NFLN. That will change.

It is already happening. You have to subscribe to cable (or some other similar option) to get ESPN and NFL Network.

3irty1
02-12-2011, 01:24 PM
How do you figure that no team has more to gain from a lockout than the Packers? You know how quickly these windows can close--the Packers would be losing a year when the team is in its absolute prime. I'd say nobody has more to lose than the Packers.

prime311
02-12-2011, 01:58 PM
Expectations of growing from 9 to 20 Billion in the near future sounds like pipe dreams. Even if it could happen, much of that would have to be a result of inflation. Are we going to be able to start investing in NFL futures so the net worth can be artificially inflated? The only realistic way to increase net worth like that is if they could become globally popular and I just don't see that happening.

MJZiggy
02-12-2011, 02:16 PM
Ah but they think they're going to become globally popular. That's why the games in London and Germany. That's what NFLE was all about. I don't see them reaching 20 billion dollars--I know too many people who have reached the limit of how much money they're willing to put out. An average of $400 for a family of four to have 3 hours of fun on a Sunday afternoon is already a lot to ask, and then you run into Jerry Jones who bent the fans over for twice that last season. They're depending on a lot of rich people who really aren't that rich anymore.

Tony Oday
02-12-2011, 02:33 PM
I have to pay a ton to watch Packer Games...still cheaper than going to the bar to do it :)

bobblehead
02-12-2011, 03:41 PM
From some form of "pay per view". Ten years ago, the NFL started building toward a model in which we will all have to pay to watch or listen, in some way or another. There was an interview with a league marketing guy a couple years ago. I have wondered if he was fired for doing it, or if it was intentional as an ice-breaker of sorts. Basically, he said it is not fair that one fan pays $100 to watch at the stadium, and another sits at home and watches for free. As he asked, shouldn't it be worth a couple dollars for any fan to watch or listen? He even mentioned pay per listen radio.

They are heading that way. I suspect more and more games will go to the NFL Network, and subscription radio will start getting games. As the momentum builds, the cost to have it will increase. Currently, cable providers pay relatively low fees for NFLN. That will change.

boxing promoters felt the same way...I don't see how this could possibly go wrong.

Ok, seriously, most of us are addicted to the NFL and will pay...our kids will not. Too much entertainment available. You can't hook the kids by selling the product, you have to give them a taste for free. (that really sounded bad)

MJZiggy
02-12-2011, 03:50 PM
I have to pay a ton to watch Packer Games...still cheaper than going to the bar to do it :)

Not for me anymore. I pretty much only watch network TV and netflix in the offseason and not all that often either. Therefore I have to add in the total cost of satellite service and the per-game figure jumps substantially. I can go to the bar, eat and drink every game for less than it costs for satellite and Sunday Ticket.

pbmax
02-12-2011, 05:05 PM
From some form of "pay per view". Ten years ago, the NFL started building toward a model in which we will all have to pay to watch or listen, in some way or another. There was an interview with a league marketing guy a couple years ago. I have wondered if he was fired for doing it, or if it was intentional as an ice-breaker of sorts. Basically, he said it is not fair that one fan pays $100 to watch at the stadium, and another sits at home and watches for free. As he asked, shouldn't it be worth a couple dollars for any fan to watch or listen? He even mentioned pay per listen radio.

They are heading that way. I suspect more and more games will go to the NFL Network, and subscription radio will start getting games. As the momentum builds, the cost to have it will increase. Currently, cable providers pay relatively low fees for NFLN. That will change.

Also from the next round of Network TV contract renewals. ESPN just paid a huge increase and the other networks will likely follow suit. NFL ratings have climbed back to numbers that haven't been seen since the early days of the cable explosion. And given the fractured TV universe now, those number are even more valuable because they are almost unique.

I would be surprised if they don't achieve 1/3 of their expected gain from the next round of TV negotiations.

pbmax
02-12-2011, 05:07 PM
dp