The Players are going to lose

[Tony Oday]

http://www.thepostgame.com/features/201104/tpg-exclusive-cash-strapped-nfl-players-seeking-high-risk-lockout-loans

Owners know that even if 20% of the players get in financial trouble that could be enough to get a favorable deal for the Owners.

[RashanGary]

Maybe. If the judge rules against the lockout, the players will be able to sign a short term deal while a court assisted long term deal gets worked out. That's what they're hoping for and it still has a chance to work out.

If the court rules against them, they have to go back and agree to a deal similar to the one the owners put on the table a month or two ago. They simply can't last as long as the owners so the courts are their only hope. That's probably a big part of why the union rushed to litigation to begin with. If they had any hope to get the legal upper hand, they had to get it started or they would be forever in the position of lesser leverage.

It's up to the judge right now. That decision changes everything.


"The players are going to lose IF THE JUDGE RULES IN FAVOR OF THE LOCKOUT." makes more sense than just, "the players will lose because they're broke."

[Tony Oday]

Just because they are forced to start the off season does not mean owners will allow FA players to be signed...there are what 400 players out there that are FA?

[SkinBasket]

If the court rules against them, they have to go back and agree to a deal similar to the one the owners put on the table a month or two ago.

Haha. Good luck.

I can see the owners offering near what they were pre-moderation as a sign of good faith meant to solidify fan support behind them, but they might also be tired of the dogs biting the hands that feed them and give them far less. Without an activist judge backing them, they will have little more than their pubes to use as leverage... which is why most of us thought this was a stupid idea to start with.

Sure, the stars, for the most part, could threaten to walk away from the league but there's a huge gap between the average players and the "stars" in the league and a majority of the players need NFL employment to pay off their borrowed lifestyle. After a few weeks of paying their own insurance, not to mention watching their accounts dwindle as they make payments on all their other loans without the promise of an income this fall, there's probably already a good number of fellas out there wondering what the fuck their union/"association" got them into and why they didn't cut a deal when the dealing was good.

The promise is never as great as the reality.

[Lurker64]

Really, at the rate some of these NFL player dumbasses are running out of money... by the time that the appellate court rules on the injunction (the lockout almost certainly won't be lifted before then) a bunch of guys are going to be broke with some significant debt. Barring an agreement coming out of mediation/collective bargaining/settlement, the earliest the lockout gets lifted is late-June or early-July, and that's assuming the NFLPA wins on appeal.

[Tarlam!]

It amazes me that the NFLPA hasn't done far more in the way of guidance for players, especially the youngens, regarding financial security beyond their playing days.


"As an NFL player you are a target, as every guy will learn," said Ravens center and NFLPA players representative Matt Birk. "There are a lot of people trying to separate you from your money."

Birk also raised a question: How many players actually need substantial funding at this moment?

"Having [$250,000 to $500,000] to spend or invest -- sure, it’s a nice thing," he said. "But you can get taken advantage of, especially when you’re talking about guys in their twenties. There’s no handbook on how to handle yourself, so you learn some things along the way, and hopefully you don’t lose too big."

There really should be a handbook, shouldn't there?

Don't get me wrong, I'm firmly on the side of the owners here; I'm a capitalist pig at heart and as long as the owners are putting a great product on the market they should get paid for it. Any successful employer knows the health of his organization depends on the moral of his troops, so it's in the owners' best interest to take care of retired players with health care and all the trimmings.

And I'm delighted to see proven vets get big pay days. I find it offensive for rookies to get multi zillion dollar deals without ever having taken a snap. But I find it criminal that these kids are left to their own devices to lose the cash they make risking life and limb for my amusement.

[Freak Out]

They do have programs for the players, most importantly the rookies...but people are stupid and are soon parted with their money.

[RashanGary]

Skinbasket, I see your point. It could go exactly as you're saying. I don't think it's the most likely ruling though. The precedent was set in the early 90's. I don't know how different the laws are now compared to then or how much room there is for interpretation, but right now there is only one point on the graph and that one point says the players have a decent enough reason to try.

[Jimx29]

We, the Super Bowl winning Green Bay Packer fans are the losers

[Tony Oday]

Kenny Brit is now in jail :) I love it! These players are idiots and I hope we start hearing Bankruptcies start!

[Tarlam!]

We, the Super Bowl winning Green Bay Packer fans are the losers

I agree, but we, the SBWGBP fans have it easier than the fans of 31 other teams. Imagine being a Steelers' fan. Or worse - a Bears fan! Bears' fans must be in hell right now.

[Smeefers]

When I was in the military, they had advisor's telling us all the time how to save and invest our money. Most likely one out of 10 guys listened to them. I mean, when you are suddenly given anywhere between 5 and 20 k as a signing bonus and you're not even 21 yet, well, lets just say no matter how many times they talked to us, we didn't listen and we pretty much ended up pissing away our good fortune. I can see the same thing happening to the NFL players. I'm not excusing their actions, everyone is responsible for they're own, I'm just floating out a reason behind it. It's sad, but sometimes that's just how the world works. So in a way this may actually be good for these guys, teach them that when the well dries up, there ain't no more water, so perhaps it's time to put a little away for a rainy day.

[Tarlam!]

I get what you're saying, Smeef. But the jist of what I quoted is that there is no guide book to not getting screwed. That's seems to be a deficit that can be closed quite quickly, simply by players that have been screwed sharing their experiences with the NFLPA, even anonomously and making the anecdotes available.

Secondly, if players are as gullible as they seem to be, the NFLPA should use that to the advantage of the players by getting them into savings programmes early in their careers. They can use the same tricks as the con people, but with a better result for the player.

Just sayin'...

[Smeefers]

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make em drink.

[KYPack]

One thing knocks me out. The old time players seemed to be better prepared for strike in their day & they didn't make squat.

These present guys make way more money, but some of 'em are "broker" than the guys from the old days.

[Tarlam!]

One thing knocks me out. The old time players seemed to be better prepared for strike in their day & they didn't make squat.

These present guys make way more money, but some of 'em are "broker" than the guys from the old days.

That's because the cash flow requirements of the old guys were lower. Money went further for one, the cost of, say, a house relative to income was way lower. Same for cars. And, the lending opportunities weren't the same as they are today. They were far more traditional and conservative. So, there was less chance to over borrow.

[get louder at lambeau]

That's because the cash flow requirements of the old guys were lower. Money went further for one, the cost of, say, a house relative to income was way lower. Same for cars. And, the lending opportunities weren't the same as they are today. They were far more traditional and conservative. So, there was less chance to over borrow.

Plus, they didn't wear hundreds of thousands of dollars in jewelry back in the day and drive Bentleys and Maseratis.

[Scott Campbell]

Jay Feeley is retarded.

[Scott Campbell]

One thing knocks me out. The old time players seemed to be better prepared for strike in their day & they didn't make squat.

These present guys make way more money, but some of 'em are "broker" than the guys from the old days.


Not surprising to me at all. People making big bucks have higher burn rates. Frugality is a foreign concept to many of them. The appearance of wealth is not the same thing as wealth.

[Patler]

For players to be in financial trouble right now is pure foolishness on their parts, because the lock out hasn't affected incomes so far, except for the few that were due roster bonuses that went unpaid. No one would have gotten pay checks now anyway, not until the season starts (ignoring the small TC per diem they get before the season).

The article suggests that it is common for players to borrow from each other during the off season. Seems kind of ridiculous. Even the youngest, lowest paid players were being paid more each month from September to December than they made in a year before getting to the NFL You would think they could make it last a little longer than they do.

[Patler]

Not surprising to me at all. People making big bucks have higher burn rates. Frugality is a foreign concept to many of them. The appearance of wealth is not the same thing as wealth.

Yup, living to the max that your current income will support is a certain path to financial problems.

[Tony Oday]

Chris Rock said it!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kglXIoiXDFM

[SkinBasket]

Chris Rock said it!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kglXIoiXDFM

So did Chappelle


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fg6J1Skptbs

[Little Whiskey]

So did Tosh


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tU5KJt-NgVA

[Tarlam!]

Am I racist for laughing really hard at those last two vids? (I can't open Tony's due to copyright issues).

[Little Whiskey]

try this one Tarlam


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4m37JkkGjAY&feature=related

[Tarlam!]

DAMNIT!!! It's a UMG vid and they won't work in Germany (copyright).

[get louder at lambeau]

The Chis Rock one basically jokes about the same things as the others, Tarlam. He says white people get money and start Walmart, while blacks get money and buy rims and gold chains.

Personally, I'm offended! (That's the politically correct response, right?)

[SkinBasket]

The continued reparations bit:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFpdiwdGA_o

[SkinBasket]

And the unedited, but poorer quality full bit...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3mfF7Ibwsw

[Tarlam!]

Very clever stuff......