In reading that the NFLPA is now advising the incoming rookies to boycott the draft, it seems to me that act in itself proves the decertification is a shame...if there is no longer an NFLPA, why are they giving advice to the rookies ?? Or to any other player for that matter ?? Too bad I'm not a judge....this act alone tells me the actions taken by the NFLPA are a sham....

 

They are still a trade union, and are able to provide advice.

I'm not sure why any incoming rookie would participate in a draft when there is no CBA. Just sign with whichever owner offers you the most.

 

Any smart business, hell, any smart person, "stockpiles" money in case of hard times. The players should have done the same.

 

A rainy day fund for "hard times" and stockpiling money for an entire season off are two completely different things, IMO.

 

Yeah I don't know of any business that wouldn't prepare for the worst case scenario. I'm sure most players stockpiled their money as well.

 

It still doesn't show intent. As a business you should prepare for the worst case scenario.

 

Good point, but I guess it really all depends on how long the owners have been stockpiling money and if there's any way to prove that lockout was the plan from day 1. Doubt there is anyway to do that, so I see your point.

 

I disagree. A good business, and good businessmen, prepare for the worst. Again, smart businesses and smart people prepare for the unexpected and/or worst case scenario. If I lost my job today I could afford to keep living the same lifestyle I do now, plus pay all of my bills for at least a year without having to touch my retirement funds. There is nothing malicious or wrong with that.

 

The players will cave because most can't afford to miss even one paycheck. I'm sure some were smart with their money, but when 78% of all NFL players are bankrupt within 2 years after retirement I find it hard to believe that most have been saving up for a "rainy day".

 

I'm sure the owners have been "stockpiling", or SAVING, money for decades. You don't become a billionaire by blowing your money.

 

No, you become a billionaire by investing your money back into your company or putting money to work for you in other investment opportunities. Which is very different than keeping large sums of money liquid in anticipation of a complete shut down.

All that aside, I'm not saying it's necessarily wrong for the owners to save money in anticipation of bad times. But you have to realize that for a billionaire or corporation to stash money away for a rainy day is a lot easier than a player, especially if it's a newer player on the lower end of the pay scale. So legality aside, I think it's wrong to just say the NFL teams saved money all players should have too. Some players will be fine, others won't either because they don't have the luxury you and I might have had with being educated about money or they just haven't had time to earn enough to save for significant time off.

 

lol...investing your money is saving your money. If you just put your money in a mattress, and don't invest it, inflation will slowly eat it away.

And save the sob story about the player on the "low" end of the pay scale. They come straight out of school and earn at LEAST $350,000. If thye can't save any of that they are stupid. The average FAMILY earns about $50K a year in this country. That means they make 7x's that amount their first year. And that's the bare minimum.

No, if the players haven't saved any, which most likely the did not, they are stupid.

 

I'm not sure what you are referring to. Can you clarify? Right now it seems like you are trying to join two things not really related?

 

It really depends on your definition of investing. Yeah, stashing money away in a CD, brokerage account, mutual fund, IRA, etc is technically both saving and investing money. But billionaires and corporations invest much differently than an individual. They purchase assets, companies, etc. They use money to expand their own business. Stashing liquid money away in the event of a shutdown looks much different than this kind of "saving / investing" and it would be obvious to any accountant. Not trying to say it's legal or illegal, just stating the facts.

EXACTLY. They come straight out of school making a large sum of money and placed in an environment where spending in excess is the norm. Stupid is an unfair word to use. These are kids who simply have not been educated in money and finance. You have to try and look through someone else's lenses every now and again. I can see by your username and tag that you were / are a marine. (BTW, thank you for your service! :up:) Now I don't know this for sure, but while you're serving your country in foreign lands and getting paid (not as much as you deserve), it might be easier to save up some money when you have few expenses. At least this is what I've heard from other service men and women. It might be more difficult for someone else to save up that kind of rainy day fund while having normal day to day living expenses. All I'm trying to say here is everyone's situation is different. Not everyone has had the same education about money, and not everyone has the same opportunities to save. To compare everyone without factoring in their own unique circumstances is unfair in my opinion.

 

Players are funny. It couldn't possibly be preparation for the possibility of a strike/lockout, no of course not. Id' like to ask the players if any of them have money in the bank. They must spend 100% of all their money, or it' shows an intent to strike.

 

Its related in they broke their agreement with the union as the judge ruled. The NFL trying to cut the players out of the deal I don't think speaks to intent of them not expecting/trying to negotiate a deal. It certainly didn't help I'm sure.

 

so your sayin stringer is that there might be a loop hole that allows Ross to sign Patrick Peterson or Marcel Dareus?

 

Theoretically if there is no CBA then there is no structure to support a draft. It really depends on what happens in court though, because the judge will likely impose rules that are very close to the rules of the 2010 season.

 

Sure, that might be applicable if the players actually were on strike.

 

Well this action is only in response to the owners action of taking away health insurance on the families of players (this happened the other day). I thought that was incredibly petty of the owners, and a nuciance for players who may have a wife or children already in treatment for some kind of illness. Now they may have to change doctors or hospitals, etc. just because the owners acted very, very petty.

 

They're at war so to speak. All is fair and considering that the players have the upper hand by discontinuing to be a union. The only way to gain the upper hand is to force the players to pony up as much of their own money as possible.