free agency 2011

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Yes because the owners are legally forbidden from using replacement players. There will be a season, probably just not an offseason like we're used to.

When did Congress pass a bill - - and have a President sign it into law - - saying the owners in the NFL could not use replacement players?

Or did that happen in each and every state where the NFL has a team?

[scott.sharrer]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

When did Congress pass a bill - - and have a President sign it into law - - saying the owners in the NFL could not use replacement players?

Or did that happen in each and every state where the NFL has a team?

It isn't law as in a federal law. Using the word unlawful was a misuse of the word. After the previous NFL lockout, it was a NFL decision to put in "rules" (since I can't think of a good word to describe it) to prevent replacement players from being used again.

There will be a season next year, I have no doubts, just I think the offseason will be cut really short. Players nor owners, nor the NFL for that matter, want to go without a season because that would be a full year with none of them making money. They owners will still have to pay for their stadium leases and all that crap, would get no endorsement money, would probably see a huge decrease in merchandise sales and so on. So in reality, the NFL, and each team, is in essesence a business, no season means no income.

As far as free agency, I am probably being a homer on this one, but I would actually like to see us do very little. Wait until other teams spend their big money, after that players generally scale down the amount they ask for, sign players to smaller contracts, trade away about 15-20 of our own roster and get draft picks and players that way. We need to go young, stop getting veterans that are 30+ in age. Look at how Philly is doing after taking on a youth movement.