Replacement Players

[tmandoug1]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Well, I think you're probably making a lot of generalizations. But regardless, not sure that's quite what this discussion is about. Would you watch replacement players?

I stated in the post that I would not watch replacements.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by tmandoug1

I stated in the post that I would not watch replacements.

Got it. Must have missed it

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

the 4/1 joke that just keeps giving

Washington Redskins Become First NFL Team To Hold Tryouts for Replacement Players - Hogs Haven

Update: Ok, so as you know this was our April Fool's joke. At first we had the phone # go to the Redskins Club Level ticket office, but they politely asked us to take it down after getting bombarded with calls. So we switched it to the Cowboys ticket office, and after 3 days they did the same. I'd say this joke was a success.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at people...lol

[SmootSmack]

This is the first time I noticed SBXVII had fallen for it too, along with Brody.

Man, I hope neither of them have been training non-stop the past two weeks for this "This is my shot!"

[Daseal]

Yeah, I typed my post first thing this morning. I never learn. I understood that the owners have contracts with the players, but I thought with lack of a union a lot more would change than actually changed. Thanks all for the clarification.

[Nomad]

I would cancel the NFL Sunday ticket. I wouldnt watch one game, even if we started out 11-0......

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

If the owners decided to play any games, they would be on the hook for the current contracts of the NFL Players. You think they are going to pay 100+ million each team and have those players sit at home watching scabs play? Not only that, it would kill the quality of the NFL during that time.

I don't see any scenario where the league could lockout the players and still continue business as usual with scabs. Again, I think you are confusing a player lockout and a owner lockout. Not the same.

1. Most NFL players have year by year contracts so that they can be voided without cost.

2. If the current players do not show up for work, it would be difficult for them to demand payment since they chose to withhold their services.

There are several good reasons why owners ought to be VERY reluctant to play games with replacement players, but having to pay the current players is not one of them.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

1. Most NFL players have year by year contracts so that they can be voided without cost.

2. If the current players do not show up for work, it would be difficult for them to demand payment since they chose to withhold their services.

There are several good reasons why owners ought to be VERY reluctant to play games with replacement players, but having to pay the current players is not one of them.

1) ...if the owners lock them out there very well might have to pay(or a portion) them upon return I would have to see the contract language,players don't return it's a strike and you don't get payed while on the piket line.


....as for replacement players nope.....didn't watch it then and not now ....I'll just go to the local High school and watch or maybe gets tickets for Navy.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

This is the first time I noticed SBXVII had fallen for it too, along with Brody.

Man, I hope neither of them have been training non-stop the past two weeks for this "This is my shot!"

Think they can pass the "Hayensworth" test?

[Hog1]

Beware the clerical shuttle..........