2011 NFL Lockout Thread

[Balta1701]

Go Roger!

The NFL is considering having the World Anti-Doping Agency oversee testing of players for performance-enhancing drugs if a federal appeals court forces the league to end the lockout and implement rules for operating the league this season, The New York Times reported.

 

The Times cited an unidentified NFL official briefed on its planning.

 

"Our thought has been we have always been looking to make our program as effective as it can be," the official told The Times.

 

The newspaper reports bringing in WADA could eventually lead to players being blood tested for human growth hormone for the first time.

 

"There have been some things, HGH is one of them, that the union has resisted," the official told the newspaper. "When we get to the point where there is not a party involved, maybe we should consider what we consider important to keep pace with science and trends."

[southsider2k5]

Good.

[klaus kinski]

Ha-and no union to do anything about it. Thus ends Manny Ramirez football career (before it started)

[Milkman delivers]

That's awesome news.

 

I have always found it hilarious that any union would oppose blood tests. It's basically just admitting that the players use HGH or some form of banned substance that can't be detected by urine tests.

[Balta1701]

That's awesome news.

 

I have always found it hilarious that any union would oppose blood tests. It's basically just admitting that the players use HGH or some form of banned substance that can't be detected by urine tests.

There's more of a privacy thing though...I wouldn't want my insurance company having a sample of my blood, for example, because they'd be judging me based on the chances of getting a disease through no fault of my own. An NFL team with access, even partial access to a blood sample could do a ton of advanced work these days, and more within a few years.

[Milkman delivers]

There's more of a privacy thing though...I wouldn't want my insurance company having a sample of my blood, for example, because they'd be judging me based on the chances of getting a disease through no fault of my own. An NFL team with access, even partial access to a blood sample could do a ton of advanced work these days, and more within a few years.

 

So, what exactly is your argument? I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at here. I imagine that these tests would be conducted by an outside agency that is only looking for banned substances and only reporting back to the league/teams that the player is either clean or that he tested positive for a specific substance.

[Balta1701]

So, what exactly is your argument? I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at here. I imagine that these tests would be conducted by an outside agency that is only looking for banned substances and only reporting back to the league/teams that the player is either clean or that he tested positive for a specific substance.

My argument is that "if you put me in the place of an NFL player, I would not want my blood taken, and I'd make sure there were a whole helluva lot of stipulations/requirements to how it was used if I had it taken, and I'd make sure I got something useful back in negotiations in exchange for having my blood taken."

[Milkman delivers]

My argument is that "if you put me in the place of an NFL player, I would not want my blood taken, and I'd make sure there were a whole helluva lot of stipulations/requirements to how it was used if I had it taken, and I'd make sure I got something useful back in negotiations in exchange for having my blood taken."

 

I understand that point of view, but you also have to understand that simply by taking that stance, you're going to seem like an obvious steroid user. I agree that they have to make the agreement ironclad so that the use of the blood testing doesn't take a big turn against the players (such as the finding of a disease that may cause a player to be cut or not signed again once he hits free agency).

[Harry Chappas]

I understand that point of view, but you also have to understand that simply by taking that stance, you're going to seem like an obvious steroid user. I agree that they have to make the agreement ironclad so that the use of the blood testing doesn't take a big turn against the players (such as the finding of a disease that may cause a player to be cut or not signed again once he hits free agency).

 

Not being a smartass here but has there ever been an instance where a player was released after sustaining something that would have been revealed in a blood test?

 

I would actually think that a blood test is part of the physical a player takes and HGH is not tested.

 

With the physical nature of their sport wouldn't it be good to know exactly what the health status is of a player when drafted and signed?

[Kyyle23]

Not being a smartass here but has there ever been an instance where a player was released after sustaining something that would have been revealed in a blood test?

 

I would actually think that a blood test is part of the physical a player takes and HGH is not tested.

 

With the physical nature of their sport wouldn't it be good to know exactly what the health status is of a player when drafted and signed?

 

I totally agree with this. If a player is found out to have a heart irregularity or a condition such as spinal stenosis at the combine, then they are going to be rooted out and probably will go undrafted as a result. A similar situation was Eddy Curry in the NBA, when the Bulls found out about his heart condition they wanted no part of it and justifiably so. None of these teams want to be the team that is sued because a family member deems them liable for allowing the player to play.

 

When it comes to the health of these players, lets face it, there is not much that is private. It is in the teams best interest to have the knowledge of some sort of a defect in a player before allowing them to potentially kill themselves in an extremely violent sport. A blood test is not going to be invading any more privacy than what these guys go through at the combine. And on top of that, I highly doubt the WADA is going to be testing for anything other than what they are there for, dope in the blood.

[southsider2k5]

I totally agree with this. If a player is found out to have a heart irregularity or a condition such as spinal stenosis at the combine, then they are going to be rooted out and probably will go undrafted as a result. A similar situation was Eddy Curry in the NBA, when the Bulls found out about his heart condition they wanted no part of it and justifiably so. None of these teams want to be the team that is sued because a family member deems them liable for allowing the player to play.

 

When it comes to the health of these players, lets face it, there is not much that is private. It is in the teams best interest to have the knowledge of some sort of a defect in a player before allowing them to potentially kill themselves in an extremely violent sport. A blood test is not going to be invading any more privacy than what these guys go through at the combine. And on top of that, I highly doubt the WADA is going to be testing for anything other than what they are there for, dope in the blood.

 

I think in Eddy's case it was more like he was fat and lazy too.

[Balta1701]

I think in Eddy's case it was more like he was fat and lazy too.

Not for why the Bulls let him go

[Kyyle23]

I think in Eddy's case it was more like he was fat and lazy too.

 

that certainly made it easy for the bulls to say sayonara

[JorgeFabregas]

I remember that half season that Curry was good with the Bulls. That was actually pretty fun. Wrong thread.

[southsider2k5]

I remember that half season that Curry was good with the Bulls. That was actually pretty fun. Wrong thread.

 

Eh, Eddy is doing about as much work as the NFLers right now, so it is all good.

[Brian]

I remember that half season that Curry was good with the Bulls. That was actually pretty fun. Wrong thread.

 

Kirk was throwing ally oops to him all game. It was fun. Than it went to his head.

[Balta1701]

Kirk was throwing ally oops to him all game. It was fun. Than it went to his head.

Part of it though was he had some terrible things happen elsewhere in his life.

 

He was really solid for about 1/2 of a season with the Knicks.

[Balta1701]

There are currently 4 different legal cases pending before 3 federal courts and 2 offices of the NLRB regarding the NFL Labor dispute and lockout.

 

That does not bode well for a season.

[Soxbadger]

I actually think this is starting to get so big that the NFL attorneys will begin to tell the NFL owners they need to settle.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6570486

 

The last thing the NFL or any of these leagues really want is for the Supreme Court or some other regulating body to get involved and start really trying to figure out whats going on here. At least thats the last thing Id want if I was the NFL.

[lostfan]

Eh, Eddy is doing about as much work as the NFLers right now, so it is all good.

You use the phrase "right now" but how is that different from when he played?

[fathom]

I think anyone associated with NIU is shocked it took Wolfe this long to get in trouble when he went to the NFL.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/break...0,2495439.story

[whitesoxfan101]

I think anyone associated with NIU is shocked it took Wolfe this long to get in trouble when he went to the NFL.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/break...0,2495439.story

 

I know I'm late with this response, but Wolfe did a great job faking it at NIU for the most part. He is a well spoken guy, and represented the school well when he talked anyways. In that sense, just NIU alums and fans on the outside were shocked by this story. But, anybody with behind the scenes knowledge had heard many stories about him. I remember his sophomore year, he missed the biggest game of the year because of an eye injury sustained in a barfight. It was played off as him getting hurt being a peacemaker, but anybody with half a brain knows that's BS.

Edited June 3, 2011 by whitesoxfan101

[lostfan]

Here is the next proposed CBA:

 

http://theredzone.org/BlogDescription/tabi...BA/Default.aspx

 

• Players get 48 percent of "all revenue," without extra $1-billion-plus off top that previously had been requested by owners.

 

• Players' share will never dip below 46.5 percent, under new formula being negotiated.

 

• Teams required to spend close to 100 percent of the salary cap.

 

• Rookie wage scale part of deal but still being "tweaked."

 

• Four years needed for unrestricted free-agent status. Certain tags will be retained, but still being discussed.

 

• 18-game regular season designated only as negotiable item and at no point is mandated in deal.

 

• New 16-game Thursday night TV package beginning in 2012.

 

• Owners still will get some expense credits that will allow funding for new stadiums.

 

• Retirees to benefit from improved health care, pension benefits as revenue projected to double to $18 million by 2016.

 

It looks like the Jones/Richardson/Kraft hardliner camp backed way down/lost... players made some concessions but aren't getting bent completely over, either.

Edited June 22, 2011 by lostfan

[Balta1701]

Which tells me I was right all along to be skeptical of the owner's statement that the league was going down but couldn't open its books to prove it.

[Chisoxfn]

Sounds like the big open item is the two sides getting comfortable on the rookie wage scale.