Who to side with

[fordfixer]

The Owners or the Players I think I'll side with the Fans. We should show them who has the real power, and stop spending our hard earned money on going to games and buying their products. It wont happen but it would be fun to see

[birtikidis]

Re: Who to side with

You know as much as I hate Chad Johnson I had to agree with him.. It's sickening that Millionaires and Billionaires are B!tching at each other over money. He took like 100 fans out to dinner and made a big deal about how stupid this situation is.

[fordfixer]

Re: Who to side with

You know as much as I hate Chad Johnson I had to agree with him.. It's sickening that Millionaires and Billionaires are B!tching at each other over money. He took like 100 fans out to dinner and made a big deal about how stupid this situation is.

for Chad

[Steelers>NFL]

Re: Who to side with

I side with the owners 80%. And players @ 20%.
The owners have lot more responsibilities than the players.
A lot of people depend on the owners and their money.
Players just play (work), and spend their money. Or save it.

[Oviedo]

Re: Who to side with

I side with the owners 80%. And players @ 20%.
The owners have lot more responsibilities than the players.
A lot of people depend on the owners and their money.
Players just play (work), and spend their money. Or save it.

The owners are in it for the long term, the players for the short term and Demarcus Smith for himself.

The Rooneys and Maras have been better stewards of the game than any player or union thug. They will continue in that role.

Remember a strong union dictating terms gets you Major League Baseball.

[flippy]

Re: Who to side with

I side with some of the owners and some of the players, but mostly the fans and the game itself.

At the end of the day I still have many forms of entertainment. And if the NFL wants to become less entertaining, I'll spend more of my money/time elsewhere. No big deal really. There's still hockey and NCAA sports and WWE and UFC and baseball and soccer and lacrosse and minor league sports and horse racing and NASCAR and golf and the list goes on and on.

There's movies, tv, books, travel, art galleries, broadway, and on and on.

More things to do than I have time for.

Who really cares about the NFL in the grand scheme of life?

There are many more enriching experiences in life. A life that's too short.

Hopefully fans will stop watching DirectTV, NFL Network, ESPN, Fox and any other broadcaster of NFL games.

How dare they sell my eyeballs anyway?

At the end of the day, these arrogant knuckleheads on both sides of this standstill are fighting over my eyeballs.

Maybe it's time we close our eyes.

F em all!!!!!

[steeler_fan_in_t.o.]

Re: Who to side with

Personal feelings aside, politics aside, everything else aside.......here is the way that the game is best for the fans.

Owners have complete control.

Here is the reason why. As a fan, you want your team to always make moves on football merit, not based on contracts, salary, or union considerations. The only question would be "are we building to be a contender today or are we rebuilding to be a contender down the road?"

- Championship teams would not be torn apart because winning players get too expensive.
- Players would not be traded now because of fear that they leave in free agency.
- Players would not hold out in order to renegotiate or demand a trade.
- Better players would not be cut because cheaper kids could be picked up at a fraction of the cost.

Now, I am not suggesting that this could ever happen at this point or that I would personally want it to happen. I also don't believe that the owners would act responsibly with absolute control. But, keep in mind that the more control the owners lose the more the game becomes about money and less about football.

[Oviedo]

Re: Who to side with

Personal feelings aside, politics aside, everything else aside.......here is the way that the game is best for the fans.

Owners have complete control.

Here is the reason why. As a fan, you want your team to always make moves on football merit, not based on contracts, salary, or union considerations. The only question would be "are we building to be a contender today or are we rebuilding to be a contender down the road?"

- Championship teams would not be torn apart because winning players get too expensive.
- Players would not be traded now because of fear that they leave in free agency.
- Players would not hold out in order to renegotiate or demand a trade.
- Better players would not be cut because cheaper kids could be picked up at a fraction of the cost.

Now, I am not suggesting that this could ever happen at this point or that I would personally want it to happen. I also don't believe that the owners would act responsibly with absolute control. But, keep in mind that the more control the owners lose the more the game becomes about money and less about football.

Well said. I can't believe that there is anyone who has not learned a lesson from the demise of baseball. The owners lost control and the players gained it. It ruined the game and is the primary reason why half of the league doesn't matter except as schedule filler by July.

Do we really want football to become like this?????

[ikestops85]

Re: Who to side with

I used to be a huge baseball fan. I followed the Pirates religiously ... Clemente was my boyhood hero. I haven't been to see a MLB game since they went on strike in the mid-90s. I decided I wouldn't give the players or owners another nickle of my money. That really sucked for my son because he didn't have the memories like I did of father and son going to an opening day game.

Instead I took him to minor league games where the players would spend hours talking to you and willingly signed autographs. Scouts were in the stands and he could talk to them as they had their radar guns on the pitchers. Overall that was probably a better experience for him than having him watch some primma donnas play and spend $10 bucks for a hot dog and a coke for people who didn't give a sh!t about him.

I hope it doesn't come to that with football but it's looking like it might. These players and owners feel that they are bullet proof and they won't feel the effects of a strike/lockout. How they don't see the state of the economy and how many games were not sold out this year is beyond me. They've had it too good for too long. They should have been working on a deal for months instead of starting to meet a week before the deadline. They better get their act together soon or they will start to lose fans.

[feltdizz]

Re: Who to side with

I side with the players because those are the guys I cheer for.... I remember the players names, stats, attitudes and accolades. If the owner of the Steelers or any team changes I don't give a damn because I don't turn on the game to watch them.

The game will go on and if it's not the NFL it will be UFL, Canadian, College, HS, tackle, flag football, 2 hand touch, Madden, knee football etc...

I grew up playing the game... I didn't grow up wanting to own it.

and one last thing. Baseball SUCKS! It's fun to play and hard to watch. If you had 40 competitive teams it would still suck because there are too many games, half of them are during working hours and the rest are worse then chinese water torture.

[Mister Pittsburgh]

Re: Who to side with

I will take the owners side. They have a lot more to pay for throughout the season. I also don't want the players gaining an upper hand on them and the NFL to turn into MLB where Dan Snyders approach is actually rewarded.

[feltdizz]

Re: Who to side with

Football is way too much of a team sport to become like baseball.

[BURGH86STEEL]

Re: Who to side with

Players are the product. There will be no professional football played without the best of the best players.

What will happen if the players cave in and give the owners 1 billion dollars more off top? How will they invest that extra billion per season? Build 2 billion dollar stadiums? Pocket the money? Will the salary cap be reduced? Will teams be forced to cut certain players to get under the cap? Will the owners use that extra billion to expand in Europe or somewhere else in an attempt to make more money? I believe the US market does not have much more cash to give. At this point, I am not a big fan of expansion over seas.

The system as it was appeared to be pretty good. It probably only needed a few changes. I don't know if taking 1 billion dollars more a year away from the players is necessary. I guess this is what the players want to find out.

[BackwoodsSteeler]

Re: Who to side with

I would love to see the owners stick together, and now that the union no longer exists, tell them toi pound sand. Reduce the highest paid players to a 3 mill cap with an over-all 60 mill cap and then sit back and ask these guys where they are going to go to make a few hundred thousand a year. Most of these guysa could not hold a job as oil changer at Jiffy Lube.

What I wrote might be a streach, but things are out of hand. They are not partners with the owners, they are the product. They need to realize that. Without them, others will be drafted to play and we will all still show up and support the Steelers as a team. No man is worth 10-15-20 mill a year. They are not curing cancer, they are playing a game.

[flippy]

Re: Who to side with

If the players really want to take a stand, start a new league. But that would make them owners and they'd have to fight themselves.