WalterFootball.com - Detailed NFL Mock Drafts, Player Prospect Rankings, and One of the Largest Mock Draft Databases on the Web

Debaclation Nation

Welcome to the new Debaclation Nation, a fancy title for this Web site's new poll center.

Each week, I'll post an interesting (or boring) Debaclation Nation poll so you can vote and argue over it. I'll keep the Debaclation Nation polls archived, so you can go back and keep arguing or see who was right.

So much for the new CBA being signed on Thursday. Who has been the bigger jerk in the past 24-48 hours, the players or the owners?

July 22

No CBA: Who has been the bigger jerk in the past 24-48 hours, the players or the owners?

We all thought football was saved. When the NFL owners finished up their 2-hour lunch and voted 31-0 (Al Davis abstaining, of course, because it was daytime so he couldn't go outside since he melts in the sun), we all thought the CBA was a done deal.

Well, at least the people on Twitter thought so. From what I read in my timeline, all of us football fans were happy - until, that is, the NFL players alerted the media that they would not be voting on the CBA on Thursday night, and according to George Wilson, perhaps not on Friday night either.

The NFL players haven't had enough time to look at the document. That's fair. However, players like New Orleans' Heath Evans, Jacksonville's Mike Sims-Walker and Buffalo's George Wilson expressed their frustration via Twitter and the actual media, citing that the NFL owners have deceived them by putting stuff into the CBA that was never agreed upon.

So, are the NFL owners sly douche bags who put pressure on the NFL players as a PR move? Perhaps. But something isn't right. Evans and Wilson complained about new stuff being in the CBA, yet they say they haven't even seen it. Evans admitted as much on NFL Network. Wilson, meanwhile, was asked repeatedly by Paul Burmeister why he couldn't, in his own words, take the new agreement to his teammates. Wilson ducked Burmeister's question each time. I watched the interview with my dad as we were eating dinner. The third time Wilson avoided the question, my dad bellowed, "F*** you, a**hole, you're not answering because you're a f***ing liar!"

Here's my take on all of this nonsense - the owners did in fact use Thursday's stunt as a PR move, but it wouldn't make sense for them to change the agreement of the CBA. I just believe that the NFL players feel disrespected that the owners did it this way, and they may unfortunately delay voting on this CBA out of pure stubbornness.

Let's hope it doesn't come to that. Some NFL players often don't take to kindly to being disrespected because they believe respect should be served to them on a silver platter. However, we can only hope that they see the bigger picture - that they make money playing football, and they're going to lose their fan base - and as a consequence, their money - each day they delay signing this CBA.

As I tweeted (@walterfootball), "NFL players want more money. NFL players want fewer practices. I'd be happy just to play football for a living. #wewantfootball."

TRcasTitans31 quickly replied to me, "Owners want more money and slipped unapproved things into the CBA, I'd be happy just to be a billionaire. Works both ways." Not quite. The owners own the teams. They can do whatever they want. It's their business. NFL players, meanwhile, don't have to play football. They're free to sell insurance, drive trucks or flip hamburgers. No one's forcing them to play football, despite what Adrian Peterson may think.

But the NFL players won't sell insurance, drive trucks or flip hambugers because they have a far better job than 99.9 percent of the people in America. But for some reason, they just don't seem to realize that.

That's my take. I think the NFL players are the bigger jerks, but don't let me sway you either way. Vote on whom you think is the bigger jerk, and discuss it in the comment board below the poll.

Debaclation Nation

No CBA: Who has been the bigger jerk this past 24-48 hours?

Version 2.03

ironduke 07-22-2011 04:19 pm xxx.xxx.xxx.169 (total posts: 8)

@jake - No one is saying professional athletes are poor. The reality of this is that people are paid according to their value. These guys (and their names/likenesses) are EXTREMELY valuable. Why wouldnt they make a lot of money?

You really can't compare the salaries of unknown workers with public figures. What we do for a living has nothing to do with professional sports.

Funk 07-22-2011 04:14 pm xxx.xxx.xxx5.10 (total posts: 2)

Anyone who uses the "owners can choose not to play" must not work for a Union or know how a union works. If you work for a Union the union will ALWAYS try to get all it can but originally they were to get safety in the workplace, reasonable hours, and reasonable pay. Do you think the NFL would voluntarily provide all of the safety and health benefits if a Union had not fought for it? Do you think that YOU would have a 40-hour workweek or Overtime if it was not for a Union? Owners of any business will not voluntarily do anything that impacts their bottom line profits unless they have to. I certainly do agree the Players are the ones at fault in the last 24-48 hours due to obviously stalling things but if they are looking to make sure everything in the CBA is correct before they sign then I understand that and everyone else should too...ALWAYS read everything before you sign, especially a 10 year deal. On a side note, I heard on ESPN radio this morning that Upshaw admitted at the last CBA negotiations that they got a totally awesome deal for the Players and that the NFLPA understood and expected that things would swing back towards the middle/Owner's side when the next CBA came up. Sorry NFLPA, but you had a sweet ride and now it is time to settle the tab. From what I hear, the deal is still really great for the Players so they need to jump at it and swallow some pride. These guys are great athletes but are not sought for their intelligence or business acumen, so leave it to the reps that you put in place to agree to the deal and go hit the gym so I don't have to watch you crumple into a ball when you pull a hammy in the preseason. Thanks.

Rummy 07-22-2011 04:06 pm xxx.xxx.xxx8.70 (total posts: 2)

@roger; yes atleast College football is a pure sport without the misgivings of fraud, pay to play, and arbitrary champions

Roger 07-22-2011 03:29 pm xxx.xxx.xxx.245 (total posts: 1)

Originally it was the owners, Jerry Jones wanted more money for his stadium, so they killed the old CBA. Now it is the players, and the owners need to realize the players are pampered millionaire children, and put a clause in the CBA saying how proud the owners are of the players and how much they love them.

They are all jerks in my book and it has already soured me on the NFL. Thank God for college football!!!

Jake 07-22-2011 03:23 pm xxx.xxx.xxx.246 (total posts: 2)

@ironduke the league minimum salary for a rookie is $285,000. The league minimum player still has a salary close to three times mine (pharmacist). I can easily manage my money, and I know people who make a lot less than me and have no trouble at all managing, so why can't the NFL players do the same? Most guys get a free or reduced college degree, so they have the ability to go get a real job. Quit buying into the athletes thinking they are poor and underpaid it's b/s. Some guys I understand are left with life long injuries and are unable to work, but that happens every day in the police force, fire fighters, solderes, etc and they make a fraction of what the so called "little guy" in the NFL makes. At the same time they know the risks and they chose to play football for a living.

And you're wrong, 98% of the population doesn't have the ability to play in the NFL, but I'm saying that if even a choice between working a regular job and playing football for a living. It would be football everytime. The players need to be thankful for what they have and know that they are leaving a bad taste in a lot of fans mouth that are the real payers of their salary.

ironduke 07-22-2011 03:09 pm xxx.xxx.xxx.169 (total posts: 8)

A verse for the NFL

"When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice; but when the wicked beareath rule, the people mourn" - Proverbs 29:2

Pay the players and stop lying & stealing from your season ticket holders.

n4ry4 07-22-2011 03:08 pm xxx.xxx.xxx54.3 (total posts: 4)

@Scavenger...dude of course the players carry more real risk. No player knows if they'll be able to make money two months from now--any of them could suffer a career-ending injury on any given play, and statistically, most of them won't be able to make money in football 5 years from now, longer than the average career lasts. However, given the wild popularity of the NFL, no owner has to face the prospect of suddenly not being profitable. I don't think anyone believes the sport won't be profitable for the foreseeable future and beyond. Plus, a player can't cash in and "sell" his career for a one-time billion dollars or so, but an owner can sell any time they want. Owners' assets--the team they run--hold their value far longer than players' assets--their football skill. So yes, in reality the greater personal risk belongs to the players. Now, what's "fair" in any given negotiation offer in terms of wages and benefits is a matter of opinion and both sides will always want more money, and neither side is wrong for doing so.

Travis 07-22-2011 02:46 pm xxx.xxx.xxx4.10 (total posts: 1)

The only reason the players haven't voted yes on this thing is because they are trying to save face on the whole recertifying their union mess. They can't have it look like decertifying was a ploy for the lawsuit. I think this is all done by Monday.

Scavenger 07-22-2011 02:20 pm xxx.xxx.xxx.105 (total posts: 4)

@n4ry4...dude you are such a player apologist. The players are meat...they sell thier bodies to the darkside to get beat and battered and they get paid rather well to do so...yeah maybe for only 3 years. They don't have the "risk". What they offer and how they are awarded is pretty clear. The "risk" is to the owner operating a business....ticket sales, promotions, legal fees, tax payers, staff that goes beyond players, vendors for the facility, coaches and operations personell. What the hell does a player have to worry about? Can I still run fast and catch the ball? Can I stop this big dude in front of me from crushing the QB? There are dudes on the street that could play this game at high high level and for significantly less money. Don't be a fool!

n4ry4 07-22-2011 01:44 pm xxx.xxx.xxx54.3 (total posts: 4)

all these comments on how the poor owners are being taken advantage of, and that the NFL wouldn't exist without them are assinine. Well guess what, if the players didn't invest their hard work for years and years, into their football ability, no one would be getting 48% of the $9B pie.

Just because the players are young prima donna f*cks doesn't mean they should be locked out by 32+ owners. Owners are welcome to go and get another job if they feel like they're being treated unfairly. Why are the players not allowed to make whatever offer for their services they want? If you sacrificed your health on the football field for a company to make it wildly profitable, see how long your body will last, and then you can make the arguement for the "poor" owners

Rummy 07-22-2011 01:20 pm xxx.xxx.xxx8.70 (total posts: 2)

all these comments on how the poor players are being taken advantage of, and that the NFL wouldn't exist without them are assinine. Well guess what, if the owners didn't invest their hard earned $ years and years ago, into the players, practice facilities, coach, scouting, stadiums, municipal by laws, promotion, etc. no one would be getting 52% of the $9B pie.

Just because the owners are old crusty f*cks doesn't mean they should be held hostage by 1500+ employees. They are welcome to go and get another job if they feel like their being treated unfairly. Why are the owners not allowed to make a profit? If you owned a company and 50+% of your expenses went to wages, see how long your business would survive, and then you can make the arguement for the "poor" players

Football Please!! 07-22-2011 01:08 pm xxx.xxx.xxx8.34 (total posts: 2)

Sure it would exist. There would be 5'10 Quarterbacks and slower corners/backs, but they would be happy to play for 100k a year. I would quit my job today for equal money to play football. It's a game I played for free or had to play to pay for 12 years. Both sides are wrong, but the players are missing the point.

ironduke 07-22-2011 12:59 pm xxx.xxx.xxx.169 (total posts: 8)

@FootballPlease!! - The players are the employees AND the product. Without them, the NFL would not exist.

n4ry4 07-22-2011 12:58 pm xxx.xxx.xxx54.3 (total posts: 4)

Players carry far more and deeper personal risk than owners.

I have yet to see a study showing that the average NFL owner only enjoys an average of 3-5 years of profitability, followed by a substantial increase in the likelihood of debilitating mental and physical ailments. But that's a reality for all players.

ironduke 07-22-2011 12:53 pm xxx.xxx.xxx.169 (total posts: 8)

@scavenger - Just like people watch the UFL & Arena football.

Pages: 1 2 34 5 6

Debaclation Nation

Leave a comment