2008 NFL Season - Discuss it all Here

[tim_m]

NFL eyes 17th game to grow revenue, shorten preseason
By John Clayton
ESPN.com

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell raised the possibility of having a 17th regular-season game as an option to help settle some of the league's future labor problems.

"We are actually looking at that as one alternative," Goodell said Tuesday at the NFL owners meeting in Atlanta, the same day that the league's owners voted unanimously to opt out of their labor deal with the players' union two years early. "We think that may have an impact on some of the things we would want to talk to the players about. It's on the table."

A 17th regular-season game could replace a fourth preseason game and the possibility comes at a time that the league is not satisfied with the quality of the preseason. The league made a presentation to owners about ways to improve the current preseason Tuesday.

Under the current system, most NFL teams play 20 games -- four in the preseason and 16 during the regular season. Because of injury concerns to starters, many teams play starters for only a series in the preseason opener and often don't play starters in the final preseason game.

"We are not satisfied with the quality of the preseason right now," Goodell said. "We'd like to improve on that."

By adding a 17th regular-season game, more revenue could be created to help in negotiations for a new collective bargaining agreement. NFL owners voted 32-0 on Tuesday to shorten the collective bargaining agreement with the NFLPA to 2011, with 2010 being played without a salary cap.

"It would create new revenue," Goodell said. "Our thought process was we might reduce preseason by a game in return for that. Actually, the players would still play the same number of games. It could give us an opportunity to play a higher quality of football."

Goodell noted that the NFL used to have six preseason games.

"Now, it's become more of a year-round business," Goodell said. "Athletes come in better prepared for the season both physically and mentally. Is it necessary to play four preseason games to get the players prepared to play in the regular season?"

For competitive purposes, the ninth home game would alternate between the conferences every other year, should the NFL use the 17th game option.

NFL Players Association executive director Gene Upshaw didn't seem thrilled with the possibility of playing 17 regular-season games.

"No, it's great to have more revenue," Upshaw said. "Any discussion we've had with them about playing another game, they've always said, they would like to do it, but they don't want to pay for it. They say, 'Why should you be concerned, you get 60 percent?' But we also get paid on games played.

"We're not going to agree to play an extra game and not get paid for it. That's what they want us to do," he said. "That discussion is going to be very short."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3405076

[tim_m]

NFL owners vote unanimously to opt out of labor deal
By John Clayton
ESPN.com

ATLANTA -- The NFL officially notified its players union on Tuesday that it will opt out of the current collective bargaining agreement, which could lead to a season without a salary cap in 2010 and a possible lockout in 2011.

Owners voted unanimously Tuesday morning to opt out of the deal, which was extended in March 2006. The NFL had until November to opt out, but decided to do it early instead of waiting for the deadline.

The league, however, emphasized that it will keep negotiating with the NFL Players Association and said games will be played "without threat of interruption for at least the next three seasons."

"We have guaranteed three more years of NFL football," commissioner Roger Goodell said after the owners used the opt-out clause built into the agreement signed more than two years ago. "We are not in dire straits. We've never said that. But the agreement isn't working, and we're looking to get a more fair and equitable deal."

The decision by the owners was anticipated, although not this early. The 2006 agreement allowed either side to negate the contract by Nov. 8. Goodell said the owners acted early "to get talks rolling."

NFLPA executive director Gene Upshaw had been anticipating the early termination of the agreement. He met with owners two weeks ago, and from that meeting he asked for audited financial reports from owners to document their economic problems.

"Roger [Goodell] e-mailed me this morning [and] told me they had a unanimous agreement to terminate the deal," Upshaw said. "My response back to him? 'What a surprise.'"

"All this means is that we will have football now until 2010 and not until 2012," Upshaw added during a conference call. "We will move ahead. This just starts the clock ticking. If we can't reach agreement by 2010, then we go to no man's land, which is 2011."

Upshaw said Goodell's e-mail listed three reasons for the early termination: high labor costs, problems with the rookie pool and the league's inability, through the interpretation of the courts, to recoup bonuses of players who subsequently breach their contract or refuse to perform.

The highest-profile example of the latter was a court decision allowing Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick to keep $16.5 million in bonus money, despite pleading guilty to federal dogfighting charges and being sentenced to 23 months in federal prison.

According to the NFL, clubs are obligated by the collective bargaining agreement to spend almost $4.5 billion on player costs in 2008. Players received around 60 percent of league revenues. Growing costs of stadium construction and operations also figured into Tuesday's decision.

The owners also want a change in the system to distribute the money more to veterans than to unproven rookies. Their argument is based on a disparity in salaries that leaves them spending far more on unproven rookies than on dependable veterans.

"The current labor agreement does not adequately recognize the cost of generating the revenues of which the players receive the largest shares; nor does the agreement recognize that those costs have increased substantially -- and at an ever increasing rate -- in recent years during a difficult economic climate in our country," the NFL said.

The agreement signed two years ago was to last until 2013 with the option to terminate in 2011, which is what the owners did Tuesday. League officials and owners, including several who helped push through the last deal, have been saying for almost a year that while the previous contract may have been too beneficial to the owners, the current one had swung too far toward the players.

NFLPA outside counsel Jeffrey Kessler told The Wall Street Journal prior to Tuesday's announcement that if the owners were to opt out, the union "plans to ask for a greater share of revenues."

Kessler added that "Every deal we've gotten with them, we've received another increase."

"We are resolved to do our best to achieve a fair agreement that will allow labor peace to continue through and beyond the 2011 season," the league said Tuesday.

The debate will continue in negotiations and through the media over a course of months and years. Both sides conceded there might be no agreement until the deadline, which Upshaw suggested might not happen until the winter of 2010. That would be a year without a salary cap under terms of the deal.

"We'd like to get things done," Goodell said. "But often it's not until you have a deadline that people realize the consequences of not reaching a deal."

Upshaw added: "March of 2010 -- that's what we see as the realistic deadline. I'm not going to sell the players on a cap again. Once we go through the cap, why should we agree to it again?"

In other business at the league meetings, NFL owners voted to play the 2012 Super Bowl in Indianapolis, beating out Glendale, Ariz., and Houston. The Colts, who are opening a brand-new stadium this fall, lost out last year to the Dallas Cowboys' new stadium in Arlington, Texas, for the 2011 game.

As part of its bid, Indianapolis has envisioned an "NFL Village" covering three downtown blocks, as well as a privately funded athletic facility that would be used for practices before the game and then turned over to a city high school.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3404596

Bring on the lockout?

[Thorned Rose]

This is so stupid.

They make so much damn money off of the fans in the NFl, stop the crying.

a 17th game is stupid, it had always been 16 games for the past 30 years... it's dumb..

it would create ifs and buts and could ofs...

like if LT rushed for 2,200 yards... people would say "yeah he broke dickerson's record but he had an extra game blah blah"

it's stupid. I know OJ rushed for 2k yards in 14 games... and it still is probably the best season for a RB ever... but come on man...

don't change a good thing.

[Axl4Prez2004]

I'm with Thorned Rose, why mess with such a good thing?  Keep it at 16...dump one of the pre-season games.

[Thorned Rose]

Terrell Owens signed a new deal today with the Cowboys.

I'm glad they got him 3 more years.

It was a 3 year deal worth 27 M.

His original deal was 3yr/25M

So he just got 3 extra years with 2 more M dollars.

Great WR. Hall of Famer

[Axl4Prez2004]

I think it's a nice deal for the Cowboys too.  Wasn't 3 years $27 mill. the same as Randy?  Hopefully for 'boys fans the Newman-Williams thing doesn't get uglier in the secondary.
I hope for you folks Felix works out.  Barber n e e d s to pace himself...he runs so damn hard I can definitely see him as an injury risk.

[Thorned Rose]

Yeah, I really wanted to trade up and snag McFadden at #4.

We could of packaged Barber and one of our picks, or both picks and move up.

Shame we didn't.

Jones will work out. I miss Julius, he was underrated. I'm glad he's got a job in Seattle.

[Axl4Prez2004]

Thorned, you definitely saw something in Julius I didn't.  You probably saw more of his games than me, so I might have to take your word.  He struck me as a Michael Bennett type runner.  Great speed, but not much "shiftiness."
I think Seattle could be in trouble if they rely on Jones to be "the man."  Unfortunately for Julius it looks like more rbbc (running back by committee).  Morris could steal 3rd downs and Duckett could be stealing goal-line tds.  I know Alexander was a flop in Seattle last year, but I honestly think o-line has to bear some of the responsibility, and Julius will have that o-line opening holes for him...or more appropriately, not opening holes. 

On a totally different note, does anybody else hope they change the intro. tune on Sunday Night Football?  Faith Hill just isn't doing anything for me... 

[Layne Staley's Sunglasses]

Something classy.  We don't need any Disney productions.

[Axl4Prez2004]

I'm sure Axl could come up with a killer intro. scream.    Sunday Night is NBC, which is Universal, which is the company controlling the release of Chinese Democracy!!!  What better tie-in to GNR music than the NFL?  Alright, that mixed martial arts or wrestling would do well too, but I want the NFL tie-in!!!   

[Sober_times]

Favre seeks unconditional release from Packers, sources say

HATTIESBURG, Miss. -- Three days after a conference call with Packers team officials in which quarterback Brett Favre emphatically expressed his desire to play in 2008, Favre on Friday formally asked by letter for his unconditional contractual release, sources close to Favre and the team said.

The letter was sent by Favre's agent, James "Bus" Cook, via overnight mail on Thursday and arrived at the Packers facility Friday morning.

Cook, on behalf of Favre, expressed a desire to have an amicable parting, as the Packers have been reluctant to embrace his return. Favre announced his retirement in early March.

Packers general manager Ted Thompson and coach Mike McCarthy weren't available for comment Friday.

In a statement, the Packers said: "Brett earned and exercised the right to retire on his terms. We wanted him to return and welcomed him back on more than one occasion.

"Brett's press conference and subsequent conversations in the following weeks illustrated his commitment to retirement," the news release added. "The finality of his decision to retire was accepted by the organization. At that point, the Green Bay Packers made the commitment to move forward with our football team."

During a conference call on Tuesday that included Thompson, McCarthy, Favre and Cook, sources say that the quarterback stated emphatically that he wanted to play again.

Favre was reminded by the Packers' brass that he said publicly and privately in March that he wasn't 100 percent committed to football, sources said. Favre acknowledged his state of mind at the time, but added that he never felt he was 100 percent committed in March of previous years, either. Favre felt he had to make a decision to retire because the Packers were pressing him for an answer, a source said.

During the conference call on Tuesday, neither Thompson nor McCarthy was openly receptive or enthused about Favre's desire to unretire, the sources said, prompting Favre to direct Cook to request his release from the team. Favre has three years remaining on his contract at a total of $39 million. He currently is on the reserve-retired list.

Favre prefers a mutual parting rather than have to force the Packers' hand by writing a letter to request his reinstatement to the active 80-man roster. Under league policy, the team would have to comply or release him.

Cook's letter did suggest that Favre's accomplishments for the franchise merited the team honoring his request to be released, also asking that the action be taken "with no strings attached." Favre does not want to be traded, sources said, because he wants the freedom of choice to play for another franchise.

Favre has been in communication with McCarthy during the past month about his desire to play but until this week had not spoken with Thompson.

Favre did not wish to speak publicly about his situation when approached while working out Friday morning at a local high school in Hattiesburg. He appeared to be in excellent physical condition and threw the ball with ease, even throwing it 50 yards "on a rope" with high school receivers. He has been throwing and running with the team for more than a month.

Favre was relaxed and in a positive frame of mind, joking and telling stories about himself, former teammates and coaches. He planned to continue working out next week.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3483521




I think the Packers should just release him ASAP. He's earned the respect to be able to make the decision to return. I understand the buisness end of it and the Packers could trade him, but I don't think they should. They should end this as soon as possible.

Apparently he was pressured to make a decision in March and not knowing if he wanted to come back at that time chose to retire. Though in reality he wasn't sure if he wanted to come back. The Packers are making the correct decision to not welcome him back with open arms. As they need to move foward toward the future. 

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Favere back in '08!?! - 

Tampa Bay is a possible destination for him- that would be awesome- I'm only 2 hrs from there, I'd have to see a game!

The battle of the Bays would take on a whole new meaning ( 9/28/08 )

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-packers-favre&prov=ap&type=lgns

Releasing Favre presents the possibility that he will sign with NFC North rivals Minnesota or Chicago, where he would be an upgrade over the incumbent QBs. If the Packers traded him, there would be teams outside the division such as Baltimore or Tampa Bay, and perhaps Washington, that would be interested. There also has been speculation he could go to Miami for disgruntled defensive end Jason Taylor, the 2006 defensive player of the year.

[faldor]

They should definitely trade Favre.  They'd at least get a pretty decent draft pick instead of just releasing him.  They've gotta do it soon though to show Aaron Rogers that they're 110% committed to him.

[Axl4Prez2004]

I've got mixed feelings about bringing Brett on board with my purple and gold.   

Favre is a Packer.  It's too bad he couldn't retire a Packer.  Not only that, it's not like he'll be on board for 3 or 4 more seasons as we run towards our 1st Super Bowl in a long time...

...on the other hand, my Vikes' only weakness is qb.   

How nice would that option be?  Adrian Peterson wouldn't have to worry about 8 man fronts...Favre would have Berrian and Rice as options to throw...I think Brett wants to be a Viking.  Just a hunch.  He knows they're his best bet for another Super Bowl appearance.   

[D]

Dont rule out Tavaris Jackson yet. I think he is going to be much improved year 2.


I dont think any team is gonna stunt the growth of their young QB's for one year of bret Favre who will just kill u with an INT at the worst time anyway.


Washington or Chicago are the only places i can see him landing.

[JennaSide]

No fuckin way. Brett can't play for another team. He can't. It's not right. I... I feel like it's a divorce... I've loved him for over a decade, I can't see him with someone else, it breaks my heart...    It can't happen. I just can't take it   

[Axl4Prez2004]

No fuckin way. Brett can't play for another team. He can't. It's not right. I... I feel like it's a divorce... I've loved him for over a decade, I can't see him with someone else, it breaks my heart...    It can't happen. I just can't take it   

Jenna, I'd be proud to have you as a fellow Vikings' fan!!!!!!!!!!!!!   
   "...come to the purple side!"   

I can't see the Bears thing happening.  They have zero receivers and a questionable running attack.
The Redskins?  Anything's possible.  Snyder's got a ton o' money...but something tells me the 'skins believe in Campbell more than my Vikes believe in Tarvaris Jackson...Tarvaris really really looked bad at the end of last season.

Brett's positives still outweigh his negatives.  I think a lot of his int's last season could have been avoided with better play-calling.   

[gilee7]

I think Favre is making a huge mistake. If he had a gut feeling he was going to come back, why retire in the first place? Why not put off the announcement? If he had waited, he could still be a Packer. Everybody questioned the sincerity of it at the time anyway. Now he's going to risk tarnishing his legend. Nobody wants to see Favre in a different uniform. It's just not right. It's going to be like Michael Jordan when he played for the Wizards.

Favre had a very good season last year, one of the best he's ever had. Before the season started nobody even thought the Packers would be a playoff team, yet they came one game shy of the Superbowl. At first I was hoping he'd come back for one more season and try to do it again (with the Packers, of course), but he announced his retirement, and the Packers moved on. Now he's putting the Packers at an unfair disadvantage. People in Green Bay worship Favre, and they're not going to accept him in a different uniform. They're going to be angry with the Packers for not allowing him to come back to the team. There's no right choice now for the Packers to make. There's no way they can just release him, because then he'll probably go to Minnesota and cost the Packers from making the playoffs. They can't accept him back on the team, because that's not fair to Aaron Rodgers. If anything, they need to trade him to a team outside the division, or even the conference, and get something in return. But still, so many Green Bay fans are going to be alienated by whatever decision they make. Aaron Rodgers already had a ton of pressure to fill the shoes of the living legend; now he's gonig to have even more pressure. If he struggles early, everyone's going to be saying, "Oh, the Packers should've brought Favre back." The Packers are going to be made out to be the bad guys in the situation, when all the blame is really on Brett Favre.

Every athlete has to hang it up at some time. How sad is it going to be if Favre comes back this year, plays for somebody else, and struggles mightily? In the press conference when he announced his retirement, he said he was still in good enough physical shape, but not mental shape. If he went so far as to announce his retirement, if his mind decided it no longer wanted to play, what's to make sure that burning desire to win and give it his all every week maintains throughout the season? If his team loses a few games early in the season, is he just going to quit and leave the team? Will he still try just as hard every week?

Hell, isn't Favre supposed on to be on the Madden cover this year, too?? That should be reason enough not to come back. Originally when the cover was announced, my friends and I joked that the Madden curse would either be broken, or Favre would get run over by his tractor or something. He's going to come back this year and get injured in the first game of the season.

[faldor]

No fuckin way. Brett can't play for another team. He can't. It's not right. I... I feel like it's a divorce... I've loved him for over a decade, I can't see him with someone else, it breaks my heart...    It can't happen. I just can't take it   

Jenna, I'd be proud to have you as a fellow Vikings' fan!!!!!!!!!!!!!   
   "...come to the purple side!"   

I can't see the Bears thing happening.  They have zero receivers and a questionable running attack.
The Redskins?  Anything's possible.  Snyder's got a ton o' money...but something tells me the 'skins believe in Campbell more than my Vikes believe in Tarvaris Jackson...Tarvaris really really looked bad at the end of last season.

Brett's positives still outweigh his negatives.  I think a lot of his int's last season could have been avoided with better play-calling.   

Favre is always gonna have an ample amount of INT's.  He's a gun slinger who'll try to force things from time to time.  He's not gonna change at this point of his career.  But I agree, the positives outweigh the negatives.  He's still better than most of the QB's in the league.  He will be a welcomed addition for any team in need of a QB and a leader.  Another negative about him though is people have said he's not the kind of guy you want your young QB's to emulate.  Not many guys can play the position like Brett.  Somehow he gets away with it.

[faldor]

I think Favre is making a huge mistake. If he had a gut feeling he was going to come back, why retire in the first place? Why not put off the announcement? If he had waited, he could still be a Packer. Everybody questioned the sincerity of it at the time anyway. Now he's going to risk tarnishing his legend. Nobody wants to see Favre in a different uniform. It's just not right. It's going to be like Michael Jordan when he played for the Wizards.

Favre had a very good season last year, one of the best he's ever had. Before the season started nobody even thought the Packers would be a playoff team, yet they came one game shy of the Superbowl. At first I was hoping he'd come back for one more season and try to do it again (with the Packers, of course), but he announced his retirement, and the Packers moved on. Now he's putting the Packers at an unfair disadvantage. People in Green Bay worship Favre, and they're not going to accept him in a different uniform. They're going to be angry with the Packers for not allowing him to come back to the team. There's no right choice now for the Packers to make. There's no way they can just release him, because then he'll probably go to Minnesota and cost the Packers from making the playoffs. They can't accept him back on the team, because that's not fair to Aaron Rodgers. If anything, they need to trade him to a team outside the division, or even the conference, and get something in return. But still, so many Green Bay fans are going to be alienated by whatever decision they make. Aaron Rodgers already had a ton of pressure to fill the shoes of the living legend; now he's gonig to have even more pressure. If he struggles early, everyone's going to be saying, "Oh, the Packers should've brought Favre back." The Packers are going to be made out to be the bad guys in the situation, when all the blame is really on Brett Favre.

Every athlete has to hang it up at some time. How sad is it going to be if Favre comes back this year, plays for somebody else, and struggles mightily? In the press conference when he announced his retirement, he said he was still in good enough physical shape, but not mental shape. If he went so far as to announce his retirement, if his mind decided it no longer wanted to play, what's to make sure that burning desire to win and give it his all every week maintains throughout the season? If his team loses a few games early in the season, is he just going to quit and leave the team? Will he still try just as hard every week?

Hell, isn't Favre supposed on to be on the Madden cover this year, too?? That should be reason enough not to come back. Originally when the cover was announced, my friends and I joked that the Madden curse would either be broken, or Favre would get run over by his tractor or something. He's going to come back this year and get injured in the first game of the season.

I don't think the Packers should limit themselves to only trading him outside the division.  If the Vikings give them the best package, you gotta take it.  You can't be afraid that he might burn you 2 times during the season and take a lesser package to try and avoid that.  That's not a smart way to run things.  Besides, it's not like Brett's gonna be around another 5 years haunting the Packers.  He DOES have to retire for REAL eventually, sooner rather than later.