Sources: NFLPA wants draft boycott

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
STUPID.

These are college kids. They have been waiting their whole life to make the NFL. They only get to walk on that stage once and shake the commissioners hand. It's memories for a lifetime. How incredibly selfish of the players and players union to put these young rookies and college students in that position. It's not their fault that the 2 sides couldn't agree.

Watched Mark Ingram ( RB-Hiesman) on NFL total access last night. The kid was gushing about how his whole life he's wanted to be drafted and walk on stage. You could see dream in his eyes. I felt very bad for the position he has been put in due to the NFLPA.

I was watching espn this morning and Patrick Peterson said nobody has contacted him and told him not to show up. And at this point he plans on attending as its his life long dream.

I think the NFLPA is just talking smack to the media.

NFLPA making itself look worse by the day.

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
I find it really curious that Hessian is one of the few here who has sided with the NFLPA*.

-9fA

why is it curious? i always err on the side of labor, and the details of this situation have done nothing to dissuade me from that. in terms of the draft boycott, as I said, I don't like it, but I understand why it was suggested by the NFLPA* (nice touch, by the way).

Curious in the sense that you're the only person who has taken player's position on this situation. Oh and I wish I could take credit for the asterisk, but I got it from PFT.

-9fA

always steal credit when you can.

there are several others who have taken the players position overall, but if you mean just about the "draft boycott" i wouldn't really say I am taking the NFLPA*s position. If I were one of those guys invited to the draft for the once-in-a-lifetime chance to have my name called and walk up on that stage on national TV, and that had been one of my lifelong-dreams, then I would definitely want to have that experience and would probably ignore the "boycott." However, I understand the reasoning behind the idea, and since I see it as an extension of the players overall position I don't think its as selfish or evil as some people are making it out to be.

Originally posted by okdkid:
NFLPA making itself look worse by the day.

stupid demaurice smith

Fans should boycott the draft not the rookies.

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
I find it really curious that Hessian is one of the few here who has sided with the NFLPA*.

-9fA

lol

ideology speaks larger than actual right and wrong.

Originally posted by Esco:
Fans should boycott the draft not the rookies.

Smartest thing said all day!

Originally posted by Shorteous:

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
I find it really curious that Hessian is one of the few here who has sided with the NFLPA*.

-9fA

lol

ideology speaks larger than actual right and wrong.

how do you define right and wrong without an ideology?

[ Edited by HessianDud on Mar 15, 2011 at 12:31:03 ]

They've already backed off this. The draft will be the same as always.

Originally posted by TX9R:
They've already backed off this. The draft will be the same as always.

Bring out the big broom NFLPA

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by Shorteous:

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
I find it really curious that Hessian is one of the few here who has sided with the NFLPA*.

-9fA

lol

ideology speaks larger than actual right and wrong.

[b]how do you definite right and wrong without ideology?

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by Shorteous:

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
I find it really curious that Hessian is one of the few here who has sided with the NFLPA*.

-9fA

lol

ideology speaks larger than actual right and wrong.

[b]how do you define right and wrong without an ideology?

don't worship my misspelled poorly phrased statement.

worship my edited version.

[ Edited by HessianDud on Mar 15, 2011 at 12:32:23 ]

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by Shorteous:

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
I find it really curious that Hessian is one of the few here who has sided with the NFLPA*.

-9fA

lol

ideology speaks larger than actual right and wrong.

how do you definite right and wrong without ideology?

Well, I would guess in order to deem this as right you'd have to hold a kantianism like ideology where right and wrong is determined by the greatest good for the greatest amount of people.

Basically marginalizing the the best out come for the draftee because it brings greater good to the NFLPA's negotiating position. Although it doesn't so it is now being scratched from the tactic list.

But your right, ideology is correlated to your individual right and wrong. I think we can all generally agree that the situation is right for kantianism but I think we can all agree that kantianism is not an appropriate means to determine morality. At least if your a minority you better believe that kantianism is not the best means to determine right and wrong.

Originally posted by Shorteous:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by Shorteous:

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
I find it really curious that Hessian is one of the few here who has sided with the NFLPA*.

-9fA

lol

ideology speaks larger than actual right and wrong.

how do you definite right and wrong without ideology?

Well, I would guess in order to deem this as right you'd have to hold a kantianism like ideology where right and wrong is determined by the greatest good for the greatest amount of people.

Basically marginalizing the the best out come for the draftee because it brings greater good to the NFLPA's negotiating position. Although it doesn't so it is now being scratched from the tactic list.

But your right, ideology is correlated to your individual right and wrong. I think we can all generally agree that the situation is right for kantianism but I think we can all agree that kantianism is not an appropriate means to determine morality. At least if your a minority you better believe that kantianism is not the best means to determine right and wrong.

that's utilitarianism.

-9fA

Originally posted by Shorteous:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by Shorteous:

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
I find it really curious that Hessian is one of the few here who has sided with the NFLPA*.

-9fA

lol

ideology speaks larger than actual right and wrong.

how do you definite right and wrong without ideology?

Well, I would guess in order to deem this as right you'd have to hold a kantianism like ideology where right and wrong is determined by the greatest good for the greatest amount of people.

Basically marginalizing the the best out come for the draftee because it brings greater good to the NFLPA's negotiating position. Although it doesn't so it is now being scratched from the tactic list.

But your right, ideology is correlated to your individual right and wrong. I think we can all generally agree that the situation is right for kantianism but I think we can all agree that kantianism is not an appropriate means to determine morality. At least if your a minority you better believe that kantianism is not the best means to determine right and wrong.

This is the best time I've had on the Zone since the locking of the Alex Smith thread.....