From Lambeau to Lombardi, Holmgren, McCarthy and LaFleur and from Starr to Favre, Rodgers and now Jordan Love we’re talking Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers football. This Packers Forum is the place to talk NFL football and everything Packers. So, pull up a keyboard, make yourself at home and let’s talk some Packers football.
I think every receiver we've had trained off season at some speed seminars or receiver seminars, and those training sessions helped us win, guys like Montana trained off site with Rice, etc. so then I guess if the team likes you after you stub a big toe, whatever, they'll take care of ya, if ya don't have a resume, then not so much, gottcha.
And if any of those guys tore their ACL doing that, it is totally up tot he team whether or not to honor their guarantees and keep them on the team. Most probably just sustain minor injuries, sit on the NFI list for the start of the offseason and then are activated to the active roster when it's done. But PLENTY of players who get hurt training in the offseason start training camp on the NFI, not PUP. Plenty of them. It's fairly routine. The only impact is if you terminate the contract because of one, which you are allowed to do (unlike because of a football injury). If you cut the NFI guy, the contract is done. No more guarantees.
more slave ship crap , the workouts help the team, yet the team bails if the player is hurt, no way your going to tell me the teams frowns on the workouts, coaches have even commented on players showing up in far better condition after a off season of them, it helps players not to become Eddie Lacy's, no problem with putting them on NFI list or anything like that, but it shouldn't give the team the right to cut them, as I said, a team could cut a player for simply jogging if thats the case.
imo this is the team trying to get out of it's obligation.
Last edited by Yoop on 07 Jun 2021 15:27, edited 1 time in total.
This is the part he has to prove. If he was with teammates working out at the direction of a trainer or coach, he has a case. That "or" is big. That's why it matters if they have any documentation about working out from the team. That "or" means they don't have to be at a club facility to be covered. My bet is one e-mail from the team would do it.
"By contrast, injuries sustained by a player while working out at a club facility or as specifically authorized by his club are considered "Football-Related Injuries."
the workouts help the team, yet the team bails if the player is hurt, no way your going to tell me the teams frowns on the workouts, coaches have even commented on players showing up in far better condition after a off season of them, it helps players not to become Eddie Lacy's, no problem with putting them on NFI list or anything like that, but it should give the team the right to cut them, as I said, a team could cut a player for simply jogging if thats the case.
And this is WHY the team makes their facilities available in the offseason for players to work out within the guidance of team staff and contractual protection. The NFLPA is trying to reduce the amount the team facilities are available by reducing the voluntary and involuntary workouts in the offseason.
The NFL is trying to have the players practice and work out more together as a team. The NFLPA thinks that "voluntary" workouts are only partially voluntary, both through contractual incentives and through implicit demands on guys like Arians' comments that "some guys apparently don't realize they are fighting for their jobs" (while also letting Brady do whatever he wants).
So on one hand the league is saying "we want expanded access to contractually-protected team facilities" and the NFLPA is saying "no, the players would rather working out on their own."
The conflict between the league and union over how to manage offseasons is being played out in a proxy war. The push for virtual offseasons by the NFLPA and the push to return to in-person workouts by the league were the first shots fired in a new proxy war. And James was the first casualty hit.
the workouts help the team, yet the team bails if the player is hurt, no way your going to tell me the teams frowns on the workouts, coaches have even commented on players showing up in far better condition after a off season of them, it helps players not to become Eddie Lacy's, no problem with putting them on NFI list or anything like that, but it should give the team the right to cut them, as I said, a team could cut a player for simply jogging if thats the case.
And this is WHY the team makes their facilities available in the offseason for players to work out within the guidance of team staff and contractual protection. The NFLPA is trying to reduce the amount the team facilities are available by reducing the voluntary and involuntary workouts in the offseason.
The NFL is trying to have the players practice and work out more together as a team. The NFLPA thinks that "voluntary" workouts are only partially voluntary, both through contractual incentives and through implicit demands on guys like Arians' comments that "some guys apparently don't realize they are fighting for their jobs" (while also letting Brady do whatever he wants).
So on one hand the league is saying "we want expanded access to contractually-protected team facilities" and the NFLPA is saying "no, the players would rather working out on their own."
The conflict between the league and union over how to manage offseasons is being played out in a proxy war. The push for virtual offseasons by the NFLPA and the push to return to in-person workouts by the league were the first shots fired in a new proxy war. And James was the first casualty hit.
imagine for a second how hard it is to commute each day/week or how often you want to train, from fresno to GB, or anywhere else a player lives cross country, and I don't care what this CBA says, it is morally reprehensible to tell a player if you do anything physically and injurer yourself, your contract with us is noll and void, now if that player has a extended injury then yes some sort of injury settlement should be done, but to just cut a player because he didn't travel to Denver for a workout, gotta be a better solution,
imagine for a second how hard it is to commute each day/week or how often you want to train, from fresno to GB, or anywhere else a player lives cross country, and I don't care what this CBA says, it is morally reprehensible to tell a player if you do anything physically and injurer yourself, your contract with us is noll and void, now if that player has a extended injury then yes some sort of injury settlement should be done, but to just cut a player because he didn't travel to Denver for a workout, gotta be a better solution,
Like I said, it's a proxy war for a greater battle between two big organizations who don't see eye to eye. There are better solutions. But they're looking for a fight, not for a solution.
Gotta say, just kind of not a fan of letting Jonnu Smith AND Corey Davis walk for free, both getting 12.5 per and young. Then trading a 2nd plus for someone else.
Reminds me of the Falcons TE mismanagement. Let Austin Hooper walk for nothing, trade a 2nd and 5th for Hayden Hurst, let him walk for nothing, then draft one 4th overall.
Team is a dumpster fire, they had a great TE, and chose to spend pick #4, a 2nd and a 5th to replace him. Mind numbing to me. For a fricken TE mind you, with like 20 other holes on the roster.
I have never understood why Germany wasn't the major focus of NFL expansion.
NFL Europe was a 6-team league that initially had, I think, a team in London, in Scottland, in Amsterdam, in Barcelona, in Frankfurt (GE) and Rein (GE).
By the end of NFLE's run, the Barcelona team and Scotland team had folded and were replaced by two more German teams.
In short, 4 of the 6 teams in Europe were in Germany, the only country that had enough demand for the product to support them.
I wonder if it is as simple as travel concerns. You are adding 10-12 hours of travel beyond London to get in to Germany. Test out closer and then move farther.
You are adding 10-12 hours of travel beyond London to get in to Germany.
Where do you come up with that? I have flown both places for work. London is nice because it was a direct flight. Germany, I even had a layover in Amsterdam, and it was only a few hours difference between both total trips.
You are adding 10-12 hours of travel beyond London to get in to Germany.
Where do you come up with that? I have flown both places for work. London is nice because it was a direct flight. Germany, I even had a layover in Amsterdam, and it was only a few hours difference between both total trips.
A guess? Maybe I need to brush up on my geography! You know what, I bet I was thinking drive time, not flying between the 2.
You are adding 10-12 hours of travel beyond London to get in to Germany.
Where do you come up with that? I have flown both places for work. London is nice because it was a direct flight. Germany, I even had a layover in Amsterdam, and it was only a few hours difference between both total trips.
A guess? Maybe I need to brush up on my geography! You know what, I bet I was thinking drive time, not flying between the 2.
You are adding 10-12 hours of travel beyond London to get in to Germany.
Where do you come up with that? I have flown both places for work. London is nice because it was a direct flight. Germany, I even had a layover in Amsterdam, and it was only a few hours difference between both total trips.
A guess? Maybe I need to brush up on my geography! You know what, I bet I was thinking drive time, not flying between the 2.
Yep, Paco, time time dust off your globe. My wife and I go to Germany every few years to visit her family and there isn't much difference going into Frankfurt/Stuttgart/Berlin/Munich than London. Maybe an extra hour or so.
I have never understood why Germany wasn't the major focus of NFL expansion.
The Germans have a very strong futbol/soccer lobby and they aren't thrilled with the prospects of Normandy 2.0 via the NFL invading their markets. Its also much easier on the players/families to go to London where the language barrier isn't as great. Andrew Brandt talked about how hard it was for these guys with no language skills - couldn't even read a menu. Those were different times, it will be easier now with google translate etc - but those player issues were a significant problem during NFL-E and may have influenced decision to focus on UK first this time around
I have never understood why Germany wasn't the major focus of NFL expansion.
NFL Europe was a 6-team league that initially had, I think, a team in London, in Scottland, in Amsterdam, in Barcelona, in Frankfurt (GE) and Rein (GE).
By the end of NFLE's run, the Barcelona team and Scotland team had folded and were replaced by two more German teams.
In short, 4 of the 6 teams in Europe were in Germany, the only country that had enough demand for the product to support them.
Germany makes a lot of sense as an international game destination.
There are some big airports for direct flights, and scheduling it around Oktoberfest would be brilliant. Football, beet, brats and a visit to another country... Could build quite the 1-week vacation around that.
I have never understood why Germany wasn't the major focus of NFL expansion.
The Germans have a very strong futbol/soccer lobby and they aren't thrilled with the prospects of Normandy 2.0 via the NFL invading their markets. Its also much easier on the players/families to go to London where the language barrier isn't as great. Andrew Brandt talked about how hard it was for these guys with no language skills - couldn't even read a menu. Those were different times, it will be easier now with google translate etc - but those player issues were a significant problem during NFL-E and may have influenced decision to focus on UK first this time around
In Germany, soccer is such a national institution, they would not feel at all threatened by your throwy ball. Besides, adding or moving even a single team there would be a looong way away. One or two games per year in Germany is a way lesser investment and could happen very soon.
I have never understood why Germany wasn't the major focus of NFL expansion.
The Germans have a very strong futbol/soccer lobby and they aren't thrilled with the prospects of Normandy 2.0 via the NFL invading their markets. Its also much easier on the players/families to go to London where the language barrier isn't as great. Andrew Brandt talked about how hard it was for these guys with no language skills - couldn't even read a menu. Those were different times, it will be easier now with google translate etc - but those player issues were a significant problem during NFL-E and may have influenced decision to focus on UK first this time around
I have never understood why Germany wasn't the major focus of NFL expansion.
The Germans have a very strong futbol/soccer lobby and they aren't thrilled with the prospects of Normandy 2.0 via the NFL invading their markets. Its also much easier on the players/families to go to London where the language barrier isn't as great. Andrew Brandt talked about how hard it was for these guys with no language skills - couldn't even read a menu. Those were different times, it will be easier now with google translate etc - but those player issues were a significant problem during NFL-E and may have influenced decision to focus on UK first this time around
In Germany, soccer is such a national institution, they would not feel at all threatened by your throwy ball. Besides, adding or moving even a single team there would be a looong way away. One or two games per year in Germany is a way lesser investment and could happen very soon.
