2011 Lockout VS 1987 Lockout

[Canada's #1 Packer Fan]

need some help understanding this lock out. i read on nfl.com that they can't have replacement players this time around as they did in 1987. why is that that it looks lile the nfl and the union are following the same things they did back then

would you support the packers if they decided to use replacement players

:beee:

 

[PackersRS]

This is a lockout. NFL teams can't negotiate with ANY players.

In 87', it was a strike. Players refused to play.

 

[FrankRizzo]

I remember the one in 1987, and I believe guys like Joe Montana and Tony Dorsett crossed the picket line to play.
I think......?

 

[neilfii]

If I am not mistaken, 1987 was not a lockout, but a strike. In a lockout management (the owners) refuses to allow the players to play. In a strike the union (the players) refuse to play. Since this is the owners locking the players out the labor laws prohibit the use of replacements. In the case of a strike, it is the players refusing to play and the owners can use replacements under certain circumstances and assuming they can get those replacements to cross the picket line.

 

[LAG]

Back in '87, a coworkers husband played semi-pro ball for a Racine team, as a kicker. He tried out for and won a spot as a replacement player for the Pack. He played in three games. One of the good things is those players won games and helped the Pack get in the playoffs that year for the first time since the Dan Devine era in '72. This year the Pack doesn't need replacement-"scab" players to win games.