Phantoms vs Rage

The National Indoor Football League (NIFL) forum
herb1
Site Admin
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 9:30 pm

Phantoms vs Rage

Post by herb1 » Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:02 pm

So has anyone heard who might be showing up for this game. Its in St Louis so maybe Jim Hart or Pete Lisp and the NFL St Louis Cardinal of the 1970s will take the field. Wait St Louis has a team a darn good one,it is the Farce Phantoms that don't.
Maybe the owner will put on the pads and give a clinic instead he probably should be sent to one.
Has anyone else noticed very few games scheduled this week??? :twisted:

So how many teams do you guys figure will not finsh the season ??? replacement teams dont count as I do not really think thats part of the business plan??
The lawsuits are piling up in Palm Beach county against the owner, owners and the league from what I hear.

goguard88
Site Admin
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 8:43 pm
Location: Fayetteville, NC

Post by goguard88 » Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:40 pm

Apparently, the game isn't happening, and RiverCity gets a forfeit win.

go_rascals
Site Admin
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2003 2:14 pm
Location: St. Charles, MO
Contact:

re: Rage v. Phantoms

Post by go_rascals » Fri Jun 02, 2006 7:04 pm

The Rage put out a press release today announcing that they have been awarded a forfeit due to Palm Beach's inability to provide a venue.

I just spoke with a friend who plays for the Rage. He told me that the team will be awarded forfeits for both its remaining road games. That leaves two games at home, 6/9 v. Lincoln/St. Joe and 6/23 v. Tennessee.

He also told me thay have a first-round bye and home field in conference playoffs. The first Rage playoff game is supposed to be 7/15.

goguard88
Site Admin
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 8:43 pm
Location: Fayetteville, NC

Post by goguard88 » Fri Jun 02, 2006 7:41 pm

While it is very likely that will turn out to be true, the Rage technically haven't clinched a first round bye and the #1 seed in the Atlantic, even after those forfeit wins they'll get. All these forfeits have been disappointing to see, but at least they're by pathetic teams that would probably lose anyway. I guess I can assume Dayton and Twin City aren't hosting another game for the rest of the season, so I'll go ahead and call those forfeits.

go_rascals
Site Admin
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2003 2:14 pm
Location: St. Charles, MO
Contact:

good new for Rage players, at least

Post by go_rascals » Fri Jun 02, 2006 8:06 pm

My friend also told me the Rage players get paid on the weeks they don't play football as long as they participate in team-sponsored promotional events. There's a parade in Illinois this weekend and a golf tournament later this month. So at least in this instance the players aren't left holding the bag.

PIONEERSFAN101
Site Admin
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 10:18 pm

Post by PIONEERSFAN101 » Fri Jun 02, 2006 8:31 pm

Ok Rage have already won their 4 remaining games then. Two forfeits, plus a replacement team for St. Joe, and a replacement team for Tennessee. Pencil them in for those Ws.

Looks like the fans get cheated out of competitive games too. Next real game: 7/15

kristin411
Site Admin
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 4:48 am
Location: Florida

Palm Beach law suits

Post by kristin411 » Sat Jun 03, 2006 3:55 am

herb1 wrote:
The lawsuits are piling up in Palm Beach county against the owner, owners and the league from what I hear.






So if the Phantoms have ended their season why are players now not being allowed to sign on with other teams? Mike Lind has now refused to release players from their contracts so that they can move on from this whole fiasco. How can the players be held to any original contract with the phantoms?? Just doesn't seem right to me. Wouldn't the Phantoms and or the NIFL be in default of contract by not even providing a home venue or paying players?? Someone help me understand this please!
Last edited by kristin411 on Sat Jun 03, 2006 4:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

nksports
Site Admin
Posts: 3669
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 7:53 am
Location: Newton, KS (the land of Oz)

Post by nksports » Sat Jun 03, 2006 4:07 am

I'm not a lawyer, although I took a class on labor law in college about 20 years ago, so here is my best stab at it:

I'd think if you were still playing players, but not playing games, you might have an argument for not allowing your players to play elsewhere. If you weren't playing players (even if you were still playing games), the team owner would be more likely to be found in default and the players become free agents. You'd need at least a judge (or an arbitrator if the contract was so structured) to make that declaration.

kristin411
Site Admin
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 4:48 am
Location: Florida

Post by kristin411 » Sat Jun 03, 2006 4:20 am

Are you meaning " still playing players" or still PAYING players??
Thanks for your input ;)

Post Reply

Return to “NIFL”