Quote
Originally posted by: jatki99
Of course leave it to forkie to take the socialistic view. Bullsh!t the players dont want a penny more, they want a WHOLE LOT more. They want the owners books opened and paid more if the owners make more on certain deals. I know its more complicated than that, but its how i perceive it.
J
Originally posted by: jatki99
Quote
Originally posted by: forkushQuoteOh, you must be referring to the owners. Because it's the owners - literally - who are holding out for more money. The players association and the owners negotiated an agreement a few years ago, and it's the owners who are now saying they had their fingers crossed while doing so. Hence a lockout, NOT strike.
Originally posted by: chefantwon
...We are the ones paying these fools and all they want is more money...
The players association isn't asking for a penny more than the current agreement.
Of course leave it to forkie to take the socialistic view. Bullsh!t the players dont want a penny more, they want a WHOLE LOT more. They want the owners books opened and paid more if the owners make more on certain deals. I know its more complicated than that, but its how i perceive it.
J
You are, quite simply, wrong. The owners are asking the players to take pay cuts. They want to cut the players share of revenue down to 50%, from its current level of 58%. Every player offer has been to either retain the current level or to take a little less if the owners raise their contribution to the NFL pension plan.
The owners want these pay cuts dispite making record revenues last year. They claim that some teams are losing money. The players said show us your books if you are losing money, and so far the owners have refused.
Owners want to enlarge the pie and increase their share of it at the same time. Players want to keep their share of the increasing pie.
If a court said to play next year under the now expired agreement, players would do so in a heartbeat, without asking for a nickle more. Owners won't do that.
If there is anything remotely socialistic about the NFL, it is the way the owners divide up revenues so that the worst team gets the same amount of revenue from television as the good teams. A team like Washington might be featured on two national broadcasts but gets the same revenue as a team like New England that is on ten national broadcasts. A team that doesn't make the playoffs gets the same revenue as the team that wins the Super Bowl.
How about having fans in Dallas help pay for the Giants new stadium? How much of their season ticket cost went to Dallas's share of the $600 million the NFL gave the Giants to build their stadium?