mikey

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/05/sp...all/05nfl.html




.

arrellbee

"The problem is that the owners can't get their act together on revenue sharing," Kessler said. "They're a dysfunctional family, and if the owners can't agree on how they share, how can they make a deal with us?"

That's a STUPID misrepresentation. The owners HAVE offered a deal at 56.2% WITHOUT making any changes in their revenue sharing formula AND HAVE agreed with the union demand that more than stadium revenues and TV money will be added to the pie that the players will get a share of. The owners do HAVE an agreement on revenue sharing. They are not dysfunctional - they HAVE approved and offered a deal to the union with around a 7% increase in the salary cap over the current CBA cap.

What Upshaw wants to believe is that if he can force a CHANGE in the revenue sharing formula somehow the owners will magically agree to the players getting an even bigger share of the pie. The irony of it is that if the higher revenue owners share more revenue with the lower revenue teams, the lower revenue teams might be willing to give the players a higher percentage from their 'free' money BUT the higher revenue teams, having already given up revenue, might not be inclined at all to also give up more by agreeing to a higher percentage player share !! Upshaw may be very misguided in what he thinks he can achieve.

Sean Pa Patriot

I think tommorrow will be a day of infamy... But after delaying the start of the offseason, something has to get done.. If not we are singing U2 at 600 pm

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



We going to take it one game at a time

gomezcat

The question will then be, "How long must we sing this song?"

__________________
The blog of our recent trip to The States (September and October 2012):


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Pats726

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2354534

It is a stupid representation...this is what LennieP has written...they can not even agree on what they disagree about...is that not really sad??
This lawyer Kessler makes Upshaw look like a genius..besides the dysfunctional family quote...here's another one.
"We can talk for 5,000 hours, but if they don't come close to our ballpark, there's no reason to talk."....Close to our ballpark?? If HIS ballpark is that far away what la la land is HE in?? Close to the ballpark?? That shows how far apart they really are..if he truly means that and is NOT postuting it will be indeed a bloody Sunday.
"But there's not a player in the N.F.L. who wants us to take a bad deal."..VERY interesting..so let the players vote then...if you think the players
would rather have a deal or chaos??? Even 56% is NOT a bad deal at all for the players..not at all!! Shiow me any other industry where those in union get anywhere near a percentage like that. WHy then has the leadership been so unavailable then if they think the players are backing them up??
With stooges like this, no deal is possible..tethe goose is cooked..roasted..As sean..we all sing U2 at 6 PM.....

hwc

One of the most striking elements of this negotiation dating back months is the total and complete absence of players and player leadership in the picture. Make no mistake about it, this is a negotiation between the owners and the agents. The players got sold down the river during the last CBA extension when Upshaw agreed that the vet minimums should no longer increase at the same rate as the overall salary cap. Ever since then, vet minimums have been essentially treading water while every dollar of increase in the cap has gone to big ticket players, signing bonuses, etc.