ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
Patriots player rep Matt Light [stats] is here and said yesterday, “They’re treating us like we’re children and they’re parents.
“Their problem economically is more about revenue sharing on their end,” Light said. “Some smaller market teams are spending a far larger share of their income on salaries and expenses than larger market teams. They should be working that out among themselves, but they know it’s easier to try and take it away from the players than to take it from each other.”
__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Light, no fool, cuts to the crux of the owners' dilemma, the small market + poorly managed teams cause problems that the owners are asking the players to fix via taking less of the gross.
The other part of the owners' problem is that they probably really DO need more $ going forward for facilities refurbishment and new facilities. Since each of the 32 situations is radically different, it's difficult to quantify.
__________________
RIP Vince Flynn. Condolences to family and friends.
I don't think there's ever been any question that's a general truth and part of what drove the owners to opt out of the CBA... but ultimately how the collective group of the NFL owners decides to split the revenue among themselves is up to them.
Light's correct but that's largely irrelevant now. A new CBA needs to be worked out and both sides need to find some compromise.
The NFL owners currently have an offer on the table. The NFLPA does not seem interested in providing a counter offer.
To borrow an analogy from a different sport, the ball is in the NFLPA's court. They just don't seem interested in hitting it back for now.
The NFLPA is bringing in a pinch hitter with the bases loaded and 2 out.....(Doty)
__________________
My guns are no threat to anyone who isn't trying to deprive me or my family of life,liberty or property. They are,however, EXTREMELY dangerous to anyone who threatens to take those things.
Light, no fool, cuts to the crux of the owners' dilemma, the small market + poorly managed teams cause problems that the owners are asking the players to fix via taking less of the gross.
The other part of the owners' problem is that they probably really DO need more $ going forward for facilities refurbishment and new facilities. Since each of the 32 situations is radically different, it's difficult to quantify.
With all the expansion many leagues have some very weak sisters, including the NFL. Would Light support a contraction of 4 to 6 clubs, and the loss of say 618 football player's jobs?
I think baseball needs to shed 5-10 Teams; and the NHL could lose an entire conference. How many teams do you think the NBA should contract?
I don't think there's ever been any question that's a general truth and part of what drove the owners to opt out of the CBA... but ultimately how the collective group of the NFL owners decides to split the revenue among themselves is up to them.
Light's correct but that's largely irrelevant now. A new CBA needs to be worked out and both sides need to find some compromise.
The NFL owners currently have an offer on the table. The NFLPA does not seem interested in providing a counter offer.
To borrow an analogy from a different sport, the ball is in the NFLPA's court. They just don't seem interested in hitting it back for now.
The thing is the last offer the NFL made was actually worse for the players than the previous one they (the owners) made. On top of that the NFL went into full PR spin mode, letting the world know they're compromising and the players are not.
How should the NFLPA react, by doing something similar - taking away one thing, and adding another - in an offer that would put the two sides even further apart? And then go on a PR campaign about how they're trying to work out a deal but the owners aren't?
Right now neither side seems to be interested in negotiating. The last offer the NFL made was like throwing a hand grenade into negotiations; the intent was to blow things up.
I don't think there's ever been any question that's a general truth and part of what drove the owners to opt out of the CBA... but ultimately how the collective group of the NFL owners decides to split the revenue among themselves is up to them.
Light's correct but that's largely irrelevant now. A new CBA needs to be worked out and both sides need to find some compromise.
The NFL owners currently have an offer on the table. The NFLPA does not seem interested in providing a counter offer.
To borrow an analogy from a different sport, the ball is in the NFLPA's court. They just don't seem interested in hitting it back for now.
I was in favor of the 11th hr offer until it was explained that there was a poison pill at the end .
__________________
Felger started his question, "Correct me if I'm wrong," BB quickly interjected, "I can't wait--"
``The officials now are evaluating the players and their performance, I mean, that's great,'' Belichick deadpanned. ``I can't say how much that means to me, really.''
The thing is the last offer the NFL made was actually worse for the players than the previous one they (the owners) made. On top of that the NFL went into full PR spin mode, letting the world know they're compromising and the players are not.
How should the NFLPA react, by doing something similar - taking away one thing, and adding another - in an offer that would put the two sides even further apart? And then go on a PR campaign about how they're trying to work out a deal but the owners aren't?
Right now neither side seems to be interested in negotiating. The last offer the NFL made was like throwing a hand grenade into negotiations; the intent was to blow things up.
The bottom line is that the NFLPA can make their counter offer at any time but has chosen not to do so.
That's going to catch up with them in the hearts and minds of the fans at some point.
Matt Light comments on recent events
Linear Mode
