Perhaps some numbers can give a perspective on what the owners are offering versus what the players want. For history, the players pie per team was: 2001 67.4M 2002 71.1M 2003 75.0M 2004 80.6M 2005 85.5M 2006 94.5M under pretty much the same percentage cut to the players under the current CBA. So this year, they get a 10.5% raise. For the 5 years from 2001 to 2006 they got a 40.2% raise. Each of us will have to decide for ourselves if that is a fair raise or not. I'm sure most all of us got at least that amount. So what, if the figures being mentioned in the media are somewhat correct, are the owners offering for the new CBA ? The number that Felger mentions is 105M. So what that means is that the owners offer of 56.2 percent of the redefined revenue pie is offering the players 12% MORE of the pie than they are getting under the current CBA. Apparently that's not considered to be a very respectful offer on top of the 10.5% the players are already getting this year. Obviously very disrespectful. In perspective, if the players accepted the new CBA at 56.2% they would be getting a 22.8% raise this year. And from 2001 numbers it would be a total of 55.8% raise. I know most of you do a lot better than that, but that is what the penny pinching owners are offering. So what is Upshaw saying is the minimum these presently underpaid guys deserve ? His MINIMUM 60% number would give a salary cap of, I guess, 112M. So that would be a raise this year of 31% or a total raise since 2001 of 66.2%. Now that is much more fair to the players, don't you think ? And probably gives them the same sort of raises that you have been getting. Well, just thought that might give you a better perspective on just what the players are dealing with in trying to reach a new agreement that is fair to them.