spacecrime
Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2004
- Messages
- 8,325
- Reaction score
- 5
Admittedly there are problems with divvying up revenues, but Upshaw walked out because there was no compromise between the percentages. From ESPN
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2351271
Gene Upshaw, the union's executive director, said the league is offering 56.2 percent of its total revenue for the players, almost four points lower than the union's idea.
"Our number has to start with a six," Upshaw said.
Presumably, the owners' number must start with a five.
Both sides stand to lose a lot of money over this. Is it worth it to all the players being cut to lose thier jobs over 4%? Probably they don't care. They're being cut because they're getting paid more than they are worth and likely have banked huge singing bonuses. If they were worth the money, they'd still have jobs.
For the players not being cut, was it worth it over 4%. Sure, for most all of them. They're under contract anyway. Only a few would reap the windfall benefit. Probably the teams wouldn't have this huge bloodletting and all the overpaid players would keep their contracts and the wouldn't be much of the 4% to spread around anyway. Plus, with all the high-priced players being cut today, other players get to take their spots in the starting lineup. Now they get playing time, a chance to earn contract incentives, and if they are good and charismatic, maybe even get an advertising gig opr two!
Was it worth 4% for the owners. Hell, yeah. No owner makes his primary living off a football team. You have to be really really really rich to afford to buy a team. They have money out the wazoo. Of course they always want more money, but in order to become billionaires, they had to learn that youk don't become a billionaire by entering into an agreement when it isn't to your benefit.
Was it worth 4% to the agents? Nope. Agents only make money when new contracts get written. They don't make money when palyers get cut. In fact, since they make a percentage of what a player makes, the agent loses money when the player gets cut. This is terrible for the agents.
So, to recap, the group most hurt by this, and the only group really hurt badly by it, are the AGENTS!!
HOORAY!!! We should have done this years ago.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2351271
Gene Upshaw, the union's executive director, said the league is offering 56.2 percent of its total revenue for the players, almost four points lower than the union's idea.
"Our number has to start with a six," Upshaw said.
Presumably, the owners' number must start with a five.
Both sides stand to lose a lot of money over this. Is it worth it to all the players being cut to lose thier jobs over 4%? Probably they don't care. They're being cut because they're getting paid more than they are worth and likely have banked huge singing bonuses. If they were worth the money, they'd still have jobs.
For the players not being cut, was it worth it over 4%. Sure, for most all of them. They're under contract anyway. Only a few would reap the windfall benefit. Probably the teams wouldn't have this huge bloodletting and all the overpaid players would keep their contracts and the wouldn't be much of the 4% to spread around anyway. Plus, with all the high-priced players being cut today, other players get to take their spots in the starting lineup. Now they get playing time, a chance to earn contract incentives, and if they are good and charismatic, maybe even get an advertising gig opr two!
Was it worth 4% for the owners. Hell, yeah. No owner makes his primary living off a football team. You have to be really really really rich to afford to buy a team. They have money out the wazoo. Of course they always want more money, but in order to become billionaires, they had to learn that youk don't become a billionaire by entering into an agreement when it isn't to your benefit.
Was it worth 4% to the agents? Nope. Agents only make money when new contracts get written. They don't make money when palyers get cut. In fact, since they make a percentage of what a player makes, the agent loses money when the player gets cut. This is terrible for the agents.
So, to recap, the group most hurt by this, and the only group really hurt badly by it, are the AGENTS!!
HOORAY!!! We should have done this years ago.
