- Joined
- Oct 10, 2004
- Messages
- 33,218
- Reaction score
- 44,411
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Your assumption is the players will sacrefice article 46 for revenue sharing. I'm not sure about that
I believe coming out on top of Brady, Kraft and the Patriots in the DG case earned Goodell loads of positive cache with the other owners. There's a load of stuff that went on between Goodell and guys Iike Mara, Rooney and others that I think those guys are scared ****less may be revealed. Goodell has them over a barrel.Goodell Nausea Syndrome is more like it for me. The preening arrogance makes me sick.
I’ll allow that he must have something going for him that apparently convinces enough of the owners to stick with him. The question for me is why so many of the Billionaire Boys (not including the league’s charity case in Wisconsin) think they can’t get equal or better performance from someone willing to take much less; as they do regularly in reference to their own players. That’s why I can’t totally rule out the “more here than meets the eye and it can’t possibly be a good thing” feeling.
History would prove you correct but I dunna know...Here in lies the issue. Are the players willing to go on strike for an extended period? My hunch tells me the answer is no. The players will eventually cave again. That's what I've seen from the players. Realistically the players need to go on strike for the whole season I reckon, maybe even 2 seasons.
I believe coming out on top of Brady, Kraft and the Patriots in the DG case earned Goodell loads of positive cache with the other owners. There's a load of stuff that went on between Goodell and guys Iike Mara, Rooney and others that I think those guys are scared ****less may be revealed. Goodell has them over a barrel.
It’s a stupid plan. Let dummies continue protesting a flag that represents them.
Precisely the points I have raised to cricket sounds from folks defending Kraft's and the 32's majority support keeping Goodell.
WHY???
What are the business reasons?
What personal initiatives and actions has he taken to raise revenue?
What personal initiatives and actions has he taken to improve the brand?
Why would the 32 even for a moment consider the outrageous contract demands of a poor performer?
Something major is amiss.
Goodell got the small market owners in line. Kraft conned the Union. The CBA passed with everyone but Jerruh behind it and Paragraph 46 remained in the CBA. Using the line that W made (in)famous after Katrina, the owners basically think, "You're doing a heck of a job Roger."
'Precisely the points I have raised to cricket sounds from folks defending Kraft's and the 32's majority support keeping Goodell.
WHY???
What are the business reasons?
What personal initiatives and actions has he taken to raise revenue?
What personal initiatives and actions has he taken to improve the brand?
Why would the 32 even for a moment consider the outrageous contract demands of a poor performer?
Something major is amiss.