Re: Has anyone heard
posted at 9/10/2010 11:09 AM EDT
Which is what, reject?
You spend more time trying to pretend I have no idea what I am talking about instead of learning something. Speaks volumes.
"The issue there is that the top-earning teams make it difficult for the lower-earning teams to keep pace with the salary cap. At least that’s how the argument goes. In 2006, the NFL tried to resolve that by having increased revenue sharing. However, that has caused resentment among the owners who are forced to share."http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-cbaandowners051908
Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti created a stir earlier in the week when he said some linebackers are making more than a few entire teams. And Goodell said Friday that the owners made $200 million less than in 2006. "The owners and clubs are being squeezed, the economics are not working," he said.
The players say they want to see the clubs' profit-loss statements. Goodell says the NBA and NHL showed their unions the books, but both had long work stoppages anyway.
So, how much of this is posturing -- by both sides -- and how much is serious?
The owners don't seem to be in anywhere near the union-busting mood they were 23 years ago. But unless they get the upper hand in a deal this time around (especially with Smith, with whom they have no relationship, on the other side), they'll probably put replacement players on the field again, because what we learned in 1987 is that players don't have the resources to withstand a protracted work stoppage. Owners do. With the product being more popular now than it ever has been domestically, the owners won't benefit from a work stoppage, but they'd benefit from getting the deal they want, by whatever means necessary.
At the heart of so much of this disagreement seems to be stadium improvement or procurement. Goodell even said, "Capital improvements take a significant investment, a need the league didn't have 20 years ago." It's one of the things that owners put under the umbrella of "cost recognition," reasoning that mutual investment will increase revenue, which will lead to greater compensation for the players . . . or, as Goodell said, "a proper system which recognizes the investment it takes."
Read and learn, kiddo.
Sure sounds like to me the owners opted out of the 2006 extension specifically to try to gain more control of the revenue pool.
Glad I could TRY to help, but you apparently are far beyond that.