The argument of "no one else does, why should we?" is rediculous. In the most prosperous era of NFL ever, the owners are demanding more money, with claims of money loss. The players, who would be losing the money, are asking the NFL to provide information, which is not cherry picked, to prove they need the money. I don't see how it's complicated. You ask for more money, you prove you need it, you get it. They are only hurting their claim by continuously dropping the amount they want.
The NBA opened it's books to the players union. There's your example. Regardless, you don't just ask for $1 billion without a reason. I don't get why people find that such an absurd idea.
I thought I heard that the owners offered to open their books from the past 5 years and the Union wanted the last 10 years. I obviously am not in the meetings, but I don't understand why the players didn't take them up on this. There must be more to it.
The financial institution the NFLPA is working with probably needed a larger sample to determine whether the demands were reasonable. I don't know, that's my guess.
I have read that the NFL offered "profitability statements", which is just cherry picked garbage and does not include full financials.
Could be that they wanted to prevent a 18 game season when they still have leverage. if they accepted the NFL's offer to delay the debate 2 years than they would have far less power to fight it. Also I think they want to remove the franchise tag. edit nvm. I thought the clause that they had to agree only applied for 2011 and 2012. still like to see more details on that point.
If the NFL had opened their books (which they shouldn't) no matter what they said, the union would find something in there to use against owners and strengthen their own agenda.
Yeah they should open the fucking books. If the players are going to get+/- 45% of all revenues of the entire entity, they are fucking partners not employees. Unless you are not smart enough to recognize that fact. Why on earth if you are going to be splitting revenues to that extent, wouldn't you open the books to your partner? The owners can bury tons of ridiculous expenses into a business and claim they aren't making shit. Why should the players agree to subsidize a 3 million dollar dildo collection for Irsay's wife? Also this isn't a normal business where an owner can claim they are taking the risk. That is bullshit. This is essentially a licensed monopoly. They have no real competition and almost zero risk other their own greed and stupidity. This isn't the car industry in Detroit, where if they continue to make shitty products and couldn't get significant concessions from their unions (who by the way saw open books) they would go under. If this was a true business with real competition then I would be more than compelled to listen to an owners side.
I will wait to hear from the players on why they didn't take a deal like this, before passing judgement.
Nobody's holding a gun to their head to play football. I have no problem with the unin doing what they have to to get the best deal possible, but they have no busines scrutinizing how the owners spend their share of the revenue. The owners don't get to scrutinize the players's spending and critique how they are wasting money.
Uh, ya they do. If the owners are claiming they're losing money and want to take money away from the players to make up for their loses, it's well within the players rights to ask where it is going. i don't see what is so fucking complicated about this for some people. if i come to you and say, "i need more money and you need to give me it", are you going to just blink and hand me the money, or are you gonna ask me why i have no money?
basically people are using their own situations with respect to their own boss... but we are ordinary people unlike the NFL players...
Obviously the NFL is putting their side of the story in the best light in order to win the pr battle (successfully, it would seem). And I'm sure (or at least, hope) the NFLPA had some legitimate reason to reject that offer. However, it does seem odd that the NFLPA decided to decertify and jump-start the crisis; the NFL offer seems to have at least been the basis for further negotiation. In the end, the players cannot win; the owners will be rich regardless, after all. Some players can last a long lockout; but those who have invested their money poorly or made poor decisions generally *cough* Cromartie *cough*, will start agitating for a resolution.
Are you going to pay Psl's and $100+ per ticket to watch mailmen and construction workers play games. Im not! and there will ALWAYS be a union
I've only been keeping up with this randomly, mostly through news posts here on TGG, but why is the player union walking away from these offers from the league? What is not good enough? Without understanding what it is so egregious, it is hard to make an informed opinion whether to support one over the other. The list offered in the OP's posts seem like a pretty generous give. I really don't agree that business owners should have to open their books to players. I certainly would not go to my boss and demand that, so I don't think players should be either. I don't hold to this partnership idea either. They aren't partners.. they are drafted, signed, and then eventually retired or fired. They are employees. I don't think that needs to change either. On the side of the players, I do want to see these guys protected and fairly compensated, and in the case of former players I think a lot needs to be done to support their health issues related to playing. In the end, they are all a bunch of greedy assholes, imo. Screw them if they don't wanna play. :breakdance:
The one glaring detail missing from the list in the OP is the $1 billion the owners have been demanding. I have to assume that's still on the table if they didn't address it.
No, they reduced that number too. The problem is not that the offer is quite good, the problem is that it was them the ones that decided to start this mess. They're being Revis.
So you're saying they reduced that number but forgot to mention it in there big press release trying to garner public support? Either that or they thought it was insignificant?
