Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

An agreement will be reached


Portis the Tortoise

Recommended Posts

I believe a deal will absolutely get dne, maybe with a delay, but there is no way they will allow so many teams to let go of so many players and flood so many players into free agency.

Some teams could be crippled for years because of this thing.

Stalemate will not happen. They will get a deal. Not worried one bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still have a couple more days. No one wants this to happen. The deal will get done. Anyone agree?

welll.... if you look at the NHL they all went down with the ship. few people believed a season and a half would be lost. so anything is possible.

they are arguing over 4% (56 % vs 60%) but that is not the real sticking point. i believe it is the disparity between what the "weathy" and "poor" owners see as personal income. now that may be something worth fighting for. i just do not see the snyders, krafts and jones rolling over so that "poor" owners like the rooneys and browns get the benefit of their financial success.

they could go to the mattresses for a long time over this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3.8% i can't believe that all this is over 3.8%!!!!!! Holy crap make it 58% and call it even.

again, it is not that percent (although you are talking about millions and millions of dollars with each percent) it is the divergence of owners opinions about what is individual and what is common moneys.. that is huge to guys like snyder and jones

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont think so man that upshaw is a real *****clown he not going to budge.

Isnt UPSHAW on our side? He wants a higher salary cap, and even went as far to say that Snyder was one of the top three owners in the league. I could be wrong here...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

welll.... if you look at the NHL they all went down with the ship. few people believed a season and a half would be lost. so anything is possible.

they are arguing over 4% (56 % vs 60%) but that is not the real sticking point. i believe it is the disparity between what the "weathy" and "poor" owners see as personal income. now that may be something worth fighting for. i just do not see the snyders, krafts and jones rolling over so that "poor" owners like the rooneys and browns get the benefit of their financial success.

they could go to the mattresses for a long time over this

I agree with this post 100%. Even if I was a fan of a lower revenue team, I would still think "poor" owners trying to use "weathy" owners as personal income is dead wrong.

keep in mind, poor owners in this case are still making millions upon millions bucks a year. Then they want weathier teams to make up some the difference so everyone can be on the same level? Whatever. Synder and others would be fools to agree to this. Don't penalize teams for success...this is totally unAmerican.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem here, as best as I have been able to figure, is upshaw wants to force the league to come to a conclusion on its owners revenue sharing. This is not the NFLPAs business, and the CBA extension could be possible, but Upshaw wont let it happen till this gets dealt with.

Though a small part probobly involves the 4% extra upshaw wants. The league has compromised to the tune of about 10% of revenue, it is willing to give to players. Upshaw? Comprimised 0%. It wasnt a negotiation, it was Upshaw telling everyone it would all happen exactly his way. When you have one side making all the demands and not even willing to budge an inch, hes overreaching. The old CBA was obviously good enough for so long, this CBA would be even BETTER for the players, yet Upshaw wont take it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3.8% i can't believe that all this is over 3.8%!!!!!! Holy crap make it 58% and call it even.

1% = about 1 Billion dollars over the whole deal. 3.8 billion dollars, tahts alot.

The problem here, as best as I have been able to figure, is upshaw wants to force the league to come to a conclusion on its owners revenue sharing. This is not the NFLPAs business, and the CBA extension could be possible, but Upshaw wont let it happen till this gets dealt with.

Though a small part probobly involves the 4% extra upshaw wants. The league has compromised to the tune of about 10% of revenue, it is willing to give to players. Upshaw? Comprimised 0%. It wasnt a negotiation, it was Upshaw telling everyone it would all happen exactly his way. When you have one side making all the demands and not even willing to budge an inch, hes overreaching. The old CBA was obviously good enough for so long, this CBA would be even BETTER for the players, yet Upshaw wont take it.

I think you are right. In terms of the players, they are getting an even better deal.

The owners are also bickering with one another, but their gripes make sense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isnt UPSHAW on our side? He wants a higher salary cap, and even went as far to say that Snyder was one of the top three owners in the league. I could be wrong here...

Yes And No,,,,

He wants higher cap to help the players not the teams. They want a bigger pc. of the revenue sharing. NFLPA wants 60%, Owners are near 52% (I think)

Gene is a good guy doing the best job he can to get the players all the can get. The NFL is trying to make as much money it can. Neither side wants this. Teams will cut way too many good players on Friday, and those players wont be able to sign deals elsewhere or only to teams with cap space. Then next yr an uncaped season may equal strike......

We as the fans will suffer.... :doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Step back from the ledges, people! This is negotiation and posturing at its finest. Both sides are going to threaten the nuclear option, and the owners know that they have the NFLPA under their thumb.

Upshaw will blink because his constituency does not want to be unemployed, and there are many people that will take their jobs for less.

Simply stated, the deal will get done in the eleventh hour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

again, it is not that percent (although you are talking about millions and millions of dollars with each percent) it is the divergence of owners opinions about what is individual and what is common moneys.. that is huge to guys like snyder and jones

The CBA and the revenue sharing are actually 2 seperate issues. Some owners want to get the revenue sharing down first so that they know how much they have to spend, but one can happen without the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...