Oh… you are referring to baseball. Thats the game they used to play before WWII… right? No, not college football… the other game.

Those were the days!

Buddy,

If by “screwed up” you mean set a 40 hour work week, overtime pay, workplace safety standards, unlocked fire escapes then unions have screwed things up for someone. You’re just a dittohead.

Ok, then. So the players, all the players, get 50%. The other employees get 20% and the owners get 30%. That’s a pretty good deal for just 32 men.

I think your numbers are screwy, but if they’re right, that’s a great deal for the owners. 30% of $9 billion. Keep the status quo!

Therefore, I don’t have to know jack about anything, I just go along with labor like the mindless nitwit I am.

Why don’t the players, since they’re the “whole show”, just go start their own league? Call it the UFL, the Union Football League. They can build their own stadiums, they can buy their own uniforms, they can lease their own jumbo jets to pay for their travel to away games, the can pay their own medical expenses; things will be grand.

Just as labor unions have screwed up every industry they’ve ever gotten their hands on, these morons will screw up the NFL.

Besides, that offer doesn’t completely kick the can down the road. If the split changes to 50-50, that means the owners get a bigger share of any revenue gains in the future, which puts the onus on them to grow the game for the good of everyone.

If anything, the league isn’t making as much as the owners would like.

The players are the ones playing and putting on the show, they seem to have no intent of willingly doing a lockout, so. . .

its on the owners. Period.

Any talk to me that the players are in teh wrong is stupid.

And like PFT has noted, the league walked out after what was likely an introductory offer. Thats bad negotiation.

The NFL has also stressed that the expenses allowed were never fair at $1B. In fact they are $2B. In other words, the NFLPA has been getting $1B more then they should have for some time. The NFLPA is also aware of this and has again offered nothing as a compromise.

They propose 50% of $9B leaving the owners the other $4.5B out of which they have to pay expenses of $2B leaving really only $2.5B.

The reality is this as a 50/30 split w 20 set aside for paying rent, leases, admin, land taxes etc.

1) The players say “we like it” the owners say “we can’t afford it” the players say “prove it” the owners say “no”… by keeping the line the same the players put pressure on the owners to open books.

2) they punt. By not making a new offer they punt the ball back to the owners.

Clearly neither side wants to make an opening offer, the players not wanting to give up anything at the start and the owners are good with waiting and going into lockout mode.

You cant wait until a month before a deadline and start with what you already get! they knew that was not an option so why even say it. It’s a waist of time. If that what you get and its already a problem then start just below that because you know you arent going to get that deal. The players could probably make more money if they didnt have to pay the union to represent them.

If I was the owners I would tell the union that they could have that deal, but…… Players will have to have their own doctor and will be chargered for their locker space, position coaches, parking space and game fees. In addition to this players will also pay their part of the power, water, travel, accommodations and any other bills that keep the business running. No more fans, heaters or oxygen will be supplied (players must bring their own). You want to split the profit you have to split the bills

Whats the point of bargaining if one party never changes their demands?

I’d be willing to bet there is not ONE owner in the league losing money. For some reason or another though, they’ll make the players look like the bad guys and lots average Joes will buy it hook, line and sinker.

I’m on the players side. They’re labor and so am I. When I go to watch a football game, I go to see the players. They SHOULD get half of ALL revenue?

Isn’t that the answer to this:

-Aiello’s statement omits one key fact — whether the proposal to take 50 cents of every dollar generated was an opening offer from the union oe a bottom line/take-it-or-leave-it position-

After 2 years, shouldn’t they be way past opening offers?

In the short term, people tend to side with the owners because they can understand the financial risk and costs associated with running a business.

Over time, if it appears like the owners are trying to “bury” the union, I think people will feel more sympathetic to the players (even though they are millionaires) because a lot of people have been “buried” by their employers in the past 3 years during the recession.

What? You think the owners can’t figure out that 50% of all revenue is the same money as 60% of the previous CBA’s defined revenue? You think the owners will go, “Duh… oooo… 50 is less than 60, this is good.” You think the owners are not smart enough to know that?

No wonder the owners walked out. How can you negotiate with someone who is assuming you are an idiot and trying to take advantage of you.

Let me get this straight. Mort’s report came out. PFT wrote on it. The NFL said it was inaccurate.

Then today they restated it was inaccurate and went on to explain how it was pretty much dead on.

This. The owners are the ones pushing for a new deal while the players liked the old one.

Thus, it’s reasonable for the players to want to use the old deal as a starting point.

If the owners are claiming that wanting to use the old deal as a starting point is an “insult”, then I’m fairly sure that the *players* aren’t the ones who are unwilling to negotiate in good faith.