You mean like the previous administration’s truth about “weapons of mass destruction”, or the truth about the impending Iraqi “mushroom cloud”, or the truth about how “our soldiers will greeted with flowers”, or the truth about how “the oil will pay for the war”? Turn off talk radio, learn to read, and grow up and understand that they ALL lie. Unless you’re a billionaire and give millions to the campaign. They still lie to you, but at least you get a fat tax break out of it.

In the absence of a union, can’t the owners impose their own rules?

These rules would be economically favorable to the owners, but designed to survive an anti-trust challenge.

Any work stoppage would have to be initiated by the players, largely absolving the owners of being the bad guys.

What am I missing here? Don’t both the owners and the NFLPA recognize this as a possibility?

You new here?
______________________________

No, I’m well aware of the bias. I just like pointing it out over and over again. This guy should be in the Obama administration the way he spins “the truth”.

Because they have a stake in the game, their perspective can change opinions……especially when backed up by a subject matter expert.

BUT……more than likely this is more about PR signs of good faith at this point in the discussions

Once again you are misleading. The owners have appointed a 10 owner committee handle negotiations. 22 of the owners won’t be at any of the meetings period. And clearly no deal will be made today so does it really matter? Why don’t you also report on how many of the 32 team union reps will be attending? I’m guessing… hardly any if any at all.

– – – – - – - – - – - – - – – — — – - – - – - — – - – - – - – - –

Because it PFT’s obvious bias against the owners.

You new here?

“PFT can report that one owner will be present at Monday’s talks. (Insert Team Name) owner (Insert Owner’s name) will be in attendance for the negotiations, according to a league source.