Request for stay denied!

[robertpaul49]

Personally, I am very unhappy about this ruling. I do not know why, but I trust the owners more than the players to make decisions about what will be best for the game for all of the fans. I think it was a ruling by a pro-union judge, who is short-sighted. From what I understand she was concerned about other stakeholders besides the owners and the players, but I really think she was only concerned about the players union. The poor players being exploited by the horrible owners. My wife's cousin played for the Washington Wizards, and after his rookie contract was over, he had more money than my Dad has over his whole life.

 

Sure, I'm a little upset because my Dad's factory went bankrupt, and he did not have any real saving outside of factor because he put everything into it to keep it going. His troubles were in no small part to Carrier leaving Syracuse for China, and I can tell you one thing it is not easy to run manufacturing in New York in no small part to the politians and the judges, who supposedly support the little guy, even though the fifty people who worked there no longer have jobs.

 

The number one pick in the draft is doing better than Wall Street CEOs. It's insane.

 

I am very worried it will hurt the Bills, and I do not know what I will do because I do not really care about any of the other teams. I will be sick to my stomach if the Jets become the Yankees of football because some judge felt it was fine for the players to collude but not the owners.

[MattM]

The guy I was responding to claims "that may be part of the large market owners' master plan--let the union dismantle the parity system that the League has thrived on so that they can turn the NFL into an MLB-style sport, where the big market/popular teams (Pittsburgh, for ex., is not a large market, but the Steelers have a huge following) could dominate and teams like our Bills, the Bengals, Lions, etc."

 

That's a far cry from Jerry Jones publicly grousing about sharing more of his revenue with guys like Ralph who don't feel motivated to generate shared revenue.

 

I was just pointing this out. No owner wants to do away with revenue sharing. Kraft, for example, has only stated how important revenue sharing is to the entire league. He's been saying so for years.

 

 

I think you're wrong about that--in fact, the statement you made right before that about Jones not wanting to share revenue undercuts your own statement. Personally, I believe that there are a decent number of owners (again, what I think of as the "large market owners") who would like to get rid of revenue sharing to the largest extent possible (look at the fight over things like luxury suite revenue) and/or create an uncapped system that will upend the relatively level playing field that this sport has enjoyed and which has led to its incredible popularity. For ex., creating such a high cap, without a concomitant decently leveled floor, that most teams don't spend anywhere near it, allowing those teams who do a great advantage, at least in terms of chasing FAs. I think Kraft, Snyder, Jones, et al. would love that system, whether they'll publicly say that or not.

 

In terms of your cheap shot at Ralph, it's just so easy in a market like Buffalo to sell luxury suites (which is where the money is made these days) to all of the Fortune 500 companies in the WNY area, isnt' it? While I typically don't agree with you, I figured you as smart enough to understand that different teams in different cities will have far different opporunities to make money in terms of what the local market (individual and corporate) will bear. Your comment reminds me of my arguments with my cousin, who, for the life of him, can't seem to understand why the KC Royals can't invest in their team like the Yankees do and spend the same kind of money to build a winner.....

[Beerball]

'normal' league business resumes Friday, 8AM