Pyrite Gal Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 A few posters here have berated NFLPA leadership as "tards" and other negative comments about their negotiating and work on this issue. It a'int over til its over, but if this deal works out as presented I hope some of these folks are person enough to eat crow and join us all in celebratting a renewed era of labor partnership and peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 A few posters here have berated NFLPA leadership as "tards" and other negative comments about their negotiating and work on this issue. It a'int over til its over, but if this deal works out as presented I hope some of these folks are person enough to eat crow and join us all in celebratting a renewed era of labor partnership and peace. 618926[/snapback] Yeah, right. That ass Upshaw was on the radio saying there will be no cap in the new CBA. That AIN'T gonna happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribo Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Upshaw = RJx60 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 For the league to be flourishing as it is, Upshaw absolutely has to be given some credit. Let's face it, the salary cap system helps us probably more than any team. Mr. Wison is worth approx. 50 cents when compared to some of these newer owners, and this is fact. The fact that he drives around in the same car as me (a Ford Taurus) is telling. Still, with some solid drafting, management and coaching, the Bills could get right back in the hunt. That is what I call a good system. Without a cap, we are the Kansas City Royals, or worse. If the Bills continue to be doormats, it is not the fault of Gene Upshaw, nor for that matter Taglibue. It will (I am sorry to say) probably be the fault of Ralph Wilson for not putting a good management team in place, or for meddling with the ones that he does hire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kasper13 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 We should celebrate multi-millionaires and billionaires deciding on not being stupid and figuring out how to share half a billion dollars? I don't think so. The greed is out of hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 We should celebrate multi-millionaires and billionaires deciding on not being stupid and figuring out how to share half a billion dollars? I don't think so. The greed is out of hand. 618958[/snapback] Exactly. You want a celebration? I'll celebrate when firefighters/the military, etc. are earning the big bucks, because they ACTUALLY deserve it. Not these assclowns who arent happy making tens of millions playing a kids game, and are whining because 10 million isnt enough, they need more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderweb Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 A few posters here have berated NFLPA leadership as "tards" and other negative comments about their negotiating and work on this issue. It a'int over til its over, but if this deal works out as presented I hope some of these folks are person enough to eat crow and join us all in celebratting a renewed era of labor partnership and peace. 618926[/snapback] Imposter! No way was this point stated in such a brief and concise manner by...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Exactly. You want a celebration? I'll celebrate when firefighters/the military, etc. are earning the big bucks, because they ACTUALLY deserve it. Not these assclowns who arent happy making tens of millions playing a kids game, and are whining because 10 million isnt enough, they need more. 618960[/snapback] Does this mean you are not going to stand in line to give Gene Upshaw a *******? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Does this mean you are not going to stand in line to give Gene Upshaw a *******? 619010[/snapback] LOL! WTF??? Yeah, call it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Does this mean you are not going to stand in line to give Gene Upshaw a *******? 619010[/snapback] Nope, someone else on TSW will have to wait with pyrite gal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dib Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 and are whining because 10 million isnt enough, they need more. they're only thinking of their families. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Why not give them 65%? Hell they're the only ones who are doing anything in the NFL, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2003Contenders Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 I know where Pyrite Gal is coming from. If all of this moves forward and the NFLPA winds up with any amount over the 56% that the owners were originally offering, then Upshaw will have done an excellent job at driving his bargain. Remember, when it all comes down to it, the owners hold all of the cards. The flip side of the coin is that the sport has thrived under the current system and the players are already set to make an incredible amount of money under the owners' original proposal. If no extension is worked out, then Upshaw will look like a fool, having pushed too far with no ability to compromise -- and, consequently, everyone loses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 A few posters here have berated NFLPA leadership as "tards" and other negative comments about their negotiating and work on this issue. It a'int over til its over, but if this deal works out as presented I hope some of these folks are person enough to eat crow and join us all in celebratting a renewed era of labor partnership and peace. 618926[/snapback] I agree. If that deal works out, than we the fans, as the owners of the league, should eat some crow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted March 6, 2006 Author Share Posted March 6, 2006 We should celebrate multi-millionaires and billionaires deciding on not being stupid and figuring out how to share half a billion dollars? I don't think so. The greed is out of hand. 618958[/snapback] No. I do not think folks should celebrate this at all. However, I think that some posters might want to at least acknowledge reality that their brickbats were incorrect and unwarranted. One of the problems in our society strikes me as extremism. There needs to be some other choices besides total celebration or total detonation because usually reality involves some moderation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kipers Hair Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Yeah, right. That ass Upshaw was on the radio saying there will be no cap in the new CBA. That AIN'T gonna happen. 618938[/snapback] Damn straight that never will - if they aboloish the cap, there is no NFLPA pension, no free agency requirement, etc.. They will never allow that to occur... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 If the players accept 56% of total revenues instead of 60%, or even 59.5%, then revenue sharing becomes less of an issue for owners. Basically players are saying "we know that most teams can't afford to pay us, so let the big markets help out the smaller markets so that we CAN get paid a LOT more than we're already getting compared to before." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted March 6, 2006 Author Share Posted March 6, 2006 If the players accept 56% of total revenues instead of 60%, or even 59.5%, then revenue sharing becomes less of an issue for owners. Basically players are saying "we know that most teams can't afford to pay us, so let the big markets help out the smaller markets so that we CAN get paid a LOT more than we're already getting compared to before." 619165[/snapback] An article is currently on ESPN.COM at > http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2354095 < which explains the complicated financing involved. Among other things it explains why the small-market teams want the big market teams to actually pay back a return on an investment that the smaller market teams made to the bigger markets in the early 90s and earlier. If one chooses to read the article and understand it as best one can, then folks can begin to understand that this is far more complex than a simple dispuite between the millionaire players on one side and billionaire owners on the other side. It is at least a three way dispute between the NFLPA, but more directly between old guard owners in smaller markets like Ralph (who bought in at 10K years ago) and Dan Rooney (whose Dad bought in at $2500) and folks like McNair in TX who bought in at $700 million. The article accurately describes these folks as really participating in different businesses fiancially (x. it strikes some folks as simply a poor deal that Indy gets only $1 miilon/year for naming rights to its stadium because folks like Bob Kraft have sured over $19 million to name the Pats stadium after gillete. Meanwhile the concept that Cincy fogoes any naming revenue for Paul Brown stadium and Ralph fogoes any money for our stadium is simply weird). Posts whcih simply try to claim that the problem here is Upshaw does not know what he is doing actually demonstrate that the poster just does not understand the economics here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Posts whcih simply try to claim that the problem here is Upshaw does not know what he is doing actually demonstrate that the poster just does not understand the economics here. I never said that Upshaw didn't know what he was doing, because I believe he knows EXACTLY what he's doing. My point is that by demanding that players get close to 60% of revenues, he's putting a strain on the owners and creating a situation where there's animosity and a good chance that NOTHING gets done, versus simply taking less money, which is STILL a lot more than they were previously getting. Frankly if I were the smaller-market owners, I'd tell Upshaw and the NFLPA that it's 56% or nothing, and that means pensions go bye-bye, no cap in 2007 with the prohibitive rules that apply, and likely a work stoppage in 2008. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrite Gal Posted March 6, 2006 Author Share Posted March 6, 2006 I never said that Upshaw didn't know what he was doing, because I believe he knows EXACTLY what he's doing. My point is that by demanding that players get close to 60% of revenues, he's putting a strain on the owners and creating a situation where there's animosity and a good chance that NOTHING gets done, versus simply taking less money, which is STILL a lot more than they were previously getting. Frankly if I were the smaller-market owners, I'd tell Upshaw and the NFLPA that it's 56% or nothing, and that means pensions go bye-bye, no cap in 2007 with the prohibitive rules that apply, and likely a work stoppage in 2008. 619212[/snapback] The smaller revenue teams (a better phrase actually than smaller market beecause it is more accurate in describing the lay of the land in this dispute) correctly judge that the NFLPA is better seen and enlisted as an ally in their real battle with the high revenue teams. The low revenue teams would get relatively killed if they trained their effort on beating down the NFLPA rather than focusing on what is best for their business model which is to use the NFLPA as leverage to force the large revenue teams to pay back the welfare payment made to them in the NFL G3 program where the NFL subsidized the larger revenue teams to the tune of $700 million bucks in loans they used to get stadium deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts