morehouse11 Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 People who are taking the owners side to me are completely clueless on obvious facts!! I just dont understand, does ANYBODY here believe at all that ANY owner was LOSING money before the lockout? HEL NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! In that case, how in the WORLD can you call the players greedy when they were perfectly fine with the status quo, it was the OWNERS who opted out of the CBA and locked them out? To me its pretty obvious, if the owners CBA would be signed 31-0, it is def owner favorite weighted. Its not like both sets of lawyers from the owners and nflpa sat down and wrote the CBA together. The owners lawyers wrote it, would you just sign anything that anybody gives you? I hope not!Just think about this for one second, in all other major american sports leagues, teams get sold all the time, (esp NBA). Do you know the last time an NFL team was sold on the open market? ILL WAIT??? lol its comical, the least valuable team in the NFL is worth over 800 million! For people that dont know, people SALE when they start losing money or see better investments elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmite Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Maybe it's because the owners were together and ironed out all their differences and were involved in the entire process so it was easy for them to vote yes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morehouse11 Posted July 22, 2011 Author Share Posted July 22, 2011 Maybe it's because the owners were together and ironed out all their differences and were involved in the entire process so it was easy for them to vote yes?huh? They ironed out all the differences between THEMSELVES? I dont get it, what does that have to go with voting on an agreement with players? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmite Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 huh? They ironed out all the differences between THEMSELVES? I dont get it, what does that have to go with voting on an agreement with players?So this DeMaurice Smith guy is just imaginary? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight of God Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 huh? They ironed out all the differences between THEMSELVES? I dont get it, what does that have to go with voting on an agreement with players?A good bit of the dispute was between the owners. Not just owners vs players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borat Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 People who are taking the owners side to me are completely clueless on obvious facts!! I just dont understand, does ANYBODY here believe at all that ANY owner was LOSING money before the lockout? HEL NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! In that case, how in the WORLD can you call the players greedy when they were perfectly fine with the status quo, it was the OWNERS who opted out of the CBA and locked them out? To me its pretty obvious, if the owners CBA would be signed 31-0, it is def owner favorite weighted. Its not like both sets of lawyers from the owners and nflpa sat down and wrote the CBA together. The owners lawyers wrote it, would you just sign anything that anybody gives you? I hope not!Just think about this for one second, in all other major american sports leagues, teams get sold all the time, (esp NBA). Do you know the last time an NFL team was sold on the open market? ILL WAIT??? lol its comical, the least valuable team in the NFL is worth over 800 million! For people that dont know, people SALE when they start losing money or see better investments elsewhere.If the players don't like it, they can go play in the CFL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morehouse11 Posted July 22, 2011 Author Share Posted July 22, 2011 A good bit of the dispute was between the owners. Not just owners vs players.Your are making my point EXACTLY!! We all know the owners had major disputes between themselves, so the only way they could get a 31-0 to vote for a new CBA is for ALL the owners to be happy. The ONLY owners who were not happy in the first place, are the ones who are not making as much money as the Jerry Jones, Robert Krafts, Dan Snyders etc.... So how do you make them happy, but doing a CBA that gives them more money by taking away some that goes to the players! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borat Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Real common sense: 31 "yes" + 1 abstination= Al Davis is batpoo insane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borat Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Your are making my point EXACTLY!! We all know the owners had major disputes between themselves, so the only way they could get a 31-0 to vote for a new CBA is for ALL the owners to be happy. The ONLY owners who were not happy in the first place, are the ones who are not making as much money as the Jerry Jones, Robert Krafts, Dan Snyders etc.... So how do you make them happy, but doing a CBA that gives them more money by taking away some that goes to the players!Or, it means that many owners made concessions to get a deal done. You have no idea.And so what if it is heavily owner-favored? It's not like the players are being forced to sign it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmite Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Your are making my point EXACTLY!! We all know the owners had major disputes between themselves, so the only way they could get a 31-0 to vote for a new CBA is for ALL the owners to be happy. The ONLY owners who were not happy in the first place, are the ones who are not making as much money as the Jerry Jones, Robert Krafts, Dan Snyders etc.... So how do you make them happy, but doing a CBA that gives them more money by taking away some that goes to the players!You're acting like the players were shut out of the negotiation process. They were there the whole time, have you not been paying attention? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borat Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 You're acting like the players were shut out of the negotiation process. They were there the whole time, have you not been paying attention?Nope, obviously not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmite Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Wow, if the owners conspired and assigned 7 of them to vote no, this deal would've been signed, sealed, and delivered 2 days ago! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HouseofEuphoria Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 @Joshua Cribbs' statement on the players not voting-OMG are u F'ing serious? We have to wait until all 1900 of you dumb MFers read a 600 page CBA and then wait until you all agree?!!Do you not have people you voted in to represent you in these matters?... you know,...the ones who helped put all this together?!He kept pleading for the fans to be patient but it would be much more than 72 hours.....dude was talking like weeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morehouse11 Posted July 22, 2011 Author Share Posted July 22, 2011 You're acting like the players were shut out of the negotiation process. They were there the whole time, have you not been paying attention?Maybe you MISSED the whole point, I repeat, the owners lawyers AND PLAYERS lawyers DID NOT sit down and draw up the cba that the owners just agreed too. The OWNERS lawyers did, meaning there is no guaranty that the document they wrote has everything that was agreed to by Demaurice. You are acting as if the owners and their attorneys are angels who would write a document by themselves that is completely equal for both the players and owners? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HouseofEuphoria Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Maybe you MISSED the whole point, I repeat, the owners lawyers AND PLAYERS lawyers DID NOT sit down and draw up the cba that the owners just agreed too. The OWNERS lawyers did, meaning there is no guaranty that the document they wrote has everything that was agreed to by Demaurice. You are acting as if the owners and their attorneys are angels who would write a document by themselves that is completely equal for both the players and owners?Dude, your conspiracy theory is lame.Not only that....i think it was part of an episode of X-Files...back in the day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmite Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Maybe you MISSED the whole point, I repeat, the owners lawyers AND PLAYERS lawyers DID NOT sit down and draw up the cba that the owners just agreed too. The OWNERS lawyers did, meaning there is no guaranty that the document they wrote has everything that was agreed to by Demaurice. You are acting as if the owners and their attorneys are angels who would write a document by themselves that is completely equal for both the players and owners?You're off your rocker. That's why the players and their lawyers are reviewing it now before they sign. I don't mind them doing this, it's very important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannonballsghost Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Dude, your conspiracy theory is lame.Not only that....i think it was part of an episode of X-Files...back in the day. The conspiracy theorys in the X files made more sense Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SyCo Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Where are you getting this from? The owners voted on a cba that was crafted by both parties. I doubt every lawyer who represents every player got to take turns siting at the type writer, but the deal that was written, is the deal everyone came to terms with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GEORGIAfan Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 I think this deal will shaft the players, but not because the 31-0 vote. I think the extra stuff they added is what is shafting the players. I hope when a real CBA is completed that it will pass by both sides unanimously. I want them to iron out the CBA, so we can have a base for all future CBAs and we will never have to worry about the lockout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRUNKuno Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Owners made a power move. I don't think there is anything they could've put in there that may have been incredibly substantial to the signing on by the nflpa. Players are doing their due diligence as they should be. You don't just sign a contract without reading it over. People are getting bent outta shape for nothing. Whoever thought the ratification process would be simple is out of his mind. This is standard negotiating procedure. Each side will find a way to get more out of the deal. The players allegedly did the same with that whole 10 plaintiffs getting 10mil extra ordeal. Everybody is grabbing at any thread they can find. Again this is standard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morehouse11 Posted July 22, 2011 Author Share Posted July 22, 2011 Where are you getting this from? The owners voted on a cba that was crafted by both parties. I doubt every lawyer who represents every player got to take turns siting at the type writer, but the deal that was written, is the deal everyone came to terms with.False, the one common thread from all the players that are speaking at, is saying that the owners put things in this new CBA proposal that they did not agree too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HouseofEuphoria Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 False, the one common thread from all the players that are speaking at, is saying that the owners put things in this new CBA proposal that they did not agree too.D. Smith sent a letter to all the players telling them there was certain stuff not in the agreement. You know why? Cause that's what happens when you have to give and take to come to an agreement.You wanna start this carp all over again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chifalc Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 False, the one common thread from all the players that are speaking at, is saying that the owners put things in this new CBA proposal that they did not agree too.WHile simultaneously claiming that they have not seen it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzummo Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 People who are taking the owners side to me are completely clueless on obvious facts!! I just dont understand, does ANYBODY here believe at all that ANY owner was LOSING money before the lockout? HEL NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! In that case, how in the WORLD can you call the players greedy when they were perfectly fine with the status quo, it was the OWNERS who opted out of the CBA and locked them out? To me its pretty obvious, if the owners CBA would be signed 31-0, it is def owner favorite weighted. Its not like both sets of lawyers from the owners and nflpa sat down and wrote the CBA together. The owners lawyers wrote it, would you just sign anything that anybody gives you? I hope not!Just think about this for one second, in all other major american sports leagues, teams get sold all the time, (esp NBA). Do you know the last time an NFL team was sold on the open market? ILL WAIT??? lol its comical, the least valuable team in the NFL is worth over 800 million! For people that dont know, people SALE when they start losing money or see better investments elsewhere.The owners have been meeting very often to iron out the proposals (plural, this is not the first one they've submitted). The players are the ones that didn't show up to a meeting, walked out on a couple of others, and are playing games about whether or not they are going to vote on the proposal. The owners want the league to begin play because without the preseason, the NFL will lose $800 million in revenue ($400 or so million of which will be in the player's pockets). The GM's, coaches, and the rest of the FO want a deal to get done. That puts pressure on the owners to get the deal done. The players are enjoying their time off.The players were ok with the status quo because the status quo was lopsided in the players favor. Invest a billion dollars into a business. Then give 50% of your gross revenue to your employees. Then out of the 50% leftover, you pay for advertising, real estate, maintenance, improvements, training facilities, staff, etc... Think about it this way, the old system had players getting 50% of all revenues. So the last salary cap was what, $120 million. So there's $120 million leftover. You have to pay coaches ($7 mil total), training staff, medical staff, grounds people, property bills, advertising (millions), and stadium upgrades (multi millions). How much do you think the owners really pocket from that $120 million cut? $20 million maybe? That would be a 2% ROI, which sucks. For the record, the $120 million is a pretty accurate baseline. Forbes estimated NFL revenues to be around $7.1 billion per year a few years back. That would be $222 million per team per year. Split down the middle, owners and players would have been given about $111 million each (a pretty close estimate to the salary cap).Frankly, if I was an owner, I would tell the players I'm good with 50/50 as long as they throw their endorsement deals into the pot and take on half of the expenses. We wouldn't have a league without you, and you wouldn't have endorsement deals without the league. We won't have the revenue without the expenses, so let's just throw everything into the pot and split it down the middle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revenge Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Real common sense: 31 "yes" + 1 abstination= Al Davis is batpoo insane.looks like More house is batpoo insane as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.