Scott Dierking Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Dude, the owners are going to squeeze you for every last penny, regardless of what the players make. And the payers agents will bleed the owners for every last penny in a contract, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donboyO Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 And the payers agents will bleed the owners for every last penny in a contract, too. You do realize the owners cant cut them at their whim right? expect Leon to be asked to take a paycut or be cut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 In a great oversimplification-The owners and players were split on a definite amount of revenue in the most recent discussions. The owners agreed to meet halfway, and the players walked away. You tell me who is playing harder ball? The NFLPA is trying to become the MLBPA. Be careful what you wish for. Talk about oversimplifications. The owners allegedly made a last ditch, bullsh*t offer that only covered a couple of years on a deal that was going to cover many more years. Again-Oversimplification- There was a divide in how revenues divide. The owners met them half way. The players walked. Oh please. Half way to what? It's a ******* travesty. The players were completely screwed by the rules in place for 2010. Are the owners offering any of that money back? The owners are trying to ram a new deal in place before they sign the next obscene television deal. I didn't hear them offering any legit revenue documention. The players should just roll over. Again. We should all be robbed and feel so fortunate The danger for fans is if either side gains too much of an upper hand in the ultimate deal. The best settlement is one that benefits both sides, allows the league to grow and prosper, and both sides feel like they gained something out of the process. If either side feels "raped", it will only bring more unrest to the sport and cause divides (see baseball in the 70's and 80's)-The fans lose most of all in those situations. There is no "side" in this thing that fans should feel pity for. Why not? If you want things to be good for the fans, they should probably both be screwed. I agree that a model which is good for players will lead to no draft, more player movement, higher salaries and these things can hurt the fan experience, but it's not like I think we should root for the owners to keep raking it in so that "the game" remains fan friendly. The owners aren't giving anything back to the fans, that's for sure. And the payers agents will bleed the owners for every last penny in a contract, too. Completely irrelevant. There is a hard salary cap. The players haven't fought it, they just dispute the owners claims about how little the owners earn. Every cent that goes to player A comes from players B & C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 You do realize the owners cant cut them at their whim right? expect Leon to be asked to take a paycut or be cut Yes they can-And they are not responsible for future salaries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Talk about oversimplifications. The owners allegedly made a last ditch, bullsh*t offer that only covered a couple of years on a deal that was going to cover many more years. Oh please. Half way to what? It's a ******* travesty. The players were completely screwed by the rules in place for 2010. Are the owners offering any of that money back? The owners are trying to ram a new deal in place before they sign the next obscene television deal. I didn't hear them offering any legit revenue documention. The players should just roll over. Again. Why not? If you want things to be good for the fans, they should probably both be screwed. I agree that a model which is good for players will lead to no draft, more player movement, higher salaries and these things can hurt the fan experience, but it's not like I think we should root for the owners to keep raking it in so that "the game" remains fan friendly. The owners aren't giving anything back to the fans, that's for sure. Completely irrelevant. There is a hard salary cap. The players haven't fought it, they just dispute the owners claims about how little the owners earn. Every cent that goes to player A comes from players B & C. eh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 eh Screw your winkie face! This is serious! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Screw your winkie face! This is serious! I just don't have the energy to argue vociferously for either side of this. All we are barraged with is PR ploys from both sides, and the truth is not apparently found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 I just don't have the energy to argue vociferously for either side of this. All we are barraged with is PR ploys from both sides, and the truth is not apparently found. I'm lucky. That isn't on the news here. All we have are themany, many ladies of Silvio Berlusconi. Bunga, bunga. Ruby Rubacuore Noemi Letizia Nicole Minetti Barbara Guerra Sabina Began Etc, etc, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Jet Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 I love you Silvio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 I love you Silvio. Can you guess which one is a high ranking government official? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Nicole Minetti There is soooo much right with this picture. This one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 There is soooo much right with this picture. This one? Correct! Former vellina and dental hygienist Nicole Minetti is now a Lombardy Regional Councilor. She was chosen to run by Silvio's Popolo della Liberta (People of Freedom PdL) party after treating him for two broken teeth suffered when he was struck in the face by a souvenir statuette of the duomo, ironically while in piazza duomo. She was chosen to perform the dental work despite only qualifying for the position the prior November. She had previously served as a model and dancer on Colorado Café a show which airs on Silvio’s mediaset network. This is her official website: She was careful to wear the cross for the religious vote.Here is a video of her hard at work on Colorado Café. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Smart move on the NFL part here-Saying that mandatory HGH testing for a new agreement. Players will say "invasion of privacy", but owners will say "touche!" if we are required to open books. Interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Smart move on the NFL part here-Saying that mandatory HGH testing for a new agreement. Players will say "invasion of privacy", but owners will say "touche!" if we are required to open books. Interesting Another complete total bullsh*t PR move by the owners. I will cheer the first North American sports league that says we will give everyone one phsyical at the start of the year for insurance, and that's it, unless they get arrested or do something else which triggers treatment or punishment. The chemists are always going to be ahead of the testers, and only idiots use street drugs(yes, even your beloved herb,potheads, is not good for you, but it's not my concern unless you have a serious safety-related job). Athletes aren't driving planes or enforcing laws with a gun in hand. Who freaking cares anymore but busybody douchebags. . Shawn Merriman and a cast of thousands of violators are still going to find work, and they should. If they choose to destroy their long-term health for short-term gain, I don't care, and no longer understand why anyone does. The MLB obsession and the Lance Armstrong mess are now much bigger an embarrassment than the drug users themselves. And spare me that "role model" bullsh*t. If what a pro athlete does or does not do impacts how you raise your children, you have failed as a parent. Cut the bullsh*t and make a Goddamn deal. Lock Fedora Guy and Sunburned Man with a calculator and pens and pads in a room and don't let them out until it's done. This is a fvkcing joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Correct! Former vellina and dental hygienist Nicole Minetti is now a Lombardy Regional Councilor. She was chosen to run by Silvio's Popolo della Liberta (People of Freedom PdL) party after treating him for two broken teeth suffered when he was struck in the face by a souvenir statuette of the duomo, ironically while in piazza duomo. She was chosen to perform the dental work despite only qualifying for the position the prior November. She had previously served as a model and dancer on Colorado Café a show which airs on Silvio’s mediaset network. This is her official website: She was careful to wear the cross for the religious vote.Here is a video of her hard at work on Colorado Café. Council us! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted March 25, 2011 Author Share Posted March 25, 2011 Another complete total bullsh*t PR move by the owners. I will cheer the first North American sports league that says we will give everyone one phsyical at the start of the year for insurance, and that's it, unless they get arrested or do something else which triggers treatment or punishment. The chemists are always going to be ahead of the testers, and only idiots use street drugs(yes, even your beloved herb,potheads, is not good for you, but it's not my concern unless you have a serious safety-related job). Athletes aren't driving planes or enforcing laws with a gun in hand. Who freaking cares anymore but busybody douchebags. . Shawn Merriman and a cast of thousands of violators are still going to find work, and they should. If they choose to destroy their long-term health for short-term gain, I don't care, and no longer understand why anyone does. The MLB obsession and the Lance Armstrong mess are now much bigger an embarrassment than the drug users themselves. And spare me that "role model" bullsh*t. If what a pro athlete does or does not do impacts how you raise your children, you have failed as a parent. Cut the bullsh*t and make a Goddamn deal. Lock Fedora Guy and Sunburned Man with a calculator and pens and pads in a room and don't let them out until it's done. This is a fvkcing joke. Just what we need. More steroid talk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Another complete total bullsh*t PR move by the owners. I will cheer the first North American sports league that says we will give everyone one phsyical at the start of the year for insurance, and that's it, unless they get arrested or do something else which triggers treatment or punishment. The chemists are always going to be ahead of the testers, and only idiots use street drugs(yes, even your beloved herb,potheads, is not good for you, but it's not my concern unless you have a serious safety-related job). Athletes aren't driving planes or enforcing laws with a gun in hand. Who freaking cares anymore but busybody douchebags. . Shawn Merriman and a cast of thousands of violators are still going to find work, and they should. If they choose to destroy their long-term health for short-term gain, I don't care, and no longer understand why anyone does. The MLB obsession and the Lance Armstrong mess are now much bigger an embarrassment than the drug users themselves. And spare me that "role model" bullsh*t. If what a pro athlete does or does not do impacts how you raise your children, you have failed as a parent. Cut the bullsh*t and make a Goddamn deal. Lock Fedora Guy and Sunburned Man with a calculator and pens and pads in a room and don't let them out until it's done. This is a fvkcing joke. If players have a right to look at books, owners have a right to test chemistry. Tit for tat,and that's how they play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Just what we need. More steroid talk. See Round 2! Round 2 with Poll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 If players have a right to look at books, owners have a right to test chemistry. Tit for tat,and that's how they play. The Owners claim they are losing money. In a $ 9 billion industry with guaranted massive TV money and new stadiums being depreciated up front, that is almost certainly a lie. If they want to negotiate claiming poverty, it's not unreasonable to show the books to the NFLPA, not redacted books to some 3rd party, which is the dumbest financial thing I have ever heard abr none(other than Social Security). Any 3rd party that gave an opinion for the players to rely on based on redacted books would be rightly sued within 10 minutes. It't total crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 The Owners claim they are losing money. In a $ 9 billion industry with guaranted massive TV money and new stadiums being depreciated up front, that is almost certainly a lie. If they want to negotiate claiming poverty, it's not unreasonable to show the books to the NFLPA, not redacted books to some 3rd party, which is the dumbest financial thing I have ever heard abr none(other than Social Security). Any 3rd party that gave an opinion for the players to rely on based on redacted books would be rightly sued within 10 minutes. It't total crap. Then owners have the right to know if the players they are putting multi-million contracts to, are tainted or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted March 25, 2011 Author Share Posted March 25, 2011 I dont think you can even test for HGH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 I dont think you can even test for HGH They do at the Olympics. Science is always moving ahead though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Then owners have the right to know if the players they are putting multi-million contracts to, are tainted or not. Why? Does it effect their profit margin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted March 25, 2011 Author Share Posted March 25, 2011 Why? Does it effect their profit margin? It helped baseballs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Why? Does it effect their profit margin? If I am about to invest 10's of millions of dollars on an investment of a player, I would like to know that the performance that I am paying him for was clean, and will not suddenly drop off a ledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 If I am about to invest 10's of millions of dollars on an investment of a player, I would like to know that the performance that I am paying him for was clean, and will not suddenly drop off a ledge. We'd all like a lot of things, but the owners are asking the players to make a concession BASED ON THE BOOKS. If they want the concession they have to prove that their claims about the books are true. Testing for HGH is invasive and serves no real purpose in the reasoning behind the labor dispute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 We'd all like a lot of things, but the owners are asking the players to make a concession BASED ON THE BOOKS. If they want the concession they have to prove that their claims about the books are true. Testing for HGH is invasive and serves no real purpose in the reasoning behind the labor dispute. It is a negotiation. Owners would like to know that their players are clean. They have that right if it is collectively bargained. I can tell you that when players ask owners for a look at the book-"we'd all like a lot of things". That is what this process is about. The owners may have found a skeleton in the closet of the NFLPA, that they don't want exposed, a la the owners books. It is how these games are played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 It is a negotiation. Owners would like to know that their players are clean. They have that right if it is collectively bargained. I can tell you that when players ask owners for a look at the book-"we'd all like a lot of things". That is what this process is about. The owners may have found a skeleton in the closet of the NFLPA, that they don't want exposed, a la the owners books. It is how these games are played. You keep saying that. It isn't a game. The owners want something that makes no sense. A reduction because they say they aren't earning enough when revenue is high and rising. The owners want the change, the owners have something to prove if they want that. I don't see how they gain anything by demanding more from the people they are asking to grant a concession. Well, actually I do. I see that the owners are playing a PR game. You can buy it if you like, but I won't. The owners care as much about juice and HGH as Vince McMahon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 You keep saying that. It isn't a game. The owners want something that makes no sense. A reduction because they say they aren't earning enough when revenue is high and rising. The owners want the change, the owners have something to prove if they want that. I don't see how they gain anything by demanding more from the people they are asking to grant a concession. Well, actually I do. I see that the owners are playing a PR game. You can buy it if you like, but I won't. The owners care as much about juice and HGH as Vince McMahon. They BOTH are playing a PR game. It is saber rattling. You want me to give something you know I won't give? Ok, well I will come back and do the same to you. It is gamesmanship. All part of negotiations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 They BOTH are playing a PR game. It is saber rattling. You want me to give something you know I won't give? Ok, well I will come back and do the same to you. It is gamesmanship. All part of negotiations. Once again, WRONG. The owners having to open the books to some extent is not PR and it is not gamesmanship. The owners brought it to the table with the claims about losing money or lack of profits. It's there. You can't have one without the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Once again, WRONG. The owners having to open the books to some extent is not PR and it is not gamesmanship. The owners brought it to the table with the claims about losing money or lack of profits. It's there. You can't have one without the other. True. The owners provided more information than ever given before and agreed to give even more to an independent auditor for review. Yet, DeMaurice said it was not good enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Once again, WRONG. The owners having to open the books to some extent is not PR and it is not gamesmanship. The owners brought it to the table with the claims about losing money or lack of profits. It's there. You can't have one without the other. eh. When are employees EVER entitled to see books? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 eh. When are employees EVER entitled to see books? When are employers EVER entitled to an antitrust exemption and to cut salaries that are based on a percentage of revenues that are constanly rising? I could go on, but I think you know already and are just playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 When are employers EVER entitled to an antitrust exemption and to cut salaries that are based on a percentage of revenues that are constanly rising? I could go on, but I think you know already and are just playing. When are owners of a business (in America) not allowed to make as much profit as they can, and control their business? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 When are owners of a business (in America) not allowed to make as much profit as they can, and control their business? When are workers (in America) not allowed to sign contracts for as much as the can, and control the terms of their contracts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.