Yahoo News : This Chiefs fan is mad about the NFL lockout, but at

[Coach]

Kansas City Chiefs owner and chairman Clark Hunt told the Kansas City Star he is confident the league and players will work something out by mid-August, a point he describes as something detrimental to everyone. "If we still don't have an agreement by mid-August, then that's a scenario that's bad for everybody. It's bad for the owners, its bad for the players and it's certainly bad for the fans," Hunt told the Star. Still, he says there's a lot of time to work out an agreement.

More... (http://us.rd.yahoo.com/sports/rss/nfl/SIG=11lqmth81/*http%3A//sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ycn-8051286)

[chiefnut]

the owners took the 18 game sched off the table, offered to try for 2013 and gave nflpa the out to veto it then. the owners also offered to have an independent firm provide the players with the financial info they wanted but the nflpa wants to be able to examine the books themselves. they also lowered their request for more off the top money. this was all turned down, no counter offer was proposed and the union decided to walk out. i was surprised that no counter proposal was given it appeared the owners were stating to move towards the middle. the players claim to have given in on money but were noy specific.

[Ryfo18]

the owners took the 18 game sched off the table, offered to try for 2013 and gave nflpa the out to veto it then. the owners also offered to have an independent firm provide the players with the financial info they wanted but the nflpa wants to be able to examine the books themselves. they also lowered their request for more off the top money. this was all turned down, no counter offer was proposed and the union decided to walk out. i was surprised that no counter proposal was given it appeared the owners were stating to move towards the middle. the players claim to have given in on money but were noy specific.

It's tough to call it moving towards "the middle" when the initial offer is completely ridiculous. I posted about it in another thread about how the owners/players would split revenue up to a certain "revenue estimate", which was provided by the owners and was very low. The owners would then get 100% of all the revenue over this estimate. The way I understood it is that if the NFL made around $10 billion (I think they made $9.8 last year), the split would be 55/45 in favor of the owners (in 2010 in was 60/40 in favor of the players). That's not moving to the middle. How do you counter offer when the initial offer isn't even close?

And using the 18-game schedule as a bargaining chip is just ludicrous, especially after the NFL cried player safety during the whole 2010 season. Seems like a made up "proposal" that they could give in on to make it seem like they were meeting in the middle.

[chiefnut]

ahhh yes, you are a pro player/union guy. the only side to root for is the fans and neither side represents us. just remember it was the union that had three bullet points before the talks began;
1.the $1 billion the owners wanted
2.the 18 game schedule
3.the need to see the leagues "books' for profit sharing info.
it was the union which implied that these were the stumbling blocks and the owners have addressed all three, to some degree. the last statement by the union seemed to be about the "books" not about the financial info contained therein that the union needs to verify their cut.
i root for neither side, only for the game. i believe both sides have hidden agendas and unreasonable demands as well as valid concerns. let the mediators sort it out!!!

[N TX Dave]

ahhh yes, you are a pro player/union guy. the only side to root for is the fans and neither side represents us. just remember it was the union that had three bullet points before the talks began;
1.the $1 billion the owners wanted
2.the 18 game schedule
3.the need to see the leagues "books' for profit sharing info.
it was the union which implied that these were the stumbling blocks and the owners have addressed all three, to some degree. the last statement by the union seemed to be about the "books" not about the financial info contained therein that the union needs to verify their cut.
i root for neither side, only for the game. i believe both sides have hidden agendas and unreasonable demands as well as valid concerns. let the mediators sort it out!!!

I agree but it is not going to be mediators but judges that are going to sort it out now. How many privately held companies open their books to their employees? Public held is different they have to.

[chiefnut]

the arguable point for the owners will be that they need only provide validated financial data pursuant [thats a legal term from tv] to the fiscal requirements of the nflpa and therefore need not "open their books" which contain other data not relevant to the unions needs and would violate the teams right to privacy since all teams with the exception of the Green Bay Packers are privately owned. how's that for legal mumbo jumbo!!!!

[KristofLaw]

the arguable point for the owners will be that they need only provide validated financial data pursuant [thats a legal term from tv] to the fiscal requirements of the nflpa and therefore need not "open their books" which contain other data not relevant to the unions needs and would violate the teams right to privacy since all teams with the exception of the Green Bay Packers are privately owned. how's that for legal mumbo jumbo!!!!
Point taken in my case is that the lawyers / agents and their greed are what would appear to be most detrimental to the players union. Those shady snakes ruin everything.

[chiefnut]

agents are the very epitome of greed incarnate. they negotiate under the guise of what is in the best interest of their client but in reality it is purely only what is in their own best interest. they want only to score the biggest $ contract to pad their own cut even if the terms are detrimental to the team and cut short the players tenure. they are leaches!!!

[chief31]

agents are the very epitome of greed incarnate. they negotiate under the guise of what is in the best interest of their client but in reality it is purely only what is in their own best interest. they want only to score the biggest $ contract to pad their own cut even if the terms are detrimental to the team and cut short the players tenure. they are leaches!!!

That's how business works.