Sounds like Clark is...

[honda522]

Working on getting other owners and such involved on getting this labor deal worked out from what I have read. Mr. Hunt is one of the better owners around right now. He wants a deal and a season...He sees Superbowl ahead!

All these people are pissing me off, just work together before its too late. I don't understand the problems...nothing was wrong with the league before besides a few rules Goodell put in place.

I blaming more of the players union cause they are not wanting to agree to anything but their own terms.
This is why I hate unions, never do any good things for you.


Maybe Clark can Rally the rest of the owners and players to work something out soon.

[Canada]

Work somewhere without a union and tell me you still hate them.

[matthewschiefs]

I think they need to get new people on both side of this whole mess. The people who have been in charge of getting this done so far have done a horrible job. Get new people in there on both sides and see if they can get the job done.

[Coach]

Work somewhere without a union and tell me you still hate them.
I've never been a union employee and I've somehow survived. When I was being underpaid, I changed employers instead of picketing or refusing to work. Old fashioned I guess.


I think they need to get new people on both side of this whole mess. The people who have been in charge of getting this done so far have done a horrible job. Get new people in there on both sides and see if they can get the job done.

This is a great idea

[Canada]

I've never been a union employee and I've somehow survived. When I was being underpaid, I changed employers instead of picketing or refusing to work. Old fashioned I guess.


I've worked union and non union jobs. Up until I became a paramedic (my first unionized job) I never made more than $9/hr. Now with my union, I make $33/hr, full benefits, vacation etc. I dont have the luxury of packing up and finding another employer if things dont go my way. While I dont agree with everything unions do, it is nice to have a group of employees looking out for my best interest.

I also dont have to option of picketing or refusing to work.

[honda522]

Work somewhere without a union and tell me you still hate them.

Maybe there is an industry that benefits from a union, but so far where I worked none we worth anything. In fact, at my job it makes people lazy. I know that the union people were actually topping out less than the none union people.

Ive worked all but one job in a union and that job just made me pay dues and I got fired for a BS reason.

[Chiefster]

Working on getting other owners and such involved on getting this labor deal worked out from what I have read. Mr. Hunt is one of the better owners around right now. He wants a deal and a season...He sees Superbowl ahead!

All these people are pissing me off, just work together before its too late. I don't understand the problems...nothing was wrong with the league before besides a few rules Goodell put in place.

I blaming more of the players union cause they are not wanting to agree to anything but their own terms.
This is why I hate unions, never do any good things for you.


Maybe Clark can Rally the rest of the owners and players to work something out soon.

Following in Lamar's footsteps. :chiefs:

[Canada]

Maybe there is an industry that benefits from a union, but so far where I worked none we worth anything. In fact, at my job it makes people lazy. I know that the union people were actually topping out less than the none union people.

Ive worked all but one job in a union and that job just made me pay dues and I got fired for a BS reason.Then you had a sh!tty union. You have lazy employees...but those employees are the union. That might be part of the problem!!

[Hayvern]

We are seeing the same thing happening in basketball. The players for the most part are young, dumb and stupid. They have no business sense.

I see it like this, I see the owners asking the players to give a little back to help grow the league even more. The players just figure they can keep taking and the owners will just give them money, afterall, the rich have all the money they need so just take it from them.

That is how I see it. If the players were smart, they would give the 1 billion additional off the top, come back stronger than ever and in two years, they will be making 2 billion more than they are making now. The owners will have made improvements to the stadiums to make the fan experience even better and money will be coming in hand over fist.

Have a little future thought here, the players stand to make a lot more down the road on a league that is making 11 billion per year, than they do a league that is making 9 billion a year.

And if they miss games this season, the return will be even worse. Drop that to less than 6 billion a year for a shortened season and wait 5 years before the league gets back to 9 billion.

That is about how long it took baseball to come back.

[Canada]

We are seeing the same thing happening in basketball. The players for the most part are young, dumb and stupid. They have no business sense.

I see it like this, I see the owners asking the players to give a little back to help grow the league even more. The players just figure they can keep taking and the owners will just give them money, afterall, the rich have all the money they need so just take it from them.

That is how I see it. If the players were smart, they would give the 1 billion additional off the top, come back stronger than ever and in two years, they will be making 2 billion more than they are making now. The owners will have made improvements to the stadiums to make the fan experience even better and money will be coming in hand over fist.

Have a little future thought here, the players stand to make a lot more down the road on a league that is making 11 billion per year, than they do a league that is making 9 billion a year.

And if they miss games this season, the return will be even worse. Drop that to less than 6 billion a year for a shortened season and wait 5 years before the league gets back to 9 billion.

That is about how long it took baseball to come back.Are you sure you don't mean Binillion??

Would that be more or less money in Canada? :D

[Canada]

I've never been a union employee and I've somehow survived. When I was being underpaid, I changed employers instead of picketing or refusing to work. Old fashioned I guess.



So you've never been part of a union and you have "survived". Some unions help you earn a pretty good living.

When I am being underpaid, my union negotiates my contract with my employer. I dont refuse work or picket but if I am being treated unfairly, its nice to have someone there to stand up for me so I dont have to change jobs and start all over again.

[Drunker Hillbilly]

Work somewhere without a union and tell me you still hate them.
I still hate them. LOL

[Drunker Hillbilly]

So you've never been part of a union and you have "survived". Some unions help you earn a pretty good living.

When I am being underpaid, my union negotiates my contract with my employer. I dont refuse work or picket but if I am being treated unfairly, its nice to have someone there to stand up for me so I dont have to change jobs and start all over again.
What is your option if the union negotiates a deal that you find unfair for you and your family or that you simply don't agree with?

[Canada]

What is your option if the union negotiates a deal that you find unfair for you and your family or that you simply don't agree with?
My union consults every member of the union, gives us a list of issues that will be brought up and we rank them in order of importance. In that order they go to the bargaining table. If no agreement is reached, then I go to work and I have no contract until one is reached at which time I am paid retroactively from the day my contract expired.

If I am in disagreement with what the union has accomplished, I vote differently at the next union rep election.

Tell me...what is someone who gets a deal that they think is unfair supposed to do without a union? I heard one solution on here, quit your job and go find another one.

[matthewschiefs]

We are seeing the same thing happening in basketball. The players for the most part are young, dumb and stupid. They have no business sense.

I see it like this, I see the owners asking the players to give a little back to help grow the league even more. The players just figure they can keep taking and the owners will just give them money, afterall, the rich have all the money they need so just take it from them.

That is how I see it. If the players were smart, they would give the 1 billion additional off the top, come back stronger than ever and in two years, they will be making 2 billion more than they are making now. The owners will have made improvements to the stadiums to make the fan experience even better and money will be coming in hand over fist.

Have a little future thought here, the players stand to make a lot more down the road on a league that is making 11 billion per year, than they do a league that is making 9 billion a year.

And if they miss games this season, the return will be even worse. Drop that to less than 6 billion a year for a shortened season and wait 5 years before the league gets back to 9 billion.

That is about how long it took baseball to come back.

The NBA is one of the reason I was not one saying the owners need to open there books. They did it back in 99 and still missed half the season. It would lead to an arugment over the numbers and thats about all it would do. The players would say your makeing money the owners will still say were not makeing enough.

To me if the owners appeal is granted and the lockout is put back on for good then what they really need is the NFL needs a new set of lawyers and new set of reps at the table and the players need a new union chief and a new group of players at the table. The current groups on both sides have proven they can't get the job done.

[Coach]

The current groups on both sides have proven they can't get the job done.

This!!!!!!

[tornadospotter]

You have to have two sides negotiating, each side needs to have negotiators. Only one side does have negotiators, the other disbanded their ability. So where does it leave all sides? Players can still play, and live up to there contracts, or not. You are paid to play. True negotiations are needed by both sides. But who is going to make a deal for the players, when they chose to disband their union! To me it is up to each player to play or not. The Owners should cancel the lock out to players who want to play out their signed contracts. Players need to reinstate their union and get to the table and meet at a center point, make it happen.

[Chiefster]

The NBA is one of the reason I was not one saying the owners need to open there books. They did it back in 99 and still missed half the season. It would lead to an arugment over the numbers and thats about all it would do. The players would say your makeing money the owners will still say were not makeing enough.

To me if the owners appeal is granted and the lockout is put back on for good then what they really need is the NFL needs a new set of lawyers and new set of reps at the table and the players need a new union chief and a new group of players at the table. The current groups on both sides have proven they can't get the job done.

Yup! At this point I could care less who wins; I just want football. :D

[pojote]

Some reports said if the teams loses in appeal in curt, they might shut down until a new CBA.
Will Hunt back this up? or he may contact other teams to play in a parallel league?
He has some family history to back up.

[chief31]

If the players were smart, they would give the 1 billion additional off the top,

That makes perfect business sense to me.:lol:

Wait.

Are you sure that it makes sense to just give up on a billion dollars because the folks you are doing business with, (who happen to make astronomically more than you do from your efforts) claim they do not make enough money?

In case you have missed everything about business.... ever.... Collecting more money for ownership most certainly does not translate to an equal amount re-invested. It does not even guarantee any added re-investment.

What you can count on is a higher amount of money going into owners' pockets.

There is no way they get higher gross without keeping a percentage of that increase.

I don't think you believe that is a wise business decision. I think you have your side and will, under any circumstances, back your "side".

Let's test the theory....

You are in construction, correct?

If the builder comes to you and says that he is not making enough money from his part in your dealings, do you just gleefully accept any financial cuts he demands. or do you have something more to say than that?

Also, if he insists that you have to do an extra job each month, without getting an extra payment for that work, you down with that too?

You just trust that he has your best interests at heart and the concessions will actually mean better profits for you down the road...... somehow?

I bet you are not so quick to make such a financial sacrifice, without exploring all options.

[matthewschiefs]

Let's test the theory....

You are in Erythromelalgia, correct?

If the builder comes to you and says that he is not making enough money from his part in your dealings, do you just gleefully accept any financial cuts he demands. or do you have something more to say than that?

Also, if he insists that you have to do an extra job each month, without getting an extra payment for that work, you down with that too?

You just trust that he has your best interests at heart and the concessions will actually mean better profits for you down the road...... somehow?

I bet you are not so quick to make such a financial sacrifice, without exploring all options.


While I don't disagree with a word you said lets test the players theroy.
you own this construction business. The employes get about 60% of the profits, after you take a amount of money off the top for expensise. They one day come up to you and say we want more time off more benfits and we keep the same amount of profits. Would you do this? This is what the players wanted. How is that not also unfair?

[chief31]

While I don't disagree with a word you said lets test the players theroy.
you own this construction business. The employes get about 60% of the profits, after you take a amount of money off the top for expensise. They one day come up to you and say we want more time off more benfits and we keep the same amount of profits. Would you do this? This is what the players wanted. How is that not also unfair?

Actually, this whole thing here, is not related to the scenario I was discussing.

I was challenging Hayvern's assessment of what he would do in the players' position. Because he suggested that he would make the weakest possible business decision, if he were in their shoes.

But, I will play along anyway...

They, one day, came up to me and say they want more....

Wait. Did you forget anything in your scenario?


Did you purposely omit that I demanded they all take paycuts and work more, while our total profits are at an all-time high, PRIOR TO them putting any terms forward?


It is very important to note that this set of terms that you are pinning on the players as "demands" was merely a response to my ridiculous demands.


It would be more of an attempt to list some of the things that could be offered to the players in return for some of the things the owners wanted.


That is not a list of demands.


Since the players were fine with the existing agreement, they really can't be painted as demanding anything. It is merely a matter of what demands the owners will be able to get.


Now, with the courts seeming to side more and more against the owners, they may well find themselves in a position of asking the players what their demands are.


In which case, the players will have their first opportunity to play the villian in this whole thing.


Until then, the guys who started this fight, while cheating, and continuing to cheat, are the bad guys.


However, Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are not in this whole mess to get more for themselves. They are in it to get protection for "the other guys".


I am having a hard time watching people point their fingers at the victims here.


I do not consider the fans to be the real victims. All we stand to lose is an entertainment outlet. A lot of these players have their livlihood on the line.


The owners will be billionaires no matter how this all pans out. The fans will not lose their livlihood in this.


Only NFL employees have are making any real risks in the whole situation.

[brdempsey69]

Interesting perspective on the players vs. owners (http://deadspin.com/5800887/the-bizarre-cult-of-pro+owner-nfl-fanboys)

Take it for whatever it's worth to you.

[Ryfo18]

Interesting perspective on the players vs. owners (http://deadspin.com/5800887/the-bizarre-cult-of-pro+owner-nfl-fanboys)

Take it for whatever it's worth to you.

This article is fantastic.

[OPLookn]

This article is fantastic.

The article is ok at best, any time you result to using profanity in an article I consider it null and void. Not only that but this person is squarely in the players corner but it appears they've been there since day one. I've got my opinion, it's known, and no one is going to change anyone's mind. If you're pro union you like the players. If you think that a business owner should be able to run their business the way the like you'll side with the owners...everyone else is entitled to their gray.
:lol:

I'm done debating, discussing and hopefully even thinking about this mess. There are so many points of contention in this mess that everyone is right.

[matthewschiefs]

Interesting perspective on the players vs. owners (http://deadspin.com/5800887/the-bizarre-cult-of-pro+owner-nfl-fanboys)

Take it for whatever it's worth to you.

Articles like that really really annoy me. I hate the if you don't agree with me your stupid mindsets or your just plants for one side or the other.

There facts that people who write articles like that Leave out
1. The players union decertified During a mediation session. They were not there to get a deal done they were there just to say they were there.
2. The players want something for nothing just like the owners do. They want less OTAs less contact drill LESS WORK. More benfits for the same pay. The owners wanting more games for less pay hurt the game The players less work more benfits same pay ALSO hurts the game.
The fact is that if EITHER side wanted to get a deal done they would have by now. Both sides are saying give me give me NEITHER side is saying I will give this to get this.

To me a fair deal would be this. The owners get there money. The players get there health benfits and less OTAs less contact drills for there health concerns. Both sides give something both sides get something. Yes the players would lose some money but they would work less. I don't think working less paid less is unfair.

The owners are more to blame for this whole mess. But the players are also hurting the game with the greed from there side.

[Ryfo18]

The article is ok at best, any time you result to using profanity in an article I consider it null and void. Not only that but this person is squarely in the players corner but it appears they've been there since day one. I've got my opinion, it's known, and no one is going to change anyone's mind. If you're pro union you like the players. If you think that a business owner should be able to run their business the way the like you'll side with the owners...everyone else is entitled to their gray.
:lol:

I'm done debating, discussing and hopefully even thinking about this mess. There are so many points of contention in this mess that everyone is right.

In all honesty, I think when you try to bring in politics and pro-union, not pro-union to a situation as unique as the NFL's, you're looking too much into it. There are very few parallels between a normal business who contracts out with a union and the NFL.

It's just not the same, and everyone wants to paint is as being the same as "well if I went to my employer and demanded more money or else I'm leaving..." It's two different worlds, that of the NFL and that that we work in. Your employer can most likely easily replace you. The NFL tried replacement players...didn't work.

[Ryfo18]

Articles like that really really annoy me. I hate the if you don't agree with me your stupid mindsets or your just plants for one side or the other.

There facts that people who write articles like that Leave out
1. The players union decertified During a mediation session. They were not there to get a deal done they were there just to say they were there.
2. The players want something for nothing just like the owners do. They want less OTAs less contact drill LESS WORK. More benfits for the same pay. The owners wanting more games for less pay hurt the game The players less work more benfits same pay ALSO hurts the game.
The fact is that if EITHER side wanted to get a deal done they would have by now. Both sides are saying give me give me NEITHER side is saying I will give this to get this.

To me a fair deal would be this. The owners get there money. The players get there health benfits and less OTAs less contact drills for there health concerns. Both sides give something both sides get something. Yes the players would lose some money but they would work less. I don't think working less paid less is unfair.

The owners are more to blame for this whole mess. But the players are also hurting the game with the greed from there side.

They want all of that IF there is an 18-game season...So they're really still working the same, if not more. You keep saying you are not on anyone's side, but you continually defend the owners...

[matthewschiefs]

They want all of that IF there is an 18-game season...So they're really still working the same, if not more. You keep saying you are not on anyone's side, but you continually defend the owners...
So saying the owners are More to blame is defending the owners?


The owners are more to blame for this whole mess. But the players are also hurting the game with the greed from there side.

I understand that the owners started this whole mess I get that. But IMO that is no excuse for the players to get as greedy as they have while claiming they just want to play football. Even if the players were forced to take the Owners WORSE offer (witch I would have also rejected) They would still be makeing FAR more then any of us. It's not like the players will be finding it hard to put food on the table. And the same with the owners. Instead of refuseing to talk until the owners open there books the players could have been TRYING TO REACH A DEAL. Instead of working out deals with the tv companys the owners could have been TRYING TO REACH A DEAL. If the Chiefs and bills are not playing sep 11th I will be more ticked at the owners but I will also be ticked at the players.

[Ryfo18]

So saying the owners are More to blame is defending the owners?

What can I say? That's what I get for not reading your whole post!

[Coach]

Interesting perspective on the players vs. owners (http://deadspin.com/5800887/the-bizarre-cult-of-pro+owner-nfl-fanboys)

Take it for whatever it's worth to you.

I'm tempted to delete that link because of the profantiy it contains. And I hate to send any traffic to such a twisted individual. But in doing so, I would probably be accused of being biased in favor of the owners(which I am).

It's ignorance like this article that makes me grateful for getting an education.

[tornadospotter]

I'm tempted to delete that link because of the profantiy it contains. And I hate to send any traffic to such a twisted individual. But in doing so, I would probably be accused of being biased in favor of the owners(which I am).

It's ignorance like this article that makes me grateful for getting an education.

I could do it for you. :D

[matthewschiefs]

I could do it for you. :D

Power hungry mod :lol: :D

[tornadospotter]

Power hungry mod :lol: :D

Ban you I will, How dare you think that of me. I am just trying to do my job. :D

[Chiefster]

Ban you I will, How dare you think that of me. I am just trying to do my job. :D

You have learned well my young padawan.

[matthewschiefs]

Ban you I will, How dare you think that of me. I am just trying to do my job. :D

Ban me. But just know that if you do I will become more powerful then you can ever imagine :D :sign0106: :bartsimpson:

[tornadospotter]

You have learned well my young padawan.
Young! Who are you calling Young? Me? Thanks!

[tornadospotter]

Ban me. But just know that if you do I will become more powerful then you can ever imagine :D :sign0106: :bartsimpson:
:yahoo::yahoo::yahoo::yahoo:
Well maybe we should test this theory of yours. :D
There was one before that tried, but you know who, lost in the end

[Chiefster]

Young! Who are you calling Young? Me? Thanks!

Well you ain't younger then me sonny. :11: :D

[matthewschiefs]

:yahoo::yahoo::yahoo::yahoo:
Well maybe we should test this theory of yours. :D
There was one before that tried, but you know who, lost in the end

Ban me? You no you would miss me :D

[Hayvern]

That makes perfect business sense to me.:lol:

Wait.

Are you sure that it makes sense to just give up on a billion dollars because the folks you are doing business with, (who happen to make astronomically more than you do from your efforts) claim they do not make enough money?

In case you have missed everything about business.... ever.... Collecting more money for ownership most certainly does not translate to an equal amount re-invested. It does not even guarantee any added re-investment.

What you can count on is a higher amount of money going into owners' pockets.

There is no way they get higher gross without keeping a percentage of that increase.

I don't think you believe that is a wise business decision. I think you have your side and will, under any circumstances, back your "side".

Let's test the theory....

You are in construction, correct?

If the builder comes to you and says that he is not making enough money from his part in your dealings, do you just gleefully accept any financial cuts he demands. or do you have something more to say than that?

Also, if he insists that you have to do an extra job each month, without getting an extra payment for that work, you down with that too?

You just trust that he has your best interests at heart and the concessions will actually mean better profits for you down the road...... somehow?

I bet you are not so quick to make such a financial sacrifice, without exploring all options.


You apparently have never worked for someone who have asked you to take a pay cut in order to keep having a job. Another sign of a union member that has no idea how business works.

I have been in the scenario you described. I had to take a pay cut, or be laid off. That was the choice. The company was losing money and could not afford to stay in business. So for me it made perfect business sense so I could stay employed with the promise that when things get better, I will get my money back.

[Hayvern]

I'm tempted to delete that link because of the profantiy it contains. And I hate to send any traffic to such a twisted individual. But in doing so, I would probably be accused of being biased in favor of the owners(which I am).

It's ignorance like this article that makes me grateful for getting an education.

Typical drival from a liberal that again has no idea how business is run.

You can see the people who supports the owners, those who have business backgrounds, that understand what it takes to run a business and how sometimes when times are bad, concessions have to be made.

The others are typically pro union people who never want to give anything back even when faced with massive layoffs, company closures and massive bailout deals from the government.

Think about it, if GM and Chrysler could have gotten their unions under control, a massive bailout for those companies would not have been needed.

[Connie Jo]

I think both sides have legitimate concerns, such as the players related to their healthcare & retirement, not wanting to risk more injuries going to an 18 game season, but as well can understand the owners side from a business perspective. I've been on both sides of the coin, so maybe that's why I'm in the middle, go back & forth with choosing a side. :/

Edit for after thought...'or maybe I can't make up my mind which side I'm on cause I'm female, and naturally am fickle? Nah, not me!! hahahaha

[70 chiefsfan70]

I'm fully on the owners side. These folks were very wealthy before they owned NFL teams. They were successful business minded people long before the nfl players were playing football. Matter of fact, most of these players would not even have played football if there were no NFL. Without the NFL there probably would not be college football, or at least it would not be what it is today. My point is today in America people criticize success and businesses that make profits, and employees all want more without doing more, then they wonder why there are no jobs, we wonder why companies move out of the country or move over seas.
These owners could and may just find better investments for their money.


There are many really good minded and smart players that would go far in any profession but than theres many of these NFL players would be nobody without the NFL players, ever wonder why many are wife beaters and commit sex crimes, some steal cars, commit violent gun crimes, walk on airplanes with guns.I believe by their actions many feel they are above the law. They should be thanking the owners and fans, from their heart and actions.

And yes, some wealthy successful business men are just pure evil too.

See what happened to Baseball, teams are going broke, there are very few profitable teams left, and out of those, they have the money to buy whatever players they want because fans like teams that win, Take the Royals for example, The local fans are disappearing and every year you see more Yankees hats and shirts.

Thats what happens when the Union wins, it spoils the free market and America looses.

[Ryfo18]

See what happened to Baseball, teams are going broke, there are very few profitable teams left, and out of those, they have the money to buy whatever players they want because fans like teams that win, Take the Royals for example, The local fans are disappearing and every year you see more Yankees hats and shirts.

Thats what happens when the Union wins, it spoils the free market and America looses.

I would love to hear you prove why the 1995 baseball strike is the cause of the poor attendance today in 2011.

[pojote]

Thats what happens when the Union wins, it spoils the free market and America looses.

If you apply full free market concepts, there should be no union, no salary cap, and the leagues would be only a sports regulator, everyone sells TV rights for their own.

In that case scenario, happens what is it in almost every sport outside USA, there are a few successful teams, and others that only exists. Who own those teams? Rich people that wants to own a team, not to make profit.

What should have a good CBA? I think:
* minimum salaries
* maximum work burdens (games, OTA's, etc)
* health protection
* salary protection
* salary scale for rookies
* free agency rules
* salary cap according to profits

But that's pretty much what was last CBA. What is that owners want? More risk-free money. What??!!!! Hey an entrepreneur is exactly the opposite, someone that can risk his own money to make profits.

In this, I'm on players side (I don't think they are totally right thou).

PS: I have a master in business, I own a small company, I'm not a union man. I can make profits without a risk-free CBA.

[matthewschiefs]

What should have a good CBA? I think:
* minimum salaries
* maximum work burdens (games, OTA's, etc)
* health protection
* salary protection
* salary scale for rookies
* free agency rules
* salary cap according to profits

.

I would agree with this. I think any CBA has to have a salary cap for all the teams to have a shot to win it all. I hate that MLB doesn't. Being an Indian fan sucks when you see players the indians drafted, worked throught the farm system, Brought to the majors. A couple of years later sign with the Yankees,Red sox, Phillies. (see the 09 world series game 1 starting pitchers.) If an agreement is reached without a salary cap I will proabley not be as into football as I am now.

[chief31]

You apparently have never worked for someone who have asked you to take a pay cut in order to keep having a job. Another sign of a union member that has no idea how business works.

I have been in the scenario you described. I had to take a pay cut, or be laid off. That was the choice. The company was losing money and could not afford to stay in business. So for me it made perfect business sense so I could stay employed with the promise that when things get better, I will get my money back.


I have been in two contract negotitations with the UAW and both times, concessions were made, including my taking four dollars an hour less than the previously hired, in order to keep jobs. (Even though the company just loop-holes their way aroound the agreement and move jobs out anyway.)


But best to just make assumptions on a whim, isn't it?


Not to mention I was in construction for over a deaced before joining The UAW.


You have no surprise cards to play in how your business runs.


I know all about it.


Primarily how non-union construction employees are treated.


As for your having been in that situation.... That was a different situation that you gave. It was not the same.

Your situation showed a company that was going to fail if you did not accept a paycut.


This is The NFL. There will be no failure for a very long time.


This is about somebody just wanting a higher profit than the ridiculous amount they already get.


But I will just take your word that you were not smart enough to go shopping around the indusrty for a better situation, and took whatever the owners offered without a second thought.


I believe that.


I just don't believe that you think that makes sense.

[tornadospotter]

What is the common ground? Yes there is money, or profits to negotiate over. The problem is, no representation from players to negotiate. There is no union, they disbanded it, they are the ones going to court over this. Players are suing the owners. The owners want to negotiate, players want the courts to decide. I am all for some of the issues on both sides. Especially the retirement and pension items for retired players, but I am disappointed in the way the players never negotiate in good faith. To me that says, they do not care, they just want money.
IDK, I just wish I had some opportunity in my life that I could make the minimum salary that they all get. So in reality thinking. They are all, both sides, pissing me off!

[Canada]

I would agree with this. I think any CBA has to have a salary cap for all the teams to have a shot to win it all. I hate that MLB doesn't. Being an Indian fan sucks when you see players the indians drafted, worked throught the farm system, Brought to the majors. A couple of years later sign with the Yankees,Red sox, Phillies. (see the 09 world series game 1 starting pitchers.) If an agreement is reached without a salary cap I will proabley not be as into football as I am now.In the last 20 years there have been 12 different teams to win the World Series and 13 different teams to win the Super Bowl. Seems salary caps dont make that much of a difference. Every team in MLB has the opportunity to go after big name players, they just choose not to.

[Canada]

What is the common ground? Yes there is money, or profits to negotiate over. The problem is, no representation from players to negotiate. There is no union, they disbanded it, they are the ones going to court over this. Players are suing the owners. The owners want to negotiate, players want the courts to decide. I am all for some of the issues on both sides. Especially the retirement and pension items for retired players, but I am disappointed in the way the players never negotiate in good faith. To me that says, they do not care, they just want money.
IDK, I just wish I had some opportunity in my life that I could make the minimum salary that they all get. So in reality thinking. They are all, both sides, pissing me off!
I dont think either side was negotiating in good faith. the owners tried to set aside $4 billion 2 years ago in preparation for a lockout.

[matthewschiefs]

What is the common ground? Yes there is money, or profits to negotiate over. The problem is, no representation from players to negotiate. There is no union, they disbanded it, they are the ones going to court over this. Players are suing the owners. The owners want to negotiate, players want the courts to decide. I am all for some of the issues on both sides. Especially the retirement and pension items for retired players, but I am disappointed in the way the players never negotiate in good faith. To me that says, they do not care, they just want money.
IDK, I just wish I had some opportunity in my life that I could make the minimum salary that they all get. So in reality thinking. They are all, both sides, pissing me off!

While I do agree the players have not really been negotiating in good faith they have been talking. The owners signed an agreement to not use the fact they are talking to say they are still a union.


In the last 20 years there have been 12 different teams to win the World Series and 13 different teams to win the Super Bowl. Seems salary caps dont make that much of a difference. Every team in MLB has the opportunity to go after big name players, they just choose not to.

There might be a mix in world series winners but teams like Boston New York and Philly seem to be in the hunt every year. If you look at the Yankees currert roster more then half were free agent singings. The Yankees based on being in the largest market in the world and there tv station have more to spend then anyone eles. Teams like Kansas City Cleveland in smaller markets can't offer the money they can on one player. The bigger your market the easier it is for you to compete in Baseball. IMO that hurts the game.


I dont think either side was negotiating in good faith. the owners tried to set aside $4 billion 2 years ago in preparation for a lockout.

This Both side felt hey had an ace up there sleeve and felt they could force the others sides hand. Neither side wanted to really talk about getting a deal done.

[Canada]

There might be a mix in world series winners but teams like Boston New York and Philly seem to be in the hunt every year. If you look at the Yankees currert roster more then half were free agent singings. The Yankees based on being in the largest market in the world and there tv station have more to spend then anyone eles. Teams like Kansas City Cleveland in smaller markets can't offer the money they can on one player. The bigger your market the easier it is for you to compete in Baseball. IMO that hurts the game.





Teams like New England, Pittsburgh, Indy seem to be in the hunt every year. The 90s were SF, Dallas, Green Bay. It happens every year. All teams have the same opportunity to spend the money on making a winner, some just choose not to.

[tornadospotter]

I dont think either side was negotiating in good faith. the owners tried to set aside $4 billion 2 years ago in preparation for a lockout.
To hell with them all! Lets start are own Football league. We will start by paying players in beer, bring your own football equipment. Fans can watch by providing beer for the players. We will only play in venues that have volunteer fire and rescue depts, so no need of paying for on site injury cost, player goes to the hospital, player will have there own medical insurance or not to cover. Besides a cold beer will help take away the pain, why after a few, the player will get back into the game. But fans like to have food and drink, at venues where games are played, so there for it is bring your own plus extra, preferable beer, for the players. Tailgates are strongly encouraged, and there is no parking fees. Children are most welcome to visit with players before, after and sometimes during the game with there favorite players. This can be done, and has been for A long time all across this world, in sporting events. As a younger man in life, I participated in so many much fun filled Sunday afternoons doing just the same.
I care not about bs, I love this game of football, and I love the NFL Team Kansas City Chiefs! But my live is fuller when I am with family and friends, doing or participating in events, more so than the event its self. So Player and Owners listen up, its the fans you are both losing here, and we can go on with out you.