Ongoing CBA discussions

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

That kind of talk will lead to a long strike. I do not think anyone wants that.
Both sides need eachother. Id not want to suffer through scab games again.
If the owners feel they gave up too much, open the books and prove it. Show that some teams are operating at a loss. Then it will be easier to solve. But you can not hide the numbers and cry foul. That is childish.

Exactly.

I'm always kinda confused when people stick up for the owners. I'm really not seeing where the owners are in a position to be pitied. Neither side is really... but the owners are the ones that have dug their heels in the ground here and are demanding a bigger slice of the pie, without showing what it is they are losing exactly.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Exactly.

I'm always kinda confused when people stick up for the owners. I'm really not seeing where the owners are in a position to be pitied. Neither side is really... but the owners are the ones that have dug their heels in the ground here and are demanding a bigger slice of the pie, without showing what it is they are losing exactly.

Ok, I'm tracking with you here on the "demanding a bigger slice of the pie" but let me ask you is it not a companies job to try to get the best talented worker for the cheapest price? The less the company pays out the more the business makes in order to spend on equipment, supplies, other staff like in this case secretaries, coach's, and scouts.

So if under the CBA there is a rule as to how much of the income must go to the players then why do they even negotiate dollar amounts? The amount could be set at 30% for the players but if an owner wants to pick up players he still has to negotiate an agreed dollar amount and if doing this for 52 players plus the 8 practice squad members I'd imagine the 30% wouldn't matter and why would the players care if their team is putting the majority of the teams money towards players contracts if they are getting the money each individual is asking for? It's more like "Who's line is it anyway" where the players % doesn't matter. Heck the owners could agree to 70% toward players contracts but if they are sitting down trying to negotiate the cheapest deals and the players agree to the amount then it really doesn't matter.

Maybe there would be more money to put towards an in door practice facility.