wiegie Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 no link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 Yeah well they did the same thing yesterday. I think they're sick of the owners holding this up with their inability to come to terms amongst themselves on revenue sharing. That's the hold up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpholmes Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 2 hours left??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Yeah well they did the same thing yesterday. I think they're sick of the owners holding this up with their inability to come to terms amongst themselves on revenue sharing. That's the hold up. 1352900[/snapback] I wouldn't put my money on what Upshaw says. He seems to be playing the media. His last statement was they were called back and given a worse proposal than before the call back. I find that doubtful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Outshined Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 I wouldn't put my money on what Upshaw says. He seems to be playing the media. His last statement was they were called back and given a worse proposal than before the call back. I find that doubtful. 1352978[/snapback] I wouldn't.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilthorp Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 I thought I heard several times today that all they are going to do is just extend the talks another few days or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 PFT is reporting they were going to start talking again at 8:30 EST. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 PFT is reporting they were going to start talking again at 8:30 EST. 1353048[/snapback] I bet they're bummed they gotta miss the Oscars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 It is now reported that talks broke off, union rejected their latest offer by owners and it is not going to happen. According to the union, the latest offer was less than what players are already getting. According to the owners, they were offering over a billion and a half dollars over the next six year above what they would be getting. But it appears dead for now and to be resolved sometime before this time in 2007. This season will have the lower cap and all teams are scrambling to meet that by midnight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 PFT often gets stuff wrong, I just threw that out there.... There should be a ticker we can watch as the big name cuts come in.... Arrington, Ramsey, Brooks, Collins, Shields, it's a long list! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 It is now reported that talks broke off, union rejected their latest offer by owners and it is not going to happen. According to the union, the latest offer was less than what players are already getting. According to the owners, they were offering over a billion and a half dollars over the next six year above what they would be getting. But it appears dead for now and to be resolved sometime before this time in 2007. This season will have the lower cap and all teams are scrambling to meet that by midnight. 1353057[/snapback] All this shows is that both sides are made up of drooling morans that can't do third grade math. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 All this shows is that both sides are made up of drooling morans that can't do third grade math. 1353065[/snapback] Can't argue with you Ursa Majoris. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Just reported on espnews that the waiver deadline is now 11:30 instead of 10. Now why would they do that with the talks supposedly dead? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Just reported on espnews that the waiver deadline is now 11:30 instead of 10. Now why would they do that with the talks supposedly dead? 1353079[/snapback] This is a hugh CF led by morans. They're making Bud Selig look intelligent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Just reported on espnews that the waiver deadline is now 11:30 instead of 10. Now why would they do that with the talks supposedly dead? 1353079[/snapback] they want football fans to cry.. plus as was said before...they probably don't want to miss the emmy's or oscars...or whatever is on now... as you can tell...it doesn't concern me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Just reported on espnews that the waiver deadline is now 11:30 instead of 10. Now why would they do that with the talks supposedly dead? 1353079[/snapback] Perhaps they think negotiating by Blackberry(where they don't actually see each other) works better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guggs Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Man, this is getting sickening. Why do they even have deadlines? They just keep on extending them and postponing them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 This last extension was made just to give teams enough time to actually make the cuts. No one is talking anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 This last extension was made just to give teams enough time to actually make the cuts. No one is talking anymore. 1353167[/snapback] you mean the Redskins... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyalboyd Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 I just want to see how bad its going to be. Come on and do the cuts already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guggs Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 I couldn't have said it better myself, Loyalboyd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Upshaw is just flat out lying to the media. The old agreement of 60% was based on team revenue generated by ticket sales and television.The new 56.whatever% is based on ALL revenues,including outside money generated by everything from parking to stadium naming rights. An example;which is larger,60% of 100$,or 56% of 150$? The players are getting much much more than before.The only truth to what Upshaw states is the percentage number.He conveniently leaves out what the percentage is taken from. http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/story/9286091 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Upshaw is just flat out lying to the media. The old agreement of 60% was based on team revenue generated by ticket sales and television.The new 56.whatever% is based on ALL revenues,including outside money generated by everything from parking to stadium naming rights. An example;which is larger,60% of 100$,or 56% of 150$? The players are getting much much more than before.The only truth to what Upshaw states is the percentage number.He conveniently leaves out what the percentage is taken from. http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/story/9286091 1353186[/snapback] Your thoughts would be valid if they bore any factual information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 (edited) Your thoughts would be valid if they bore any factual information. 1353219[/snapback] Yeah?Did you read the article?What the players want the new revenue percentages based on versus the old is right there in black and white. An excerpt. Until now, they received their money primarily from television and ticket revenues. This time, they requested their share from all team revenues, including outside money generated by everything from parking fees to stadium naming rights. The link...again. http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/story/9286091 Edited March 6, 2006 by Sox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Yeah?Did you read the article?What the players want the new revenue percentages based on versus the old is right there in black and white. The current CBA includes players salaries @ 63% of the designated gross revenues. That is your ticket sales and television figure. The NFLPA is believed to be asking for 60% of a total gross revenue figure that, in addition to the tickets+television, includes all the other stuff you're talking about. The league supposedly offered a 56.2% of the "TGR". That would have equaled a smaller share for players than what they currently get. Supposedly, the NFLPA dropped down from the 60% figure in negotiations, but the hangup continues to be how the owners will choose to define what revenues fall into the "TGR" category. 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.