dolphaholic Wrote:
> 1. The owners opted out of the current deal 2
> years after signing it, not the players.

Their are certain aspects of the old CBA that were ridiculous - like top 10 picks getting paid like HOF players before they ever caught a pass or tackled anyone in the NFL.

> 2. The owners wont open their books up and show
> this financial hardship they keep talking about
> (although I think they're close to doing that
> now).

Personally, I don't think they should have to.

> 3. I've never heard of an owner going bankrupt,
> but I have heard of players being paralyzed or
> killed from the sport, not to mention the long
> term effects the sport has on them.

True. But players take these risks of their own free will. It's a tragic situation, but I am not sure more money is the solution. More money won't prevent head injuries or suicides.
Owners don't risk their bodies, but they do risk their money; and the guys who risk their money usually make more money than the guys who risk their bodies.

> 4. I'm alot closer to being a millionaire then a
> billionaire, so I tend to take the "blue-collar"
> side.

I'm no billionaire by any stretch. I work for everything I have. Honestly, I think that makes me side with the owners more than the players.

> And until the court case the other day it seemed
> like the owners were hell bent on breaking the
> spirit of the players and not really caring about
> what the game means to the fans. Again though, I
> dont really care who concedes, I JUST WANT FREE
> AGENCY TO START DAMN IT!!!!!

I agree.

ChyrenB Wrote:

> You wanna talk about the Average Joe? I would
> rather see the players make RIDICULOUS salaries
> than see it go into the pockets of the owners.
>
> You know why?
>
> Because the more the players make, the more they
> encourage kids to go into the game. The more kids
> go into the game, the more the AVERAGE JOE gets a
> chance to have a break in life.

The big issue the players bring up is player safety and long term security. I don't think those are addressed by giving the players more money, and I am not convinced that it's a good thing for a 30 to 35 year old man to never have to work again. Do players attract kids to games? Yes. But if those kids go on to play in the NFL they will face the same issues of player safety and security; and those issues still won't be resolved by making more money.

> Leon in Denver, I know its true about you, while
> NortheastfinFan, I don't know about you, but there
> were other people who saw things from the
> standpoint of King George. They were called
> Royalists and Tories.

In my mind, this is strictly a business discussion. I don't look at it from a political perspective at all.

There is nothing more POLITICAL than economics.

I don't think that proposition can be seriously challenged.

I am sure that is true for many people. It's not how I view it.

ChyrenB Wrote:

> You are fooling yourself if you believe that by
> taking the side of the owners and criticizing the
> players you are not showing your economic, thus,
> political bias.

I am not going to debate this subject; but I can assure you that you know nothing of my views on politics.

dolphaholic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> berkeley223 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > does anyone really think NFL players are
> > underpaid? what would these guys be doing if
> they
> > weren't playing football? it's a business
> decison
> > each makes. obviously they think it is more
> > profitable for them to play in the league
> making
> > at least (usually much much more than) 300k a
> year
> > (9 months work maybe), as well as all of the
> > status and hoochies that come with the gig. Or
> > they could sell insurance or coach HS football
> or
> > go into personal training or whatever their
> free
> > college education has enable them to do. If
> they
> > are making less than NBA and MLB players, that
> > shows those guys are overpaid. Now maybe the
> pie
> > could be split up differently, so that rookies
> are
> > not making more than vets, but that's just a
> > detail.
>
>
> You could make the argument that Korey Stringers
> family thinks they're under-paid.


oh please. and the family of any construction worker killed when he fell off the roof of a building.

Northeast Fin Fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ChyrenB Wrote:
>
> > You are fooling yourself if you believe that by
> > taking the side of the owners and criticizing
> the
> > players you are not showing your economic,
> thus,
> > political bias.
>
> I am not going to debate this subject; but I can
> assure you that you know nothing of my views on
> politics.


RESPONSE: If you'll notice I stated above that I did not know where you were coming from and whether it was from a pro-owner bias. I have had many pm discussions with Leon and I know where he stands.

In the last hanging of the thread, we were talking about whether all economics is politics. When I said that taking the owners side was political, whether the person knows it or not, I took no personal shot at your beliefs but at your knowledge as to the implications of your position.

I'll say it again, when one takes the side in this dispute, as in most any labor dispute, he is taking a political side.

To say this is about economics and not politics is naive because all economics is political.

The price being paid for gasoline today is political. Disagree?

phinsfan2, stop making sense

ChyrenB,
"What he does with the money is no more your business, Leon, than what the owners do with their money. I don't see you criticizing what the owners do with their money because we never find out."

So tell me. Where did I say that I give a hoot about what the players do with their money? Where did I say anything about caring about the owners? If you read my posts you would find that I have no sympathy for either the owners or players. It's business and that is all it is.

As far as our forefathers go, do you really think these players are "common men"? Once they are drawing the kind of money they make as NFL players they become business men. Business men that make a lot of money. Some might not be as smart or as rich as owners but they are business men that are very well off. So stop the whinning about the common men already.

I dont care what you guys say, if you compare the salaries that NFL players make to NBA and MLB players....with all things considered, they are under-paid.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

Fair enough explanation on my flip flop allegations phinsfan.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> phinsfan2, stop making sense


Don't waste the pixels Berk. I've been trying to warn PF2 about that for months and months, and he just won't listen!

Quote:

"In other words, its just your opinion not a fact (or opinion) based on actual data."


&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Then your argument is as well. I guess nobody is right...or wrong, and this is all opinion based.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

But PF2, football is a game of only 16 regular games. Everyone is groan (even fans) at the concept of an 18 game season.

Basketball, by its nature lends itself to 80 plus games.

Baseball is what 162 games (or am I still back in 1964)?

Yes the fact is that when you factor in the number of games, football players make more but I think that has to do with the fact that you can't have that many games in football and football has replace Mickey Mantle and Willie Mays' game as the National Pastime.

The more people watching and wanting the product, the more both players and owners make.

The per hour argument doesn't really hold water. Being a football player is more than just playing in the game on Sunday. When you look at the amount of hours spent per week in practice, meetings, studying film, working out, and getting treatment for injuries, football players spend more time doing their "job" than any of the other major sports.

Thank you Chyren and Mark.

Phinsfan, I could get "verifiable data" to support my argument by searching Google as well. But I dont. I dont need too.

Trust me, I could honestly care less about the CBA, I just want it signed and football to be played this fall. But the fact is blatantly obvious that the football players are the ones who made this sport great, not the owners. So the owners need to compensate the players, and stop swimming in the billions of dollars that the players are making them.

Yes, the top level guys are compensated VERY well, but what about the practice squad guys who get abused like a red-headed step child, normally only play 1-3 seasons and leave with life long injuries. The normally cant work past 45, have no benefits and are normally addicted to some sort of pain killers.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"