View Single Post
10-28-2012, 04:16 PM
Registered User
Jeffrey93's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,226
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
These cut gets so overdramatized, when the big picture is that player salaries basically doubled over those six years in spite of the cuts, while team profits stayed flat.

As for "let's play while negotiating," it makes no sense for the league. No PA is going to give the league anything if the default is just that the league lets them keep playing anyways. In fact, the league wanted to play while negotiating last year, and the PA refused to negotiate until summer. And if you were paying attention, you'd know that Donald Fehr has a reputation for striking just before the playoffs in order to get big concessions. The owners would be idiots if they let him do that after he already did it to baseball.
I was simply saying they offered to play under the current CBA because that is what one side usually does in a labour dispute, not because they think the current CBA is worthy of being extended or is one that the Owners want.

They knew a new CBA wouldn't be the's why they offered to get to 50/50. I agree that the league couldn't let them continue playing under the current CBA because of the potential for a strike at any time.

The league making the initial offer they did wasn't a sign to show players it isn't fair after they wanted to keep playing under it. It was a shot across the bow, a low-ball, a message. It was also an absolute waste of time and kicked things off horribly.

Jeffrey93 is offline