2012 CBA Discussion Part IV (Lockout talk here)
View Single Post
11-21-2012, 01:31 AM
Bruin fan since 1975
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Edmonton Canada
Originally Posted by
So you would propose no "make whole"? Using this rationale, of course.
my proposals dont matter anymore and i hope the league/players can figure one out between themselves that will work.
but what im saying is that some people believe the union has accepted a 50/50 but the deal the unione proposed was 50/50 and then on top of that... extra. the extra they are asking for is significant.
i guess the owners are willing to do a 50/50 with a make whole... which is also extra. its not as much extra as the players want though.
so it seems both sides are willing to not do 50/50 right away. who am i to say that they need to?
if i was going to do a proposal myself... im probably say they should do 45/45 and take 10% to put into a fund that can liberate taxpayers out of situations where we are currently being held hostage. But my proposal would never ever ever be acceptable to either side.
The make whole... seams too confusing. if the owners are willing to do a make whole, they should just make it was simpler. But i find the unions logic on the make whole to be baffling. their complaint is that they worry that their money will come from their side of the 50-50 split? whats wrong with this if they are right?
i mean they are worried that current players get the current money negotiated... but if they can get it from a 50-50 split then why not? why must this money come from the owners? I dont get it. I realize they fear that there wont be enough money... but if there is... why cant it all come from their side of the equation?
and if there isnt enough money... then that was always a possibility anyhow. The individual contracts are always subject to escrow if revenues dont meet predicted projections. I dont really get the whole make whole thing... but the owners are on board with it so i dont personally care.
i just want a deal. I try to understand the owners pov. they are the ones driving the agenda now. i think their motives seem understandable to me. alot of other posters here seem to say they dont understand the owners. i am guessing though they want to understand so ive taken a stab at trying to explain the owners position. The owners themselves dont seem to care about PR or rather the league doesnt. The owners are under a gag order.
The players position is easy to understand too. They want whatever they can get. Why not? You and i would too. They cant be faulted for wanting it... the only fault is if they are asking for more then is available. From where i read the tea leaves... thats the case. I dont think the owners are willing to give what the players ask for. I think the owners would rather lose the season then give what the players ask for. I wonder if the players understand this? I wonder if the players would rather lose the season then to accept what the owners are offering? I worry that the players dont understand the owners position here... and maybe are thinking the owners are bluffing? I hope not.
on a scary side note... was listening to oilers lunch today. The host Bob Staffer passed on a rumor he heard that Fehr has a clause in his contract that pays him 10 mill if the union signs off on an offer that Fehr doesnt approve. The ramifications of this is... Fehr might be intentionally forcing a situation to get this payday???? Now Staffer reported this as an unsubtantuated rumor that was interesting to him. He normally seems like the type of host that tries to protect his credibility. I doubt hed recycle this rumor if it didnt have some legs... but it was just a rumor so far.
if its true... then im not sure id trust Fehr at all. we already know hes not sticking around after this deal. So what does he have to lose if he refuses to accept a deal for the players? He gets his 10 mill and whatever deal gets signed doesnt end up on his legacy anyhow. Its scary if theres any truth to this at all
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Alberta_OReilly_Fan