View Single Post
11-23-2012, 10:28 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2005
Country: United Nations
Posts: 3,795
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by DutchShamrock View Post
This notion is such garbage. Show me how this applies in the real world. There is give and take in all sports negotiating. Everything is based off the previous CBA. Of course the previous one matters.

The owners don't just impose terms and force agreements. I can't believe I have to constantly argue the most basic of accepted facts.

And it just shows you how asinine your concept is anyway. If the last CBA is irrelevant, the players can't be judged on their offers relative to the last CBA either.

People can obviously form their own opinions and hate the union. At least base it on realistic terms. Don't be hypocritical.
I am judging the players on their offer based on the asinine insistence that their income is not directly linked to revenue, not the last CBA. Like I said before, they absorb no risk and want guarenteed revenues in their "partnership". It's ludicrus.

TheRedressor is offline