So Will The Owners Approve The Deal Or Not?..

Discussion in 'NFL Zone' started by CaptainAmerica, Mar 6, 2006.

  1. CaptainAmerica

    CaptainAmerica Active Member

    5,030 Messages
    22 Likes Received
    ...The following is from the Washington Post's story on the developments last night and this morning: "This morning's development means the owners will now vote on an approved deal instead of a proposal."


    For those who know how all of this works, does this mean the owners are now likely to approve the deal when they meet this week?
  2. joseephuss

    joseephuss Well-Known Member

    23,783 Messages
    2,508 Likes Received
    Eventually. I think there may be some tweaking, but it will get signed in the next few days or weeks.
  3. Nors

    Nors Benched

    22,015 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    What is the deal?

    My guess is at 59.5% of revenues - no. It was a 60% to 56% stalemate. Now they can pretty up % to save face for side that has to fold.


    This wreaks of Tags buying 3 days to take NFLPA offer on table back for "reconsideration".

    I sense this will bump up against Deadline again - before any agreement is struck. Also - note the owners need 24 votes to pass deal.
  4. AtlCB

    AtlCB Well-Known Member

    3,860 Messages
    110 Likes Received
    I can't imagine the small market teams agreeing to this without revenue sharing.
  5. Yeagermeister

    Yeagermeister Active Member

    47,580 Messages
    11 Likes Received
    I hope so just so the nfl can move on and get down to business.
  6. AbeBeta

    AbeBeta Well-Known Member

    27,314 Messages
    2,110 Likes Received
    the owners can't tweek the deal. they either approve the agreement or not.

    if the owners reject this deal then there is going to be no deal for a considerable period of time. and I expect that Tags would resign.
  7. peplaw06

    peplaw06 That Guy

    13,690 Messages
    411 Likes Received
    I think the way this has been spun by Tags and the media is BS... Calling this a "deal pending owner approval..." That's been the case all along. 56 to 60% stalemate, they said the deal was dead as a doornail. So the Union moves a half of a percentage point, and Tags says no... Then he says, well give me the deal, I'll take it to the owners and see what they say. They're not gonna accept this as is, that means it's not a deal.
  8. Champsheart

    Champsheart Active Member

    2,572 Messages
    14 Likes Received
    I do not know much about this stuff and how it works, but I really do not think the Owners are going to approval their proposal. I think this is a complete waste of time. JMO
  9. joseephuss

    joseephuss Well-Known Member

    23,783 Messages
    2,508 Likes Received
    They said it would be considerable time before even they got to this point. There could still be some back and forth on this. Nothin major as I think they are close. It isn't as if the owners don't know what the deal is right now. They are part of the negotiations.
  10. joseephuss

    joseephuss Well-Known Member

    23,783 Messages
    2,508 Likes Received
    Revenue sharing already exists. The big contracts, tv and apparel are all shared equally.
  11. Doomsday101

    Doomsday101 Well-Known Member

    85,260 Messages
    8,063 Likes Received
    True only dispute appears to be over local revenue and I'm on Jerry side when it comes to that.
  12. aikemirv

    aikemirv Well-Known Member

    7,274 Messages
    180 Likes Received
    You know the funny part about revenue sharing is that the union is all for as much sharing as possible, but in the end that idea will hurt players salaries and bonuses more because guys like Jerry will not have as much cash to make deals in FA and the guys who are getting Jerry's and Danny's revenue are still going to hoard it and not spend the big money on players.

    Somehow Upshaw thinks that just because more money is shared that it will go to the players and that is not necessarily true at all, unless there is a big minimum that a club can spend and I have not seen that at all.!
  13. joseephuss

    joseephuss Well-Known Member

    23,783 Messages
    2,508 Likes Received
    That is a great point.
  14. AbeBeta

    AbeBeta Well-Known Member

    27,314 Messages
    2,110 Likes Received
    No, it isn't part of negotiations. Tags's job is to negotiate deals for the owners. Tags worked out a deal with the union. Negotiations done.

    If the owners don't like that deal that Tags and Upshaw worked so hard to strike, then it amounts to a no confidence vote for Tags. And as I noted before, Tags may resign if that happens. Similarly if the players refuse to ratify the deal, Upshaw is done.
  15. SkinsHokieFan

    SkinsHokieFan Well-Known Member

    2,423 Messages
    142 Likes Received
    You guys need to spy on the meeting
  16. aikemirv

    aikemirv Well-Known Member

    7,274 Messages
    180 Likes Received
    From reading the reports it does not look as if Tags is married to the deal and presenting it to the owners as a fair deal to me. It just looks like an effort to get the thing moving again.

    I see no "I will resign if the owners don't sign" in this proposal at all. It is a group of people anyway, not just Tags.

    "The NFL negotiators called us tonight after our negotiations broke off to indicate that they will take our complete package to the owners for an approval vote on Tuesday,
  17. Rockytop6

    Rockytop6 Well-Known Member

    2,076 Messages
    84 Likes Received
    I hope he would resign.
  18. Rockytop6

    Rockytop6 Well-Known Member

    2,076 Messages
    84 Likes Received
    There is no guarantee that the players will accept it. It should read "pending the owners approval and the players ratification".

    I would hate for Tags and Upshaw to be in charge of anything that I had anything to do with.
  19. ABQCOWBOY

    ABQCOWBOY Moderator Staff Member

    39,764 Messages
    4,714 Likes Received
    No deal will be done in my opinoin. 59.5 is still 60 rather then 56. Revenue sharing is not going to fly with 9 or 10 owners unless something else is given up by the small market guys. Why would smart owners handicap themselves in this way and then further compound the problem by agreeing to pay even more then what they initially had to. If the poor owners can't afford to leave the revenue sharing the way it is, then how are they going to be able to afford to pony up more money to account for the increase to 60%? They wont and it will eventually have to be off set by the teams who are making more money. At least, that's the story we'll get.

    I don't see it.
  20. Murph80

    Murph80 Member

    974 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    I don't see it either. The owners are very far apart.

Share This Page