[quote=“C49erMoose, post:19, topic:25151”]I don’t think the owners should be required to open their books for anyone - they own the business. The players are free to walk and the owners should be free to replace them (albeit, with lesser talent in this case).
The real problem with this whole situation is the lack of competition.[/quote]Not sure anyone is arguing these points. The municipalities are making the decision to fund these stadiums to lure or keep teams, though I think many cities make poor decisions to use the taxpayer’s money to give owners such sweetheart deals and the cities should also put pressure on the owners to provide a good product in exchange.
The owners don’t have to open their books. But the players are free to make this a condition of their negotiations. The owners are then free to replace them. The players are then free to join a brand new league that will make a lot of money in the NFL’s absence. The owners will then lose lots and lots of money. Both parties get to decide how far down that road they want to go, but I don’t see why anyone needs to act like the players should shut up and take it because they have it so good already. The owners have it good too, but are claiming a lower number than we all suspect is the case to try to help pressure the players into accepting their demands. They are free to use these tactics too, but don’t expect to get sympathy for such transparent dishonesty.
[quote=“9erken, post:21, topic:25151”][quote=“C49erMoose, post:19, topic:25151”]I don’t think the owners should be required to open their books for anyone - they own the business. The players are free to walk and the owners should be free to replace them (albeit, with lesser talent in this case).
The real problem with this whole situation is the lack of competition.[/quote]Not sure anyone is arguing these points. The municipalities are making the decision to fund these stadiums to lure or keep teams, though I think many cities make poor decisions to use the taxpayer’s money to give owners such sweetheart deals and the cities should also put pressure on the owners to provide a good product in exchange.
The owners don’t have to open their books. But the players are free to make this a condition of their negotiations. The owners are then free to replace them. The players are then free to join a brand new league that will make a lot of money in the NFL’s absence. The owners will then lose lots and lots of money. Both parties get to decide how far down that road they want to go,but I don’t see why anyone needs to act like the players should shut up and take it because they have it so good already. The owners have it good too, but are claiming a lower number than we all suspect is the case to try to help pressure the players into accepting their demands. They are free to use these tactics too, but don’t expect to get sympathy for such transparent dishonesty.[/quote]
Exactly. The problem with these arguments is that no one really reads/listens. They just jump straight to ideologue talking points.
If the owners have nothing to hide, open the books. If I wanted to see my company’s 10-K report I could. I wouldn’t understand it, but I could see it. It wouldn’t do me any good, but I’m not in an athlete union either.
Any NFL team, which is about all of them, should be told by the muni that gave them $ they aren’t allowed to lock out & must negotiate or pay back muni $.
And the NFL contract to get paid by TV deals if they want a NFL contract is BS.
And how is the NFL contract to have games on Direct TV, but not on other cable & satellite providers, not an illegal monopoly?
And how can the NFL dictate to the networks to black-out games that aren’t sold out, or not to show 2 games in a row on certain weekends? Doesn’t the customer get whatever candy bar they want when they go to the store? How can the seller tell the buyer what to do?