Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jAZ
I don't understand how Tags can come in to the Owners and say "this is a take it or leave it deal" and then lobby to take it. That seems ridiculous, and it seems that should be the job of the Union Rep, not the Owners rep.
And the whole "saving the league" angle (because tags and upshaw are so close and both are likely to retire) seems silly as well. It's only a 6 year deal. What happens in 6 years when they are both gone? Same thing that would happen today I suspect.
I'm not going to argue that the owners deserve more money or this is a bad deal, but I'm suprised by the position Tags has taken on such a deal.
It seems to me that he's saying the owners have no remaining negotiating leverage. I'd be suprised if that's true, and I'd be suprised if they crafted a proposal with some reasonable modifications that the Union would say "hell no" and screw everyone.
It seems like Tags is saying the owners should blink. And I don't buy it.
|
Why shouldn't he tell them to blink? If in his opinion this is the best deal he can work out with the union then he should tell them that and that no labor unrest for the price of $10 million per club is worth it. The cap change is the extra amount it will cost the clubs. Personally I think the amount of increase in ticket price far exceeds the 10% increase for 6 years the union is looking for.
Dave
__________________
Thanks, Trump for the civics lesson. We are learning so much about RICO, espionage, sedition, impeachment, the 25th Amendment, order of succession, nepotism, separation of powers, 1st Amendment, obstruction of justice, the emoluments clause, conflicts of interest, collusion, sanctions, oligarchs, money laundering and so much more.
|