Thread: The Official CBA Negotiations/Lockout Super Thread

Originally Posted by USCKingsFan31

"[Fehr] said it is still not an offer that interests players whatsoever given the drop from the current 57 percent."

As opposed to a rebuttal of, oh, 50/50, Fehr and the players have NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER in dropping down from 57%.

He'll continue to tell us that the lockout is 100% on the owners, too.

That is not what he said. He said the offer is not acceptable to the players since it is a drop from the current 57%.

Originally Posted by USCKingsFan31

"[Fehr] said it is still not an offer that interests players whatsoever given the drop from the current 57 percent."

As opposed to a rebuttal of, oh, 50/50, Fehr and the players have NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER in dropping down from 57%.

He'll continue to tell us that the lockout is 100% on the owners, too.

Why bother even showing up to the meetings if you're going to make zero concessions?

This guy needs to go into politics. He'll have less of an effect on my life that way.

Originally Posted by FishMonger

Why bother even showing up to the meetings if you're going to make zero concessions?

This guy needs to go into politics. He'll have less of an effect on my life that way.

What did the owners concede?

The reality is, the players are "right"... they conceded big last time, and shouldn't have to be the ones to concede again.

But a lengthy lockout does nothing for them. The league will outlast them again, and they'll end up signing a deal equal to or worse than this one in the end.

Just my guess, obviously.

I like that Fehr had two Princeton educated enforcers standing behind him while he spoke. Classic!

Originally Posted by go

What did the owners concede?

Adjusted numbers for revenue sharing, kept the same definition of expenses (HRR or whatever the hell they call it).


I'm not saying the owners are right, but at least they're willing to move a bit.

Originally Posted by USCKingsFan31

The reality is, the players are "right"... they conceded big last time, and shouldn't have to be the ones to concede again.

The league gave up years of free agency, among other things.

You do realize the effect that has had on "2nd contract" costs, don't you?

Originally Posted by FishMonger

I'm not saying the owners are right, but at least they're willing to move a bit.

Considering that they started with the equivalent of gang rape as the initial offer, I'm not sure that "moving a bit" is really that commendable.

Originally Posted by santiclaws

Considering that they started with the equivalent of gang rape as the initial offer, I'm not sure that "moving a bit" is really that commendable.

Everybody and his father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate knows the initial offer was set to get the union down to 50/50.

And everbody etc. seems to agree that this is fair...everyone except the poor union who really conceded last time.
Like REALLY conceded!