May 20
Something about this story just irks me. Now, before I get ahead of myself, I want to say that I think major athletes are greedy. Not each individual necessarily, but as a whole. Strikes, lockouts, sitting through training camp… What a joke. Just do your job and get paid your millions of dollars.
Now, what bothers me about this story is that NFL owners somehow thing it’s wrong that the players get 60% of the revenues. Really? They don’t deserve a slim majority of the money the league brings in? How does that work? Honestly, even if they’re greedy themselves, they’re still the ones out there making the plays and bringing in the fans. Nobody goes to a game because they love the owners. What a joke.
May 20th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
This could be wrong, but it is my understanding after reading profootballtalk.com that the substantive issues regarding the opt-out are the amount of guaranteed money being given to rookies (much more than to proven free agents) and the inability to reclaim bonus money when a player breaches his contract (e.g., vick).
Either way, I still agree with you. The deal was signed two years ago. It is not arcane. As far as I’m concerned, any problems that the owners see now could have been foreseen then. And if they weren’t, shame on them. Live up to your word. I think if the Players thought they were getting a two year deal, regardless of the opt-out clause, I doubt they would have signed it.
May 21st, 2008 at 2:17 am
yeah, to be honest, i didn’t know that. it does seem like they have a somewhat legitimate gripe, but like you said, it’s their own fault.
in general, i just get tired of hearing about the money issues. there’s enough money there to go around, and if both sides were less greedy, it wouldn’t be an issue.