I will post the two he said she saids and let you fugtards argue.
NFL Head Lawyer dude says :
We incorporated new economic terms to try to bridge the gap. You’ve heard a lot of talk about an $800M gap. Nowhere close. Not close to factual.
We offered today to split the difference and meet the union in the midpoint, with a player compensation number that would have been equivalent to player compensation in 2009 and above player compensation in 2010, and we offered grow it from there over four years by $20 million a club, to the point where in 2014 the player compensation number was the union’s number. It was the number the union proposed to us and we accepted it. That wasn’t good enough.
We offered to guarantee for the first time in the history of the league, more than one year of injury on player contracts. Apparently not good enough.
We moved off of our wage scale, and we offered to do a rookie compensation system within the context of a hard rookie cap as the union had proposed which would preserve individual negotiations and maintain the role of agents in the process. Evidently not good enough.
We offered, in fact we agreed to the union’s request for a cash team minimum for the first time in league history. We agreed to it at their number and their structure. Evidently not good enough.
We told the union that for 2011 and 2012, we would play within the existing 16-game regular season format, and we committed to them, notwithstanding the rights we have in the current agreement, we would not change to 18 games without their consent. Evidently not good enough.
At the same time, we agreed to implement wide ranging health and safety changes, reducing the offseason program by five weeks, reducing the practice time in the preseason, reducing the practice time and contract drills during the regular season and expanding the number of days off for players. Evidently not good enough.
We offered to increase the benefits in a wide range for both current and retired players. Under the proposal we had tendered, retired players who left the league before 1993, would experience an increase in their retirement benefit of close to 60 percent and the union, which says it represents former players, walked away from that today.
Comes from here -> http://nfllabor.com/...mara-jeff-pash/
The NFL demanded a multi-billion dollar giveback and refused to provide any legitimate financial information to justify it.
The NFL’s offer on March 7 to give the NFLPA a single sheet of numbers was NOT financial disclosure. The players’ accountants and bankers advised that the “offered” information was meaningless: only two numbers for each year.
The NFL wanted to turn the clock back on player compensation by four years, moving them back to where they were in 2007.
The NFL offered no proposal at all for long-term share of revenues.
NFL demanded 100% of all revenues which went above unrealistically low projections for the first four years.
The NFL refused to meet the players on significant changes to in-season, off-season or pre-season health and safety rules.
The NFL kept on the table its hypocritical demand for an 18-game season, despite its public claims to be working toward improving the heath and safety of players.
The NFL wanted cutbacks in payer workers’ compensation benefits for injured players.
The NFL sought to limit rookie compensation long after they become veterans — into players’ fourth and fifth years
From here ->http://www.nfllockou....being-reached/
Begin now debating the merits of Unions, Capitalism, How right you are, and how awesome I am.