Did Upshaw's death cause owners to act?

[mav1234]

"Ever since Gene Upshaw passed away -- I'm just going to lay it all out there -- the owners saw blood in the water," Brees said Wednesday after a players-organized workout at Tulane University. "They felt like, 'This is our opportunity to take a significant piece of the [financial] pie back at all costs, a piece that we will never have to give back again. This is our chance, while they don't have leadership, while they're scrambling to find a new executive director. This is our time.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/jim_trotter/05/26/lockout/index.html#ixzz1NUouGUa2

Frankly I think it had more to do with the deal than Upshaw, but I could be wrong.

Then again, I kind of wish both sides would shut up and get this worked out. Blah.

What do you guys think?

[rayzor]

brees shouldn't quit his day job.

[blackcatgrowl]

Gene's death happened in Aug 2008.

I'd say the owners were more concerned about this trend in 2009 than his death:

[mav1234]

so what you're saying is that Upshaw is responsible for the US economy collapsing?!

[blackcatgrowl]

so what you're saying is that Upshaw is responsible for the US economy collapsing?!

Well... he was head of the highest paid union in the country...

[Cyberjag]

My opinion of Brees took a radical shift when I read this. I think he's scum for exploiting this. Just a bad person, really.

[mav1234]

For those too lazy/at work/whatever to click the post, here's another quote:

"Their philosophy was, We're going to give you a very subpar deal, a slap-in-the-face deal, and hope that you'll accept it because hopefully we've intimidated you enough into thinking that this is a take-it-or-leave-it deal, and you're just going to succumb to the pressure," he said. "Well, guess what. We're a lot more informed and educated than in the past, and we're much better businessmen than you think and we're going to stand up for what is right and what is fair. Fifty-fifty is fair. It's been fair for the last 20 years and I think the game has done pretty well over the last 20 years. I think franchise values have gone up at a pretty good rate over the last 20 years. So you can't sit here and tell me that the system is broken."

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/jim_trotter/05/26/lockout/index.html#ixzz1NVOtHRZK

[countryboi]

sounds like a of bad blood coming from the brees

[Panths]

Yea 50-50 is fair too bad that's not what either side is asking for

[blackcat]

50-50 is fair if both sides are taking equal risks, which by the way isn't happening.

[I am Hubby]

IMHO, I believe that the players are caught in the middle in all this. I lived in the Flint, Detroit reigon in Michigan most of my life. I have seen what the union can do for people. Higher earnings, better benefits, and a decent quality of life. The drawback is that every time a CBA comes up you know you are probably going to spend some time on the couch or picketing, because the union inevitably strikes to get what they want. The car industry in Mich. is in ruins, McDonald Douglass (I think) can't build a plant in SC, in main part because of unions. The only people that truly benefit from unions are the ones working for the unions.

Conversely, as an ex-business owner, I can sympathize with the owners. They have a right to a profit. They spent their time building and cultivating their business. No one has a right to decide how much of the profits they are allowed to keep.

Brees may be right that more players than ever are more savvy to business matters. But they are still blind to the fact that without the owners, he wouldn't have a job. And that the owners have said they are willing to expand their roll in taking care of ex-players, as well as current players. They have also agreed to a larger piece of the pie for the players, which in my opinion is above and beyond fair. The owners know that without football they will loose their business, do the football players think they could start their own league and become their own owners? Yes football is a short and violent career choice, where the average player isn't even assured of a paycheck next week. That does not mean they are entitled to anything.

In conclusion, IMO the union trying to force the owners into concessions is bush league. Sitting down and negotiating is the right thing to do for all concerned.

Just my thoughts, and GOOOO PANTHERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[panthers55]

Interesting how Upshaw was frequently demonized by players (particularly Retired players) while he was president for being too chummy with the owners and essentially being in their pocket. Now that he is dead and the owners want to renegotiate the CBA he is being cannonized by Brees and other players as the bastion that stood between the owners and the players and negotiated such a strong deal.

[JawnyBlaze]

Brees definitely sunk to a new low with this one. Great QB, stupid and selfish person. No business representing the players.

[pantherfan49]

50-50 is fair if both sides are taking equal risks, which by the way isn't happening.

Yep. How that gets lost on people is beyond me.

Also, Moley wants to split revenue 50-50, which is complete bullshit because then the owners have to pay all non-player associated overhead out of their 50 percent take.

At the end of the day, I just don't see how anyone can side with the union when some of the players make more money than does ownership.

Consider the fuging Superbowl champion Green Bay Packers. Now they are community owned and not privately owned, so they may not be the best example to illustrate this point, but they are the only organization that opens their books to the public.

The Packers had an operating profit of only 10 million USD in 2010. Meanwhile, Moley makes 10 million USD a year- in other words, he makes the same amount of money as does ownership of the Superbowl champions. Do any of you that work for someone else really think that you should make as much money as the owner?

Fug you Moley!