One things is for sure at this point. The players will not negotiate until at least the first court hearing is over. And, it appears that they won't be negotiating at all; it's all up to the lawyers.
Personally, I think this stance will hurt their de-certification case a bit because it may be viewed as a data point showing they never intended to negotiate in good faith.
I wasn't sure they had a fundamental difference on money until now. I felt they could reach an agreement on money. But I know I've heard Jerry Jerk-off tell us that the owners want to rollback because the 60% deal was too good. This statement from them basically says they won't rollback. I think "seeing the books" is just a ploy.
Basically, I don't think the players will ever roll-back unless the owners show their books and show they are losing money. And I don't think the owners will ever do that. The only way this ends is with the owners keeping the % going to the players at it's current level or higher... That may be a long time from now.
The part that may get really interesting is if the owners are forced to show their books. As interested as I am in hearing what they show, it would create a total circus and give the players all the ammo they need to mock, and ridicule the way teams operate. And they will absolutely use the info against the owners in any further CBA discussions whether this go round or in the future.
I can see this heading all the way to the Supreme Court who may have to answer a fundamental question... Does any private company ever "have" show it's books to it's employees?
If I had to pick sides I'd like the players to lose because I can't get over how they are abusing the boss/employee relationship. But I think the owners will lose in the end and cave to a player percentage of 60% or even higher.
Comment