Bills owner Ralph Wilson sounds like an owner who will vote against the CBA. He's troubled by the numbers. He related a conversation between former Dodgers owner Walter O'Malley and former baseball union leader Marvin Miller.
"Walter told Marvin, 'Don't steal it all at once. Just steal a little bit at a time,'" Wilson recalled. Wilson says this deal takes too much, and it troubles him.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/column...ohn&id=2359623
So No CBA = The End of the Bills in Buffalo according to most here. But our very own ower, One of the poorest among the owners if there is such a thing, Who won't raise ticket prices, who won't sell stadium naming rights...is going to balk against a new CBA.
Interesting...
I can see Ralphy dozing off during the meeting.
or taking potty breaks when the depends leak
So raising ticket prices and having more blackouts is the answer? Selling naming rights for $1M a year is the answer? Nope.
He is taking medicine for that now, lol.Originally Posted by L.A. Playa
I can see both angles. I just don't know if Ralph can see past the end of his nose. I hope he's been changing the batteries in his hearing aid frequently.
WHAT ?, WHAT ?, WHAT ?, OK. YESSS.
The NFL needs aCBA simular to MLB, where the $teinbrenner'$ of the league spilt the money with the poorer and smaller market teams.
This has been a "View From the 'STONEHENGE'"
Ralph Wilson
you can't keep asking Jerry Jones to keep your team afloat.
No, but this league is all about equality and that has become less the norm. Listen, the thing that attracts people to the NFL is the NFL...not the Dallas Cowboys or the Broncos or the Redskins. The NFL is the company and teams are the divisions...if one division of company makes more, that profit is used throughout the entire company, not just that division. It's really simple if you just think about it. These big cities owners are making more money because they are part of the NFL...if the Redskins were part of the CFL do you think they would make as much money?
I bet it's because Ralph realizes that they are giving too much to the players. Why the hell should they get 59.5% when the NFL originally said 56%? Why are they giving in to Gene Upshaw so quickly? They are starting to look desperate.
I think FA will be delayed again at least for a few more hours.
Would they be paid in Canadian Dollars for playing in the CFL?
Good posts, Nighthawk and Mikey.
The biggest problem is that the owners (probably the high-revenue ones), agreed WAY too quickly to making ALL revenue part of the salary cap. They should have fought that tooth and nail, and then fought the percentage. They should stick with 56%, period. That number makes revenue sharing less important. But there is still a need for it. And teams who are making more money because of NFL-funded G-3 loans (read: Patriots) MUST be forced to share some of that revenue.
I doubt it. Time to sac up and stand ground. Tags and upshaw both said no more extentions. Even if a CBA is reached the first day of FA is friday. If they don't get this done in the next 1.5 hours FA is on, no more extentions.
Why keep arguing over the same things? Nothing is going to change. Let owners have to cut most of thier rosters, let FA's sit out there with no jobs THEN something will get done.
Was the league about equality when the Bills ran the AFC? No. When San Fran and Dallas ran the NFC? No. What owners want to get back to is dynasty's.
See I guess I am old school in 'Do everything you can then ask for help' Ralph Wilson and other owners haven't done that.
Ice, you cannot compare the NFL from the past to today's NFL...it's not even close in the amount of revenue being brought in. The disparity between the teams was not nearly as great.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
