Promote your business or product on 700level.com. For
more information about advertising with us CLICK HERE!

Figured that since we're going to see a lot of this stuff play before our eyes, might be a good idea to get a jump on it (and it's far more interesting than watching the Eagles play).

And we start with this, which could just be the opening salvo:

"In a significant move that could impact the flow of money to potential free agents and the competitive balance of teams, the NFL has notified the players' union that effective in March, owners will pull the plug on the $100 million-per-year revenue-sharing program that has subsidized lower-revenue clubs, multiple sources said.

By Tuesday, the NFL Players Association will challenge the move with an NFL arbitrator, special master Stephen Burbank, claiming owners can't terminate the revenue-sharing model without the union's approval because it was adopted into the 2006 labor agreement, which doesn't expire until March 2011.

Management counters that the supplemental model pertained only to salary-capped seasons; 2010 is scheduled to be uncapped."

click here

Man, that's like a bear trap on the NFLPA's balls. Who said the owners didn't know what they're doing? The players would be idiots not to want to get a salery cap in place before 2010, otherwise the ability to get that big fat contact extension would be limited.

This is the TV money, right? If so, teams like Dallas could start their own broadcasting company (like the Yankees' YES network) and create a mint off of it. Teams like Oakland that got blacked out several times this year could end up having to sell the franchise or lose money. Bad teams that stay bad because of poor ownership would probably lose ownership due to BK, while teams like New England and DC could liberally compete for the best talent.

While it would remove the balance the NFL has had for so long, it has to be a bluff by the Owners. I can't imagine Kansas City or Green Bay being in favor of this.