DALLAS--After meeting on Tuesday afternoon in Dallas, the NFL owners have emerged with a fresh proposal for the players union. The proposal, approved by the commissioner’s office, would offer a 5-year extension to the CBA chock full of incentives that, if reached, could give the players up to 60 percent of total revenue sharing. The deal would be non-guaranteed and could be terminated at any time by the league.

Commissioner Paul Tagliabue called the offer “extremely generous” and said it would be their final attempt at a compromise before free agency officially begins.

“This is really the best offer we have come up with so far,” Tagliabue told reporters on Tuesday. “This would be a 5-year deal loaded with all kinds of incentives. If these incentives are reached, the players can get up to 60 percent of the total league revenue, which is exactly what they're asking for. It's actually a really big compromise on our part, if you think about it. Actually, don't think about it. ”

When asked to describe the incentives in the deal, Tagliabue wouldn’t get into specifics.

“Well you know everything is performance based in the NFL and that’s what makes us the economic model for all other sports leagues,” he said. “Basically the players would need to drive the revenue streams up to a certain point for the incentives to kick in. For example, if merchandise sales go over a specified dollar amount the incentive clause kicks in. So the players really need to do well on the field and promote the NFL brand in a way that drives up revenues so they can get a share of those revenues. And it can be terminated whenever the owners feel like it, without warning. So it’s essentially a big charade, just like a regular NFL contract.”

In addition to the incentives, the players would receive a signing bonus of $50 million upon agreeing to the new deal.

Players union representative Gene Upshaw sounded less than enthusiastic when asked about the league’s latest proposal.

“No, this just isn’t going to work.” Upshaw said earlier today. “It’s not guaranteed, it’s performance based, and it just falls short in a lot of different ways. The owners need to realize that this is not just a regular contract negotiation. You can’t walk all over us like you normally do. We’re the NFL players union! You can’t keep us down! Unless you up the signing bonus to, like, $60 million. That would be a start anyway.”

The union’s original demand was to receive 60 percent of the league’s total revenue, while the league was offering only 56.2. The new deal could theoretically get the union their 60 percent, but only if a series of complex incentive clauses are triggered.

NFLPA president Troy Vincent was also lukewarm about the proposal but did say it was “something they could work with.”

“It’s not an ideal proposal but I think we could work with it,” said Vincent. “Basically the owners are only willing to give us more of the revenue if there’s more revenue to give. You follow me? It’s pretty confusing but the bottom line is that it’s a low risk proposition for them and the same old high-risk, non-guaranteed bullshit for us. It reminds me a little of my contract with the Bills, which pays me a base salary of $4,000 and up to $5,000,000 in bonus incentives if, say, the Bills win the Super Bowl, I win the Super Bowl MVP, and I somehow kick the game-winning field goal.”

Vincent would not say if the union planned to accept the deal, only that they would meet and discuss it. The players union is not concerned about the prospect of an uncapped year or any kind of backlash from fans.

“Whatever. An uncapped year means nothing to us because it would actually be a good thing. And backlash from the fans? Uh, OK. I’m sure they’re all going to be so upset that they stop coming to games. We’re all going to be stinking rich no matter what, and the fans are going to keep buying our stupid crap no matter what, and I’m just going through this whole charade because I like this business and I aspire to be commissioner someday, so I can finally be on the other side of this thing and stick it to the players.”

  Copyright 2006, The Brushback - Do not reprint without permission. This article is satire and is not intended as actual news.

Copyright 2005, The Brushback - Do not reprint without permission. This article is satire and is not intended as actual news.