NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    Seems a lot of the back and forth seen on this forum regarding the current CBA issue revolves mostly around the issue of an 18 games season and money.  Putting those two aside, where do any of you fall in this matter?  Are you on the owners side, the players or couldn't care less as long as there is football?  Here's my two cents....

    As someone who works in the corporate sector and have many relatives who are business owners, I am in the owners camp.  What I can't fathom is the players feeling of entitlement that they can dictate to the OWNERS of the NFL teams how much revenue must be shared with the players.  Not a SINGLE owner/NFL team is forcing these players to play football.  They all go into this knowing full well the risk they bear to their bodies when they play this sport.  No different than any of you going to work where you toil now.  No one forces you to work there nor can you dictate to your empoyer they MUST share a percentage of their revenue with you!  True, you expect a fair wage, one that is paid based on market, but, to tell the owner they must share revenue with you?  Come on man!

    Yes, I know some of you will slam me, but, that is where I stand.  There are countless more issues that can be dredged up to support either side, but, I support the owners.  If I were a business owner, I would be appalled at an employee who demands I pay them a percentage of my revenue.  As long as they are happy with the wage we both agreed they accept, to think I owe them more is amazing.  What risk do they have other than to show up for work?  Are any owners placing the players in an unhealthy work environment?  Is it a sweat shop?  Yes, there may be some "stupid" owners out there, but, they are the owners.  As fans, do we think ANY athlete deserves 20 - 30 million dollars a year to play a sport?  I know most of you say "no", but, that is the way the system works.  We'd take as much if offered, too.  Some of you in this forum probably work jobs significantyl tougher than any NFL player would want.  Do you deserve millions?  I won't stretch this out much more, because when all is said and done, as much as I like football and the players I root for, they ARE the EMPLOYEES and the OWNERS OWN the team, not the players!
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from lippa. Show lippa's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    Iam not for ethier side reasons 1.AS for players are well over paid for a few months of work and they knew the risk(as you said).2,.The players that live above thier means  is totally stupid on there end and looking too get more.3.what about the love for the game they once had.4. AS for owners I understand your point and its all about profit,but when they keep riasing ticket prices so the average father/mother can't bring thier kid too a game  they love is sad!Tickets are over price buy how much I do not know but would guess its up there about 500 percent,so where is the market for the people who make the owners all the money with jerseys ,hats ,sneakers etc
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    I'm not quite so enamored of the owners as you are.  Yeah, owners own their business, but especially in a business like the NFL they have a business only because there are talented individuals out there who people want to watch play. If you have a rare talent, you can demand more money for it. That's just market economics.

    A few misconceptions in your post that should be corrected:

    • The current CBA would have remained in effect through 2012 if the owners hadn't voted to end it early. The players aren't asking for more. The owners voted to end the CBA so they could ask the players to take less. 
    • The negotiation isn't really about how much revenue the players can demand from the owners--it's about how high the salary cap should be.  The owners want to reduce the salary cap.  The players have countered with a demand that keeps the salary cap roughly at what it is.  The players aren't demanding money--they're negotiating on where their salaries can be capped.
     Most of us can't dictate to our employers. But most of us are more replaceable than NFL players.  If you have a rare talent that is essential to the success of your business, then you have more negotiating power. If you've got that power, there's nothing wrong with exercising it.

    In the end, I don't favor owners or players--I think both have a right to negotiate and I don't see anything wrong in either side asking for all they can from the other.  That's how negotiations work.




     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    In Response to Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?:
    ...I'm not quite so enamored of the owners as you are. Posted by prolate0spheroid

    Actually, this is not about being "enamored" with either side.  I couldn't care less who makes more money, but, this is an issue of a group of people who are trying to divide a multi billion dollar pie and, in my view, the owners own the pie.  The players wouldn't have a job if it weren't for owners and the fans who shell out the bucks to see them.  As I said in my post, no one is forcing the players to play football, they are chosing their path and make darn good money, too!
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Brady2Moss07. Show Brady2Moss07's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    To be honest the entire situation is confusing.
    I think both sides are greedy.
    There is a lot of money to be made and had, but I would like to see them decrease the cost of attending a game, merchandise, etc... to fans.

    When a player makes multiple times the amount of money I make in a entire year for playing just one game, I really have no sympathy for them.
    There are plenty of laborers who are out there digging ditches, laying brick, building our homes, etc... who are sacraficing their bodies for a sliver of what these pacified athletes make.

    And the suits are not better.

    It is unfortunate the American way has turned into greed and accumulating all the wealth you can for yourself.

    I am not planning on there being a season. I will find other things to do I guess.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    In Response to Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?:
    In Response to Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand? : Actually, this is not about being "enamored" with either side.  I couldn't care less who makes more money, but, this is an issue of a group of people who are trying to divide a multi billion dollar pie and, in my view, the owners own the pie.  The players wouldn't have a job if it weren't for owners and the fans who shell out the bucks to see them.  As I said in my post, no one is forcing the players to play football, they are chosing their path and make darn good money, too!
    Posted by agcsbill

    Yeah, the players wouldn't have a job without the owners--but just as true the owners wouldn't have a business without the players. I don't see why the players don't have the right to demand to be paid more money if they have the power to make that demand. 
     
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from lippa. Show lippa's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

                      prolate good point but without fans  there is no market at all for ethier too make money.So in the end who really controls the market I say give some back too the fans that allow them too make all that money for both sides!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    In corporate America if you lose your job you will easily be replaced and the company you worked for will still operate normally without you.

    In the NFL the players are what make it successful. The players are why we watch and spend our money. It will not operate normally with replacement players.

    I'm not against owners, I work for a very successful and generous owner, but the NFL is different from every other corporation. It is successful because of the rare talents of the players. It is not successful because of the owners.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    In Response to Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?:
    It is unfortunate the American way has turned into greed and accumulating all the wealth you can for yourself. 
    Posted by Brady2Moss07


    I agree, but why is all the animus directed at the players? Aren't the owners just as greedy as the players?  

    What really strikes me as weird, though, about America right now is how every put-upon worker seems to support "owners" while at the same time wanting to see other laborers take wage cuts.  Don't American workers understand that it's the owners who are making the really big money while they're cutting your pensions and shipping your jobs to China?  Why do you think these owners are such noble and admirable heros?  No, they're the greediest of the greedy, making the most money, and doing things (like sending jobs overseas) that hurt America and hurt average working Americans.  Yet, we treat these "owners" and CEOs like gods, vote to give them bigger tax cuts, and talk about what virtuous risk-takers they are.  Meanwhile we attack auto workers and teachers who are making middle class wages and demand instead that they make the poverty wages we apparently think they deserve. It's nuts.  It's like we want more than anything to bend over and take it up the backside from our "owners" . . .  and we especially hate seeing other average people not bending over with us.  It's a slave mentality: the mentality of weaklings who hate to see others rise above their own station and be strong. Average Americans have become doormats who hate it most when some other average American isn't a doormat. It's really pathetic. And it's generating a spiraling race to the bottom. 

    I simply don't understand it. 





     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    In Response to Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?:
                      prolate good point but without fans  there is no market at all for ethier too make money.So in the end who really controls the market I say give some back too the fans that allow them too make all that money for both sides!
    Posted by lippa


    It would be nice for the owners to reduce ticket prices, but I don't think they'll do that as long as they can sell out at the current prices.  The Pats have the highest average ticket prices in the NFL, but have a waiting list tens of thousands long.  Ultimately ticket prices are about supply and demand. Supply is limited and demand is great, so ticket prices will continue to stay high--and probably will rise.

      




     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    with the players on this one, especially after the comments from the Carolina owner
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from lippa. Show lippa's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

               Yes prolate Iknow this  ,I brought it up cause without fans they have nothing  tv rating and sales of products and high and demand i know is great and we as fans allow it ,I admit i do it too so no better lol
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    In Response to Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?:
               Yes prolate Iknow this  ,I brought it up cause without fans they have nothing  tv rating and sales of products and high and demand i know is great and we as fans allow it ,I admit i do it too so no better lol
    Posted by lippa



    Yeah . . . I already sent the Pats my annual check for season tickets! I guess I still think it's worth it, even if it is expensive . . .
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from lippa. Show lippa's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

     thats cool if i had season tickets  I would too .Iam not saying nothing  wrong with it just think it should be more about the fans and whos making the money for them instead of 7 dollars for beers and so on then on top of it they charge for parking at the stauims when already paid for a ticket its crazy.
               You go up too loudon ,nh for a nascar race by tickets for as low as 40 and free parking  and you can bring in your own beer now thats sweet.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    Yes, the fans are caught in the middle and pay the prices.  As long as we do, these two parties will continue to fight to divide the pie.  In corporate America, the money made by these NFL owners and the players is a pittance compared to some other industries.  It just so happens to be a very visible enterprise which captures our attention.  As Bradsy2Moss says, I, too, have no sympathy for someone who makes millions and cries about not making enough.  Prolate, you talk about corporate America and the benefits given corporations as well as the earnings of auto workers v teachers.  We all wish we could make more and, at the same time, we scream about teachers wanting more while we want our governments to reduce our taxes.  Then we turn around and pay tens of thousands of dollars for new cars assembled by workers who make 50 - 60 -70 dollars an hour or more.   What it boils down to, and prolate you mentioned this too, as long as the fans are paying the current ticket prices, there are waiting lists for season tickets, and the cow is getting fatter, these two groups have no reason to back down.  If this season were to be lost as a result of this standoff, the fans should send a message to the NFL and the players.  That message is this:  "Without us, you have no teams, no revenue and no millions to divide, we are staying away until you come to your senses and quit raking us over the coals!".  That, sadly, will never happen!
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    In Response to Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?:
    In corporate America if you lose your job you will easily be replaced and the company you worked for will still operate normally without you. In the NFL the players are what make it successful. The players are why we watch and spend our money. It will not operate normally with replacement players. I'm not against owners, I work for a very successful and generous owner, but the NFL is different from every other corporation. It is successful because of the rare talents of the players. It is not successful because of the owners.
    Posted by digger0862



    Exactly. Professional athletes are entertainers with rare talent. Not surprisingly, they get paid more like actors and actresses than like ordinary laborers.  That has nothing to do with what anyone "deserves" for their work--it's just a reality of the market. If you have a rare talent that's in much demand, you can demand more money.  


     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from lippa. Show lippa's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    IMO rare talent is one thing ,but dont think they cant be replaced you know how many good players are out there  that just missed the cut and thousands more waiting too come up and as football fans ,I bet we will still watch so the owners win they get the people in the stands and market thier team.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    We've ended up with an economy where a relatively small number of people make extraordinary amounts of money while the average worker is being pinched with stagnant wages and reductions in benefits.  Unfortunately, a lot of average workers have been hoodwinked into believing that other average workers are the enemy. This idea that autoworkers make 50, 60, 70 or more an hour is just bunk--but a lot of people are convinced it's true.  The reality is that autoworkers make a bit under $30 an hour--and even if you add in benefit costs, they earn maybe $35 to at most $40 an hour.  Meanwhile, the CEO of Ford Motors makes $15 to $20 million a year!  Why are people so quick to attack the assembly workers, who bring home $50,000 to $60,000 a year in pay and maybe another $10,000 in benefits, while the executives of those same companies are raking in $50,000 or $60,000 a day and no one seems to mind!

    I'm not saying that top executives of huge companies shouldn't make a lot of money.  They should. Those are hard jobs with a lot of responsibility--and it takes certain rare talents to fill those positions successfully.  But should executives be making 200 or 300 times what their workers are making?  That seems a bit excessive to me--especially when the CEO isn't the founder of the company, just another hired employee.  What made America strong and great was good jobs that paid good wages and decent benefits. Those jobs are still around, but they are getting scarcer.  Part of the problem, in my mind, is that the balance has swung too far against labor and in favor of management and owners. Unions can be pains in the neck . . . but at the same time, they help keep things in balance.  We need groups (and government regulators) who can push against owners and management who want to cut pay, cut benefits, and move jobs overseas.  Without that, we just will end up with fewer and fewer good jobs and ultimately a weaker America.  Owners and executives do what's best for themselves. There's nothing wrong with that.  But we need a way to balance what they do--and that means either unions or government officials willing to step in sometimes and force owners and management to take workers' needs into consideration as decisions are made. 

    To get back to football . . . that's a very unusual situation where labor has more power than in other jobs--not so much because of the union, but simply because the laborers have rare talents which make them harder to replace.  Everyone is maybe making way too much money in the NFL--both players and owners--but at least there's a balance in these NFL negotiations where labor and owners are more equal.  That's what I like.  I wouldn't say I'm in favor of the players (owners have rights to ask for more too and if the teams really are having financial difficulty, then the owners should be getting the players to make concessions), but I also like to see a situation where labor isn't just bowled over by management. So in these negotiations, I wouldn't say I'm on one side or the other--but I'm certainly not mad at the players.  In fact, I'm glad to see them being aggressive and not backing down too fast. In the end, I hope the two parties can come together and work out an agreement that's good for them both.

    As far as us fans go, though . . .  we're going to be paying a lot whatever happens.  But that's just the reality of the market.  As long as we pay, the prices will stay high.  At least though, the quality of the sport is high too. NFL football is expensive, but in my mind it's a darn good product.  And both the players and owners make that quality possible.  I hope in the end, they all do well because I want to see the quality of the product stay high.





     





     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from mrbungle. Show mrbungle's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    I think that if this drags out, the entire NFL loses. 

    Winters are tough here in NE and a lot of us (I know I have) have had a rough year. Utlimately, the fans are the ones who sacrifice to pay the teams/players/NFL. We pay for the licensed stuff. We buy the tickets. We provide the revenue. Sure, the TV networks do too but, without a fan base, they'd have no money. 

    IMO, this is a bad time to be whining about pay when everyone involved with the NFL makes more money in a week than I do in 20 years. Yes, they all have the right to do this and I support that but, dragging this out will tarnish the entire NFL. No matter what they all say, the longer this goes on, the more it looks like nothing but greed. That's not going to go over well with a lot of folks who have to make decisions like paying the cell phone bill or get your DISH/DirectTV shut off. I know a LOT of folks going through just that. 

    So, where do I stand? 

    The NFLPA and the NFL should consider just who pays their salaries. It's not primarily fat cats with lots of $$. It's guys like me that work overtime and do whatever it takes to take me family to 1 game per season if I can. That alone costs me close to $1000.00. A thousand bucks, when all added up for 5 people to go to the game. Maybe more. Why don't they address that? Less fortunate families have ZERO chance of seeing the Patriots play. Hey, I understand it's beacause we have a great team and all seats are sold out (which is a good thing) but, something is fundamentally flawed here. 

    I don't offer a solution but, I do ask the union, the players and the league to consider how fortunate they are to have such good fans. Don't blow it by looking greedy. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoLongHarryTruman. Show SoLongHarryTruman's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    I think you all need a little perspective. 

    "In 2009, the Atlanta Falcons had the highest average player salary at $1.325 million, while the St. Louis Rams had the lowest average player salary at $488,640. Most players in the league earned a salary somewhere in the middle of that range, around $770,000 that year." (http://www.ehow.com/about_7492678_average-professional-football-salary.html)

    Even that's misleading. If Brady is pulling down around 15 mil a year (14.6 cap value in 2009), what are the grunts getting. In 2010 the minimum salary for a player by year of service was: Rookie: 260,000; 1 year: 275,000; 2 year: 290,000, etc to year 10: 405,000. How many players get to 10 years? 

    Sure there are rich players, Brady, Manning, Mankins, Moss. For every rich player, how many journey men are there that play 1 or two years, at or near minimum pay, and are out of football? How many are forced out due to debilitating injury? 

    The union isn't about making players rich. Its about protecting those players whose name you never hear. Its about preventing owners from abusing power they have. Sure, owners have made a select group of skill players very rich. Make no mistake though, that's a sign of greed on their part. Then they turn that fact against players as a group. Its a negotiating ploy. 

    Everybody is greedy. The players are greedy. The owners are greedy. I'm greedy and so are you all. The difference between these groups is power. Owners have it. The players, you and me, not so much. If the players union can level the playing field some, good for them. And if you're sick of the 'greed' displayed by owners and players, exercise the power of the dollar you have and stop watching the game. College players don't get "paid".

    In case you're curious, I do not belong to a union and never have. I have zero interested in belonging to a labor organization, but I have an appreciation for the positive impact they've had on the labor market in general. In case you can't connect those dots, non-union shops pay competitive rates to defend against unionization.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    In Response to Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?:
    IMO rare talent is one thing ,but dont think they cant be replaced you know how many good players are out there  that just missed the cut and thousands more waiting too come up and as football fans ,I bet we will still watch so the owners win they get the people in the stands and market thier team.
    Posted by lippa

    If we can queue up to watch college football, in which the teams aren't all full of the elite of the elite, you are right, we'll watch pro football with or without the Mannings and Bradys of the world! 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from chaucer. Show chaucer's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    I stand with Prolate and So Long HST.  Most sense I've read at this site in a long time.  I'm glad to hear sympathy with the unions and the middle class, the "forgotten" people in this country by politicians of both parties and by rich corporate types who lobby for kegislation that favors their interests at the expense of the middle class.  Thanks for the enlightened views.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    I see SLHSTs points and agree there is some validity to the "man in the middle" thought process.  The "average" NFL players most likely do not wind up making millions during their average 3-4 year careers.  The Mannings and Bradys of the NFL world are the rarities.  I think we all wish there was some balance in life in which the folks who mean to most to our everyday lives, teachers, fireman, policemen and others who actually contribute to our societal way of living are better paid for their contributions while an entertainer, be it sports or movies, rake in millions no matter how much they claim they work "hard".  That's just the way it is.  Granted, in this particular situation, it is the owners who are the "rich" while the players are trying to "strike it rich".  Even though I may side with the owners, they have hurt their own cause with the way some of them have paid players to the detriment of the whole.  Classic cases:  Albert Haynesworth or A Rod...  the owners did fess up the $$$ as crazy as the amounts were.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from AZPAT. Show AZPAT's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    In Response to Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?:
    I'm not quite so enamored of the owners as you are.  Yeah, owners own their business, but especially in a business like the NFL they have a business only because there are talented individuals out there who people want to watch play. If you have a rare talent, you can demand more money for it. That's just market economics. A few misconceptions in your post that should be corrected: The current CBA would have remained in effect through 2012 if the owners hadn't voted to end it early. The players aren't asking for more. The owners voted to end the CBA so they could ask the players to take less.  The negotiation isn't really about how much revenue the players can demand from the owners--it's about how high the salary cap should be.  The owners want to reduce the salary cap.  The players have countered with a demand that keeps the salary cap roughly at what it is.  The players aren't demanding money--they're negotiating on where their salaries can be capped.  Most of us can't dictate to our employers. But most of us are more replaceable than NFL players.  If you have a rare talent that is essential to the success of your business, then you have more negotiating power. If you've got that power, there's nothing wrong with exercising it. In the end, I don't favor owners or players--I think both have a right to negotiate and I don't see anything wrong in either side asking for all they can from the other.  That's how negotiations work.
    Posted by prolate0spheroid



    "But most of us are more replaceable than NFL players."
     
    Are you kidding me?????? Did the NFL roll over and die when Lombardi's great Packers teams stopped playing? Did it shrivel up after players on the Steelers, Cowboys, Dolphins, and Vikings teams of the 70's retired? I seem to recall game still being played after the 49'ers of the 80's retired.    

    Seems to me I recall new people replacing guys like Jim Brown, Johnny Unitas, and Sam Huff. Same for guys named Larry Csonka, Franco Harris, and Fran Tarkenton. I don't remember any teams folding after Joe Montana, Barry Sanders, or John Elway retiring either! Reggie White retired,a dn I know the Packers strapped it up the next season.

    Guess what? Players leave and NEW players take their place! Gee, it happens in all sports! If you even want to try to equate our non-professional sports lives to a pro, well, you haven't got much self esteem for yourself. 

    If these players feel they can geta  better deal someplace else with their, (hrumph!) COLLEGE EDUCATIONS, then I say to them: GO FOR IT! Let them show the world that They can actually put C-A-T together to make a word AND know what it means, at $2.85Million/year!

    Seems to me the owners are the ones taking the financial risk, with most of them trying to put a winning product on the field, less a championship caliber one. The players? The cost to attend a game? Well, stare down a $163Million roster payroll, which doesn't come close to include their operational costs (scouting, general maintainence, front office, PR, etc), not their financial committtments (ie: bank and investor note payable) just to "own" that logo we see on helmets.

    Remember the USFL? WFL? Players thought they could strike it rich there too. 
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmcintosh. Show andrewmcintosh's posts

    Re: NFLPA Vs NFL.. where do you stand?

    it really upsets me when talking heads/mm quarterbacks blast one side for being "greedy", as if greed were some easily quantifiable objective term that we can just throw around.  As has been said, i'm greedy, you're greedy, the players are greedy, and so are the owners.  I'm greedy for football, i'm greedy for Pats wins, that in and of itself is not a negative thing, hence i'm not taking sides in this negotiation.  Both sides have valid points, the owners are perfectly within their rights to withhold their financial information, and the players are within their rights to be skeptical and ask for more transparency.  The entire notion of a "union" consisting of minimum 350k individuals seems kind of funny to me, to be totally honest i've never been a huge fan of unions (post about 1930), but the PA certainly has every right to collectively bargain with ownership until something gets hammered out....which will happen no earlier than july imo.  Good thread here guys

    edited to compensate for my apparent kindergarten spelling ability
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share