The idea would require the low-revenue clubs to use at least some of the money they receive on player salaries.

The two sides disagree on how to generate the money that would go to the low-revenue clubs.

The plan's proponents say that it could produce as much as $10 million for some of the low-revenue clubs.

Put simply, the agreement taxes increased earnings of low-revenue clubs at around 45 percent.

The result, Hausman said, would mean little money raised for low-revenue clubs.

But high-ranking officials of two low-revenue clubs acknowledged that the possibility exists.

The remaining 15 percent would be disbursed to the 13 low-revenue clubs.

That would pose a different kind of problem for the low-revenue clubs, which is one reason the exchange might never be proposed.

There is also a struggle going on between middle-revenue and low-revenue clubs.

The union sees the proceeds from a payroll tax as being more money to be distributed among medium- and low-revenue clubs.