Dragonborn10 Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 (edited) Obviously I don't have all the details but from what I read about the NFL's proposal it seemed ok. It seemed to me the league met many of the unions demands and moved to the middle on the money. I understand the union is afraid they are being duped by not having access to all the information they need but the proposal from the NFL included more shared financial information. I suspect there would have been an out clause in the deal they union could have exercised just like the owners did if the deal wasn't working for them a couple years down the road. I think the union believes the courts are going to be more fair than the owners. However our national court system is filled with Bush I and II era appointments and the Supreme Court is decidedly pro-business. I'm not so sure the courts will consistently be on the players side. Maybe this Judge Doty will be but any decision he makes will be appealed higher to courts that are likely much more conservative and pro-owner/anti-union. Edited March 12, 2011 by Dadonkadonk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glory Bound Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Obviously I don't have all the details but from what I read about the NFL's proposal it seemed ok. It seemed to me the league met many of the unions demands and moved to the middle on the money. I understand the union is afraid they are being duped by not having access to all the information they need but the proposal from the NFL included more shared financial information. I suspect there would have been an out clause in the deal they union could have exercised just like the owners did if the deal wasn't working for them a couple years down the road. I think the union believes the courts are going to be more fair than the owners. However our national court system is filled with Bush I and II era appointments and the Supreme Court is decidedly pro-business. I'm not so sure the courts will consistently be on the players side. Maybe this Judge Doty will be but any decision he makes will be appealed higher to courts that are likely much more conservative and pro-owner/anti-union. I own a couple of stores, & if any of my employees gave me an ultamatum demanding that I turn over all my financial records so they could determine if I'm paying them enough or not, they would be locked out the next day too. I wonder if the players truly realize that the fans are responsible for making them millionaires... & the vast majority earn between minimum wage & 20 bucks an hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wing Man Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 From my understanding of what has occurred, and correct me if I'm mistaken, the players were getting 58% of the revenues from the league in the last CBA. The owners wanted the players to receive 40% of the revenues in the new CBA. Splitting the difference would have resulted in the players receiving just 49% of the revenues in a sport that has never been more popular or (allegedly) more profitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonborn10 Posted March 12, 2011 Author Share Posted March 12, 2011 I own a couple of stores, & if any of my employees gave me an ultamatum demanding that I turn over all my financial records so they could determine if I'm paying them enough or not, they would be locked out the next day too. I wonder if the players truly realize that the fans are responsible for making them millionaires... & the vast majority earn between minimum wage & 20 bucks an hour. Please stop with this it's about the fans nonsense. The money comes from TV and TV alone. That money comes from huge corporations buying advertising funnelled through Madison Ave. To the NFL, you are a more important fan if you stay home and watch the game instead of showing up at the stadium. BTW you do realize the owners are billionaires. The minimum wage guy should side with them? Me thinks you are a Tea Bagger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 I own a couple of stores, & if any of my employees gave me an ultamatum demanding that I turn over all my financial records so they could determine if I'm paying them enough or not, they would be locked out the next day too. I wonder if the players truly realize that the fans are responsible for making them millionaires... & the vast majority earn between minimum wage & 20 bucks an hour. Are your workers unions workers by any chance? Because if not it is basically apples and oranges. I'm not sure how people cannot understand this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Labor agreements are never black and white, but the previous CBA signed in 2006 called for 59.6% of a certain revenue pool to go to players. It wasn't all of league revenues, but significant enough to move the league's salary cap from approximately 85M in 2006 to 128M by 2009. The NFL was willing to go to 50% of revenues, or 4.5B to go to players and the NFLPA rejected it. The PA's insistence on having team financial records for the past 10 years is unreasonable and nothing the NFL would ever agree to. I guess the PA is banking on Judge Doty to rule in their favor, but the idea that 50% of league revenues (which BTW would have increased the cap to 161M IIRC) is not enough remains absurd to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glory Bound Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Please stop with this it's about the fans nonsense. The money comes from TV and TV alone. That money comes from huge corporations buying advertising funnelled through Madison Ave. To the NFL, you are a more important fan if you stay home and watch the game instead of showing up at the stadium. BTW you do realize the owners are billionaires. The minimum wage guy should side with them? Me thinks you are a Tea Bagger. Hey brainiac...if people don't watch the games on TV...attend the games, buy the garb, purchase Sunday ticket, etc, etc...then the NFL folds. This is not rocket science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonborn10 Posted March 12, 2011 Author Share Posted March 12, 2011 From my understanding of what has occurred, and correct me if I'm mistaken, the players were getting 58% of the revenues from the league in the last CBA. The owners wanted the players to receive 40% of the revenues in the new CBA. Splitting the difference would have resulted in the players receiving just 49% of the revenues in a sport that has never been more popular or (allegedly) more profitable. I read the following: 1. Rookie wage scale for first rounders with the money saved guaranteed to go to the veteran pool of money. Big win for the vets. 2. Rookie 2-7 round money would be stable to go up. 3. Less OTA's and a 16 game schedule at least for the first two years of the deal with an 18 game schedule to be talked about in the future. Win for the union. 4. More shared financial information in the future 5. Each team would get about 10 million more in revenue before sharing with the players. That is 1.32 billion instead of the 1 billion they get now. The owners originally were asking for 2 billion be excluded from the players. 6. Teams must spend up to at least 90% of the salary cap What I have not seen is what the NFL proposed as the percent of sharing of the remaining 7.68 billion (9 - 1.32) in TV revenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Hey brainiac...if people don't watch the games on TV...attend the games, buy the garb, purchase Sunday ticket, etc, etc...then the NFL folds. This is not rocket science. The problem I can't get around though in the fan argument is that it's not the players that are expendable. You make it sound like you would shell out hundreds of dollars a year to watch some 4th stringers start rather than Brady, Manning, etc. That's simply not true. The owners are the expendable ones...there are plenty of billionaires who have nothing better to do with their money than buy a football team...couple that with the fact that a franchise in the NFL runs successfully as a public stock option and I'd say it's the owners with a bloated sense of their worth in the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glory Bound Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Are your workers unions workers by any chance? Because if not it is basically apples and oranges. I'm not sure how people cannot understand this. No...but as BillsVet just stated > "The PA's insistence on having team financial records for the past 10 years is unreasonable and nothing the NFL would ever agree to." Right is right & wrong is wrong...union or not! I just can't side with the players on this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KG4ZDX Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Hey brainiac...if people don't watch the games on TV...attend the games, buy the garb, purchase Sunday ticket, etc, etc...then the NFL folds. This is not rocket science. AMEN people. No fan=no money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agardin Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 I own a couple of stores, & if any of my employees gave me an ultamatum demanding that I turn over all my financial records so they could determine if I'm paying them enough or not, they would be locked out the next day too. I wonder if the players truly realize that the fans are responsible for making them millionaires... & the vast majority earn between minimum wage & 20 bucks an hour. Does your store have a revenue sharing agreement with its employees as well as salary caps, floors, franchise tags and retricted free agency? If not then the example is moot. Comparing 'real life ' business examples and the NFL is hard to do. IMO, that is why the owners and players will have a hard time garnering any public support, most of us just can't relate to billionaires v millionaires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMan Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Players seem to have forgotten how badly they got their butts kicked in 87. It is precisely what is going to happen this time around. The owners are going to bust them flat and players will end up with less than last weeks best offer. Contrary to public perception, most NFL players are not wealthy. We see big contract numbers but agents get a piece, union gets some, Bills players pay New York taxes - that hurts, Uncle Sam, etc. Most are living beyond their means like the rest of us. They don't have nearly the staying power we think they might. The players will be back ready to play and sooner rather than later. Yes the NFLPA messed up big time and staying power will be the main reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonborn10 Posted March 12, 2011 Author Share Posted March 12, 2011 Players seem to have forgotten how badly they got their butts kicked in 87. It is precisely what is going to happen this time around. The owners are going to bust them flat and players will end up with less than last weeks best offer. Contrary to public perception, most NFL players are not wealthy. We see big contract numbers but agents get a piece, union gets some, Bills players pay New York taxes - that hurts, Uncle Sam, etc. Most are living beyond their means like the rest of us. They don't have nearly the staying power we think they might. The players will be back ready to play and sooner rather than later. Yes the NFLPA messed up big time and staying power will be the main reason. The players may have lost that strike but they won in the courts. The strike set the stage for the union to decertify and for the players to move ahead with lawsuits. That is how FA was born. Remember Freeman McNeil. His only claim to fame is it was his name on the law suit that created FA and helped forge the current CBA structure. The only difference now is it is a lockout and not a strike. It's the owners that want a new deal and not the players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Players seem to have forgotten how badly they got their butts kicked in 87. It is precisely what is going to happen this time around. The owners are going to bust them flat and players will end up with less than last weeks best offer. Contrary to public perception, most NFL players are not wealthy. We see big contract numbers but agents get a piece, union gets some, Bills players pay New York taxes - that hurts, Uncle Sam, etc. Most are living beyond their means like the rest of us. They don't have nearly the staying power we think they might. The players will be back ready to play and sooner rather than later. Yes the NFLPA messed up big time and staying power will be the main reason. I don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glory Bound Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Does your store have a revenue sharing agreement with its employees as well as salary caps, floors, franchise tags and retricted free agency? If not then the example is moot. Comparing 'real life ' business examples and the NFL is hard to do. IMO, that is why the owners and players will have a hard time garnering any public support, most of us just can't relate to billionaires v millionaires. I receive your point & it's valid. I am putting my money on the billionaires. As a previous poster stated..."staying power" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 The problem I can't get around though in the fan argument is that it's not the players that are expendable. You make it sound like you would shell out hundreds of dollars a year to watch some 4th stringers start rather than Brady, Manning, etc. That's simply not true. The owners are the expendable ones...there are plenty of billionaires who have nothing better to do with their money than buy a football team...couple that with the fact that a franchise in the NFL runs successfully as a public stock option and I'd say it's the owners with a bloated sense of their worth in the process. you're wrong here. the players are replaceable, everyone is replaceable. i get your emotional argument about the thrill of watching brady or manning lead the come from behind victory, but if brady blows out a knee the game goes on. even assuming your argument about the next billionare to step up is accurate (and i wonder where all those billionares are who can buy a team, throw it on the field and have the success we see in the nfl), the assumption that somehow the next billionare wants to partner with brady and amnning et al makes no sense. it's a relationship where both side win if they play nicely. but it's not about fairness and equity and should not be. i for one lost a ton of respect for the union and brady/manning etc being the plaintiffs. again, i tactically understand why they did it, but it just confirms my belief that the players are in it for the players, the owner for the owners, and we're an afterthought to both. blow it up, rip it down, whatever happens---they are all a party to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 (edited) I also think that the NFLPA made a mistake. In the short term, they are likely to win with Judge Doty, because Doty always seems to rule in their favor. When they get to the Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court, I predict that they will lose. I also think that the NFL has a strong argument that the decertification is a sham. This is so especially based on what they have done in the past. Also, although there is some language regarding waiver of the sham argument in a previous agreement, I recall reading that the waiver only comes into play if they had decertified after the CBA expired. The NFLPA (if my understanding is correct) shot themselves in the foot because they obviously chose to decertify prior to the CBA's expiration. Another option the NFL would have is to not have any rules (or limited rules) - which would blunt any antitrust suit. The NFLPA does not like a salary cap -- but they are going to hate not having a floor, which will affect a lot of players. Finally, in the American Needle case (if I recall the name of the case correctly), the Supreme Court included some language in the opinion that may allow the NFL to implement a lot more rules (draft, caps etc) than the NFLPA would like. In summary, expect the NFL to lose in Judge Doty's court (in my mind, the NFL will never get a fair determination with him). In the end, if it goes further without a settlement, the NFL will ultimately prevail. Just my two cents. Edited March 12, 2011 by Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonborn10 Posted March 12, 2011 Author Share Posted March 12, 2011 Hey brainiac...if people don't watch the games on TV...attend the games, buy the garb, purchase Sunday ticket, etc, etc...then the NFL folds. This is not rocket science. And do you think the fans will stop watching if the players get 48% or 55% or 60% of league revenue??? The fans will be there and the TV money will be there. People say the baseball strike drove fans away. That is wrong. Baseball as a TV event had been and will continue to fade. We the fans will show up the moment the games are on again. What are you going to do/watch on Fall weekends in Buffalo? Syracuse football? Tennis? Golf? Please. The fans are used as a pawn because the owners and the players know we have no other good options and like a battered spouse will come back over and over again paying $20 to park a car or in my case hundreds of dollars for Sunday Ticket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Please stop with this it's about the fans nonsense. The money comes from TV and TV alone. That money comes from huge corporations buying advertising funnelled through Madison Ave. To the NFL, you are a more important fan if you stay home and watch the game instead of showing up at the stadium. BTW you do realize the owners are billionaires. The minimum wage guy should side with them? Me thinks you are a Tea Bagger. Owners are rich = owners are wrong? Deep thoughts, by Dodonkadonk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts