Punching Bag Posted July 14, 2017 Share Posted July 14, 2017 However, they don't get 50%. They get a max percentage of 48.5%. In 2016 they received 47.2%. In the next collective bargaining agreement they would be dumb not to demand at least 50% of the revenues. And NFL would be dumb to give to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted July 14, 2017 Share Posted July 14, 2017 (edited) And NFL would be dumb to give to them. I think that the next CBA will result in a big win for the players. I'm guessing that they get to 50% of the revenue and have marijuana removed from the testing. In return the owners will get more power over the "guaranteed portion." They will be able to recuperate portions of that money for violations of the conduct policy (a lot easier than now). The league will also push more international involvement to grow the profile (and revenues). Edited July 14, 2017 by Kirby Jackson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted July 14, 2017 Share Posted July 14, 2017 I think that the next CBA will result in a big win for the players. I'm guessing that they get to 50% of the revenue and have marijuana removed from the testing. In return the owners will get more power over the "guaranteed portion." They will be able to recuperate portions of that money for violations of the conduct policy (a lot easier than now). The league will also push more international involvement to grow the profile (and revenues).when it comes to illegal activity and hocus pocus I'm going to side on the league. I don't think they'll get 50% and weed. And if they do this they need to allow better drug counseling and stiffer penalties Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted July 14, 2017 Share Posted July 14, 2017 when it comes to illegal activity and hocus pocus I'm going to side on the league. I don't think they'll get 50% and weed. And if they do this they need to allow better drug counseling and stiffer penalties They'll trade the weed for an extension on performance enhancers. Both sides want to do this now so I think that it will be fairly easy to pass that part through. The fight will be on the revenue. I'm guessing that the owners will concede a couple of points (especially in lieu of the NBA contract publicity) in exchange for a little security from "bad contracts." As an example, with Dareus' transgressions the Bills would be able to get out of a significant portion of that contract. I guess that there are other things that owners could ask for but this feels like a good starting point. "We don't mind giving you a little bigger piece of the pie but in turn, we want to be able to wash our hands of certain guarantees for less dependable guys." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manther Posted July 14, 2017 Share Posted July 14, 2017 They said there wouldn't be any math.... It was my understanding there wouldn't be any math Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billieve420 Posted July 14, 2017 Share Posted July 14, 2017 No way the players get any concessions on Weed as long as it is still illegal in the majority of the US. If one day it becomes legal then that is a different story. It would be a win for the Player's Association if they can get a reduction in terms of punishment but that is highly unlikely as well. There is going to be a lockout I have no doubts about it. Players felt they got the shaft with the last deal and won't cave as easily this time. We will see how far they are willing to take it though as the owners have the money to absorb a long holdout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted July 14, 2017 Share Posted July 14, 2017 No way the players get any concessions on Weed as long as it is still illegal in the majority of the US. If one day it becomes legal then that is a different story. It would be a win for the Player's Association if they can get a reduction in terms of punishment but that is highly unlikely as well. There is going to be a lockout I have no doubts about it. Players felt they got the shaft with the last deal and won't cave as easily this time. We will see how far they are willing to take it though as the owners have the money to absorb a long holdout. The league doesn't want it either. That's why it's coming. The last thing that they want is to suspend a guy 4 games for smoking pot while the other leagues look the other way. It gives the NFL a black eye. It makes them look like they have a bigger drug problem than the NBA for example. If they just don't test for it their image will improve. They don't like "_____ is suspended" any more than we do. Yeah, I'm not sure the rest of the negotiation will be too smooth. As always, the NBA is the rabbit that all of the dogs are chasing. The NFL cannot give the guarantees that the players want. They are going to have to give some though. The players are going to ask for the moon next time after seeing these last few offseasons in basketball. They are going to get a few points I'd imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWATeam Posted July 14, 2017 Share Posted July 14, 2017 The league doesn't want it either. That's why it's coming. The last thing that they want is to suspend a guy 4 games for smoking pot while the other leagues look the other way. It gives the NFL a black eye. It makes them look like they have a bigger drug problem than the NBA for example. If they just don't test for it their image will improve. They don't like "_____ is suspended" any more than we do. Yeah, I'm not sure the rest of the negotiation will be too smooth. As always, the NBA is the rabbit that all of the dogs are chasing. The NFL cannot give the guarantees that the players want. They are going to have to give some though. The players are going to ask for the moon next time after seeing these last few offseasons in basketball. They are going to get a few points I'd imagine. Good, accurate take IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msw2112 Posted July 14, 2017 Share Posted July 14, 2017 I think that the next CBA will result in a big win for the players. I'm guessing that they get to 50% of the revenue and have marijuana removed from the testing. In return the owners will get more power over the "guaranteed portion." They will be able to recuperate portions of that money for violations of the conduct policy (a lot easier than now). The league will also push more international involvement to grow the profile (and revenues). I like this post and think it makes sense. The players get a larger piece of the pie and the league gets more control to recoup guaranteed money paid out from guys who don't live up to the "off the field" terms of the contract. Everyone says that the Dareus contract is so horrible, but if he stayed out of trouble and performed at the levels he has when he was at his best, the contract would be justified under the current system and nobody would be complaining. Top notch defensive linemen get paid big bucks. Eliminating the Ryan Bros. scheme having a negative impact on Dareus' play the last two years, his off-the-field transgressions are really what make the deal so shaky. He's getting a huge amount of guaranteed money, he has been suspended, he has been in rehab and as a result, came back out of football shape, he is at great risk of a much longer suspension, etc. If you eliminate the off-the-field issues and look objectively at Dareus' ability, you would think that he would be extremely successful in the new 4-3 scheme being installed by McDermott and Frazier and that he could perform like one of the top defensive linemen in the league, thus justifying the big contract. As far as the international stuff, it makes sense to expand worldwide interest and the marijuana thing is what it is. As more states legalize it and it is approved for medical purposes, it becomes less and less of an issue and the league may benefit from distancing itself from it. It would be a big win for the players without being a big loss for the league, in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punching Bag Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 Tell the players if they want NBA level contracts they need as many games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cba fan Posted July 15, 2017 Author Share Posted July 15, 2017 (edited) The cap figure is based off of revenues in both sports. In basketball it's referred to as the "BRI" which stands for basketball related income. This is a combination of ALL revenues both local and national. The players get 51% of that. In the NFL ALL streams of revenues contribute to the cap and players receive betweeen 47-48.5% of the revenue. The total is based on all revenue. My research said:...........................................NBA...............................NFL salary cap.......................................................$2.970 billion.................$5.344 billion avg salaries....................................................$6 million.......................$2,276,949 league total revenue.......................................$8 billion.......................$14 billion % of total league revenue going to players.....37%..............................38% A bunch of income must be excluded from the salary cap calculations. Yes? Edited July 15, 2017 by cba fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 (edited) My research said:...........................................NBA...............................NFL salary cap.......................................................$2.970 billion.................$5.344 billion avg salaries....................................................$6 million.......................$2,276,949 league total revenue.......................................$8 billion.......................$14 billion % of total league revenue going to players.....37%..............................38% A bunch of income must be excluded from the salary cap calculations. Yes? It's complicated as the cap is the "ceiling." The cap is set at a percentage of revenues but that doesn't mean every dollar within there will be spent. The cap is always based off of the previous year's revenues. There are all kinds of exceptions (bird rights, over 38, MLE, taxpayer MLE, super max, BAE) thatmake it hard to oversimplify. The hard cap in football is a little easier to explain. If you are interested in reading more (or anyone) I strongly suggest googling Larry Coon. He's sort of The Godfather of the NBA CBA. In a nutshell though the NBA salary cap number is $99M & the luxury tax number is $113M. The NFL cap is at $167M. 51.2% for the NBA (believe that is still it) and 47-48.5% for the NFL of revenues determine that cap. Edited July 15, 2017 by Kirby Jackson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manbeast Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 NFL is a more violent sport. The NFLPA did the right thing by agreeing to slot and lower rookie salaries. What The rookies get in the other leagues is far less than what the NFL pays. And it was much much worse. $60+ million for Sam Bradford before he ever took a snap. Now the NFLPA needs to fight for at least 50% of revenue and spread that out by adding a 2-3 active roster spots, a designated developmental QB spot, a slightly higher league minimum, and then whatever is left over is free to be used however the team wants. I am still in favor of the large signing bonus and prorated cap charge over fully guaranteed contracts. I hate seeing guys in the NBA just traded to move their bloated contracts around. If the money is fully guaranteed there is little incentive to sacrifice for the team. Pay them more, a lot more, but keep making them earn their contracts. One other addition would be mandatory injury insurance policies. What is really needed is a positional cap before QB salaries reach 30mil a season. They take up a disproportionate share of the cap and don't allow a team to keep it's players together. The exception is Brady and now Carr who have put team first. I guarantee that only 64 players vote against it. That may be a reasonable trade off for a few more percent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMF2006 Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 16 NFL games vs 82 NBA games. So if they want NBA money let them play an NBA schedule;) They don't even want to play 18 games though.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuco Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 My research said:...........................................NBA...............................NFL salary cap.......................................................$2.970 billion.................$5.344 billion avg salaries....................................................$6 million.......................$2,276,949 league total revenue.......................................$8 billion.......................$14 billion % of total league revenue going to players.....37%..............................38% A bunch of income must be excluded from the salary cap calculations. Yes? Yes. And like Kirby said above, it makes it hard to oversimplify. I know nothing of the NBA but NFL league revenue going to the players is not figured simply by adding everything up and subtracting all the salaries. The 48.5% figure doesn't mean the salary cap is 48.5% of the total revenue. It means 48.5% of revenue goes towards player costs. Players pay (out of their pocket) for almost nothing during the year. The team picks up the tab but those expenses are figured in as player cost. There are many player costs computed (and of course, many more players than in the NBA). Among them are normal benefits like pension contributions, disability payments and group insurance plans. Also worker's comp, unemployment and social security payments fall under the player costs roof. Add in per diem amounts and meal allowances along with travel and boarding expenses for players attending certain off season workouts and training camp (when there are almost twice as many players), team payroll for playoffs, certain travel expenses, and certain expenses for numerous other things. The formula dedicates 48.5% of the total revenue for total player costs. Then it subtracts all of the above and sets the team salary cap by dividing what's left by 32. Then teams are required to spend (on average) at least 95% of that amount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punching Bag Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 There are a lot more expenses in football; basketball just needs some spit shine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 There are a lot more expenses in football; basketball just needs some spit shine.There are bigger expense but I'm not sure there are more. If you travel, privately, 50+ times a year (on average), and stay in 5 star hotels for 30 (or so) people the cost adds up. I've never gone through the the entire expense portion but I'd venture to say that they are fairly close. Baseball likely has the highest expense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rochesterfan Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 I think that the next CBA will result in a big win for the players. I'm guessing that they get to 50% of the revenue and have marijuana removed from the testing. In return the owners will get more power over the "guaranteed portion." They will be able to recuperate portions of that money for violations of the conduct policy (a lot easier than now). The league will also push more international involvement to grow the profile (and revenues). I think you are sort of right. I think there will be a prolonged stoppage at some point and the players will get some concessions like 50% of the revenue- Marijuana will depend upon whether the current President - rolls back a lot of the legality on it - if it becomes totally illegal again like the attorney general would like - I do not think they get that. I think the owners will get the win and there will be 17 or 18 games, mandatory practice will increase, and they will look for ways to prevent future lawsuits from the players. The problem is the players fight for things like Marijuana and discipline that impact very few players and tend to cave on bigger things that impact the majority because they stock the PA with the stars that do not listen to the average player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 I think you are sort of right. I think there will be a prolonged stoppage at some point and the players will get some concessions like 50% of the revenue- Marijuana will depend upon whether the current President - rolls back a lot of the legality on it - if it becomes totally illegal again like the attorney general would like - I do not think they get that. I think the owners will get the win and there will be 17 or 18 games, mandatory practice will increase, and they will look for ways to prevent future lawsuits from the players. The problem is the players fight for things like Marijuana and discipline that impact very few players and tend to cave on bigger things that impact the majority because they stock the PA with the stars that do not listen to the average player. The thing on marijuana is that both sides want it. They just want to quietly remove the testing like in other sports. They'll "trade" that to strengthen PEDs or maybe even personal conduct. It doesn't look good for anyone to have the perception that there is a "weed problem" in the league. Don't ask, don't tell works best for everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cba fan Posted July 16, 2017 Author Share Posted July 16, 2017 Yes. And like Kirby said above, it makes it hard to oversimplify. I know nothing of the NBA but NFL league revenue going to the players is not figured simply by adding everything up and subtracting all the salaries. The 48.5% figure doesn't mean the salary cap is 48.5% of the total revenue. It means 48.5% of revenue goes towards player costs. Players pay (out of their pocket) for almost nothing during the year. The team picks up the tab but those expenses are figured in as player cost. There are many player costs computed (and of course, many more players than in the NBA). Among them are normal benefits like pension contributions, disability payments and group insurance plans. Also worker's comp, unemployment and social security payments fall under the player costs roof. Add in per diem amounts and meal allowances along with travel and boarding expenses for players attending certain off season workouts and training camp (when there are almost twice as many players), team payroll for playoffs, certain travel expenses, and certain expenses for numerous other things. The formula dedicates 48.5% of the total revenue for total player costs. Then it subtracts all of the above and sets the team salary cap by dividing what's left by 32. Then teams are required to spend (on average) at least 95% of that amount. Thank you for clarifying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts