Roger Goodell meets with NFL owners today about CBA

[rattsass]

I think it's actually just under 3 years. Hey, if it's too hard, find a different line of work.

 

It is a grueling job for sure, one that takes a lot of work. But hey, if it was easy everyone would do it.

And if everybody could do it they would be paid like policemen, firemen, and telephone repairmen.

[Seahawks21]

Somebody is going to have to explain to me how the owners face any possible risk whatsoever. I would bet it has been 30 years since an owner even came close to losing any money by owning a franchise. Sports franchises appreciate at a rate that is just about unparalleled.

 

Nobody has ever, EVER gone to a stadium to watch an owner play football. Nobody has ever bought an owner's jersey. They essentially do nothing but sit back and take half off the top. Look at how most of the owners got their money to begin with. They get paid millions of dollars to be rich. Sure, there are exceptions. When I pay my money, I want that money to go to the players, the people that are risking their futures to entertain me.

 

 

As far as the timeline, the only reason I wrote August, is because if something isn't done by March, there is very little incentive for them to get anything done before August. Sure, they'll have discussions, but their backs don't go up against the wall again until August, so that is when I expect the talks to really accelerate. If they want to play some sort of full season, they HAVE to have something done by August. I don't see that getting done in June or July, there just isn't enough sense of urgency in those months to force both sides to make some concessions. Usually in these types of situations, nothing gets done until the last minute. The first last minute is March, the second last minute is August.

[Seahawks21]

Are players overpaid? Sure, but that discussions is completely irrelevant as long as us consumers are dishing out the dough. Are they overpaid? Sure. But are they overpaid relative to the amount of money the league is making? Not even close. The players should be making the lion's share of the pie, if not eating the whole thing. Would you rather all the money you spent was going to a rich old guy's pocket while Peyton Manning makes relative peanuts? There is no place for owners in professional sports, and sooner or later the players are going to wake up and realize it.

[Ursa Majoris]

Somebody is going to have to explain to me how the owners face any possible risk whatsoever.

There is none. Red McCombs bought the Vikings for, IIRC, $275 million and sold them three years later for $600 million, having invested the square root of f**k all into the team. He was so mean, he wouldn't even get the AC fixed at the Vikings training facility offices.

 

There are many more like him - inheritors or buyers of a can't miss franchise, however bad the actual franchise is. Aside from operating profit, the actual appraised value of the closed shop system sports franchises use rises much faster.

 

If there IS a lockout, the owners will win easily.

[tazinib1]

I'm very interested in hearing the ruling on the grievance over the re-negotiation of television contracts by the NFL owners. I'm not sure alot of you know, but in a worst case scenario where there is no season, the owners STILL get the television contract money. This could be a HUGH outcome in potential CBA talks.

[piratesownninjas]

 

Signed and submitted.

 

Some very good info here. However, it is one sided and I'd like to see and hear the owners side.

 

Never-the-less, this is gonna be very big debate for the next couple of months.

Both sides are wrong and both sides are right. They need to all put on there big boy pants and meet in the middle.

 

And I don't think there is any chance of having no football next year. I don't think anyone really believes that. I think we're looking at missing a lot of training camp and potentially a pre-season game or two. I have to believe that Fox, CBS, ESPN, NBC, Miller and other massive companies tied to the NFL will put pressure on to get it worked out.

[piratesownninjas]

I'm very interested in hearing the ruling on the grievance over the re-negotiation of television contracts by the NFL owners. I'm not sure alot of you know, but in a worst case scenario where there is no season, the owners STILL get the television contract money. This could be a HUGH outcome in potential CBA talks.

The head of the NFLPA keeps on saying this, but I've heard Goodell and Jerry Jones both say that it's not the case. Both sides are bitching so much along with spreading lies/rumors no one really knows what to believe.

[Ursa Majoris]

The head of the NFLPA keeps on saying this, but I've heard Goodell and Jerry Jones both say that it's not the case. Both sides are bitching so much along with spreading lies/rumors no one really knows what to believe.

I have also heard it's true because I haven't heard anyone deny it but it's always amazed me that anyone would sign a billion dollar contract where they need to pay up even if no product is delivered. Who'd sign that? It's nuts.

[piratesownninjas]

Are players overpaid? Sure, but that discussions is completely irrelevant as long as us consumers are dishing out the dough. Are they overpaid? Sure. But are they overpaid relative to the amount of money the league is making? Not even close. The players should be making the lion's share of the pie, if not eating the whole thing. Would you rather all the money you spent was going to a rich old guy's pocket while Peyton Manning makes relative peanuts? There is no place for owners in professional sports, and sooner or later the players are going to wake up and realize it.

I'm guessing you have no comprehension of how the real world and business works.

[lennykravitz2004]

More guaranteed money for players. Owners want 18 games, they'll have to pay for it. Expanded rosters. Players might have to give more time, i.e. less voluntary off-season and more required. Long-term considerations like injuries sustained during a career lingering post-career - how will this be addressed? Many-a-dollar to be accounted for here in many-a-way.

[piratesownninjas]

More guaranteed money for players. Owners want 18 games, they'll have to pay for it. Expanded rosters. Players might have to give more time, i.e. less voluntary off-season and more required. Long-term considerations like injuries sustained during a career lingering post-career - how will this be addressed? Many-a-dollar to be accounted for here in many-a-way.

Start by installing a rookie wage scale.

[Seahawks21]

I'm guessing you have no comprehension of how the real world and business works.

Are you suggesting that the NFL is not unique and the same rules should apply to Peyton Manning as would apply to a hot dog produced by Oscar Meyer? I can't think of a single circumstance where the "real world" and the business of the NFL, its players and/or owners are similar.

Edited January 18, 2011 by Seahawks21

[Pope Flick]

I hate profootballtalk since they make chit up half the time, but there's not ONE WORD about the decertification option in any of these posts which I find odd:

 

2. The union has the ability to try to block a lockout.

 

For months, the union has been warning the media and the fans against a lockout. The rhetoric from NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith regarding a lockout is looking more and more accurate, even if to some extent it has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

During the 2010 regular season, however, the NFLPA embarked on a series of meetings with players from every team. Systematically, the union obtained advance approval to decertify in the face of a lockout.

 

Derided by the NFL as a decision to “go out of business,” decertification would prevent the league from locking out the players by converting the NFLPA from a legally-recognized union into a collection of individual, non-union workers. Some think that the NFL would challenge the maneuver as a sham, but such an approach would entail P.R. risks, since the NFL would be using the legal process in order to force a lockout on the players.

 

Still, the union inexplicably continues to warn against a lockout while ignoring the fact that the NFLPA has spent hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars to line up the ability to block a lockout via decertification. If the union fails to decertify, it will prove that the effort was a ruse aimed at making the NFL think that decertification would occur.

 

If decertfication happens, the league then would be compelled to craft across-the-board rules regarding free agency, the draft, and player salaries. The union would likely respond by filing an antitrust lawsuit, arguing that the league consists of 32 separate businesses that cannot work together to place common limits on its workers. (This is why the American Needle case was viewed as being critical to the labor situation, even though the facts center on marketing deals. If the league had secured a ruling from the Supreme Court that it is one business, an antitrust claim based on labor rules may have been doomed from the start.)

 

A league source with knowledge of the labor dynamics recently told us that the NFL could respond to decertification by simply applying in 2011 the rules that applied in 2010: no salary cap, no salary floor, six years to unrestricted free agency, no rookie wage scale (Andrew Luck just peed a little), one franchise tag per team, continuation of drug and steroids policies. The league would adopt this approach in the hopes that it would survive an antitrust challenge; though the NFL lost the American Needle case as it relates to whether the league is one business, the Supreme Court’s written ruling strongly suggests that a pro sports league may have a valid, legal reason to apply across-the-board labor rules.

 

With no salary cap and no salary floor, teams would be permitted to spend as little or as much on players as they choose — a dynamic that didn’t hurt franchises like the Chiefs, Buccaneers, or Jaguars in 2010, each of whom were far more successful than big-spending teams like the Cowboys and Redskins.

Edited January 18, 2011 by Pope Flick

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

Would there be no product or would there be scabs playing?

 

I have also heard it's true because I haven't heard anyone deny it but it's always amazed me that anyone would sign a billion dollar contract where they need to pay up even if no product is delivered. Who'd sign that? It's nuts.

[piratesownninjas]

Are you suggesting that the NFL is not unique and the same rules should apply to Peyton Manning as would apply to a hot dog produced by Oscar Meyer? I can't think of a single circumstance where the "real world" and the business of the NFL, its players and/or owners are similar.

I'm talking big business, not hot dog sales. To suggest that players could organize, have stadiums to play in, hire vendors, staff, promote the game, schedule the game, pay the tab on all of the bills and negotiate a TV contract is asinine.

[tazinib1]

I hate profootballtalk since they make chit up half the time, but there's not ONE WORD about the decertification option in any of these posts which I find odd:

 

Great addition to the thread.

 

ETA: Crap I can't copy and paste your quote. Love it...good post.

Edited January 19, 2011 by tazinib1

[half_hennessy]

As has been said there is a story to both sides but to say the owners have no business being in the NFL and making a profit out of it is ridiculous. Without the owners who funds the money for all expenses like stadiums?who pays the coaches and all the staff?who pays all the over heads?

 

The owners may not look like they do much and some may not but they have a place and definitely deserve their slice for what they pay out.

 

I am not sure there is a win win situation here though I don't know if both sides can come out happy with what happens here, The owners will push hard for an 18 game season and to be honest I cannot see any sensible arguement that will stop this. I know players are saying it will shorten their careers but it is already shorter than pretty any season played in professional sports all over the world.

 

I know you will say this is football and the the contact shortens players careers and so forth well they play football here in Australia aswell and we play a 24 game regular season plus playoffs plus representative games. This can come up to around a 34 game season and the NFL Players are saying they can't handle 2 more games on top of what is really already only about a max of 20 games.

 

It will be interesting to see what the outcome is here the owners might get the 18 game season and a rookie scale which I personally feel needs to happen this will open up some money to go to an expanded roster and possibly towards more insurance for players post career. I can't see how the owners will get more money or a bigger slice of the pie and putting the games up though I doubt that will happen maybe i am wrong.

[Seahawks21]

I'm talking big business, not hot dog sales. To suggest that players could organize, have stadiums to play in, hire vendors, staff, promote the game, schedule the game, pay the tab on all of the bills and negotiate a TV contract is asinine.

Ummm, what would stop them from hiring basically the same people that already do the same job? Instead of being paid by the NFL, the employees are paid by the new league. I hope you don't think I'm trying to say that Chris Johnson is going to be in charge of the "food and beverage committee" of the league. The league hires people to do this for them, just like any company, just like the leaders of a new league would do. I'm not going to be crazy enough to try to tell you there would be a smooth transition or that it would be simple or easy in any way. On the field, however, it could still be very much the same, and they still would make money hand-over-fist. Even more money than they are making now. Possibly, significantly more money than they are making now.

Edited January 19, 2011 by Seahawks21

[Seahawks21]

As has been said there is a story to both sides but to say the owners have no business being in the NFL and making a profit out of it is ridiculous. Without the owners who funds the money for all expenses like stadiums?who pays the coaches and all the staff?who pays all the over heads?

 

The owners may not look like they do much and some may not but they have a place and definitely deserve their slice for what they pay out.

 

I am not sure there is a win win situation here though I don't know if both sides can come out happy with what happens here, The owners will push hard for an 18 game season and to be honest I cannot see any sensible arguement that will stop this. I know players are saying it will shorten their careers but it is already shorter than pretty any season played in professional sports all over the world.

 

I know you will say this is football and the the contact shortens players careers and so forth well they play football here in Australia aswell and we play a 24 game regular season plus playoffs plus representative games. This can come up to around a 34 game season and the NFL Players are saying they can't handle 2 more games on top of what is really already only about a max of 20 games.

 

It will be interesting to see what the outcome is here the owners might get the 18 game season and a rookie scale which I personally feel needs to happen this will open up some money to go to an expanded roster and possibly towards more insurance for players post career. I can't see how the owners will get more money or a bigger slice of the pie and putting the games up though I doubt that will happen maybe i am wrong.

I would have to think that the athletes that make up the NFL could get the funding to do just about anything they want. They rent the stadiums for eight days a year and the bank pays the coaches, staff and overhead based on future earnings, just like any business loan, until they are working off profit, which wouldn't take too long IMO.

 

Look, when I first heard the idea, I thought it was completely nuts and did my best to poke as many holes in it as I could, basically defending the league and the status quo. The next day it was explained to me pretty thoroughly and I had some time to think about it, and the whole thing just seems to really make sense. I'm actually very confident that it will happen within the lifetimes of a lot of us. However, I don't think it will be football first.

 

This isn't a new idea, either. The first player revolt against ownership in the US happened in baseball in the 1880's, and I believe actually led to the collapse of one of the leagues. I think all it would take is for somebody to convince a handful of the top players, and something like this could domino.

 

What does an owner do that a bank and/or a team president couldn't?

[half_hennessy]

You could be right there but you get where i am going on the 18 game thing i think the whole arguement is ridiulous to be honest get rid of pre season all together they can srimmage between themselves some teams do it against eachother, there isn't much difference there between a pre season game and a scrimmage just get rid of them all together.

[tazinib1]

I would have to think that the athletes that make up the NFL could get the funding to do just about anything they want. They rent the stadiums for eight days a year and the bank pays the coaches, staff and overhead based on future earnings, just like any business loan, until they are working off profit, which wouldn't take too long IMO.

 

Look, when I first heard the idea, I thought it was completely nuts and did my best to poke as many holes in it as I could, basically defending the league and the status quo. The next day it was explained to me pretty thoroughly and I had some time to think about it, and the whole thing just seems to really make sense. I'm actually very confident that it will happen within the lifetimes of a lot of us. However, I don't think it will be football first.

 

This isn't a new idea, either. The first player revolt against ownership in the US happened in baseball in the 1880's, and I believe actually led to the collapse of one of the leagues. I think all it would take is for somebody to convince a handful of the top players, and something like this could domino.

 

What does an owner do that a bank and/or a team president couldn't?

 

Didn't we already try this? :usfl:

[half_hennessy]

It would just be nice for both parties remove their heads from their collective asses and atleast try and get something resolved that clearly isn't happeneing right now.

 

I know the owners don't want to open their books and show how much they are making but at this point a 3rd party clearly needs to be bought in to break down where all the money is being dispersed and how much of a cut everyone truly is getting.

 

I think if this is done we may see more action from the NFLPA side of things and that this maybe the reason why their hasn't been any progress as yet. Do I think this will happen, most likely not which just means this will drag on out atleast until the draft.

 

My next question would be how do all the coaching staff fair in this? will they be paid or do they just flat miss out all together that could cause some other issues.

 

I personally would like to see an 18 game season and a rookie pay scale implemented I just think it has to happen these guys are getting way to much when they have proven nothing. Make contracts guarenteed money meaning more risk for the owners but atleast you know on the players side of the ball that your going to get paid regardless. I also would like to see more money go to the players for after football insurance wise alot of these guys leave the game with badly beaten up bodies they should be looked after well beyond their playing days.

 

is all this going to happen very doubtful but time will tell.

[Rovers]

The risk for owners varies significantly. Teams that have funded new stadiums without tax payer money have a lot of risk. Teams like the Vikings don't have nearly the risk. The owners in most of these cases have not sold the PSL and luxury boxes they thought they would.

 

Player's risk? Please. Other than ther concussion issue, which is being addressed, according to some, pussifying the NFL in the process, there isn't much risk when compared to thousands of jobs the rest of us might work in. From garbage men with bad backs to miners who get killed for a pittance compared to what even an NFL practice squad players make is a joke. These men are privledged to play a game for a living for so much money.

 

The players get almost 60% of the revenues. That is more than enough, in fact it's too much. Take 50% and take care of your own with the other 8%, you know, the ones the NFLPA keeps talking about, the crippled retirees, who for the most part can still make a middle class living just doing a speaking circuit.

 

Not surpriingly, the players haven't been saving any money. Forget the threat of the lockout, they act like they will make millions forever as an NFL player, and it's their own fault so many go bankrupt. Half of these idiots can't even speak english. If not for the NFL... they are sanitation men with bad backs instead of ex NFL players with bad backs.

 

I beleive this will end badly. I don't see the NFL playing a full season next year. The owners are idiots too, they can't even agree amoung themselves what they want, other than more money.

 

All the more reason I want to see the Jets win this year... by next year, I may write off football the way I did hockey and baseball.

 

The idea the players could form a league is laughable. They would play in what staduims? Stadiums are already leased and or owned by the owners. They don't have the money and won't get bank backing.... banks won't bet against the NFL ownership. The New York Behemoths would be playing in the stadium at Syracuse University. They wouldn't be able to get network TV contracts either.

 

Greed with rule the day, and the NFL and it's players are sure to shoot the goose that is laying all the golden eggs.

[SLAYER]

I may be in the minority here, but I see a lockout coming for a portion or whole season. As a matter of fact I expect it and would be midly suprised if they come to comprimise before sept.

They really could give a shiat about the average fan and they think a lockout would not hurt them from a fan perspective, that they could not recover from within a year.

[WaterMan]

I think it's actually just under 3 years. Hey, if it's too hard, find a different line of work.

 

It is a grueling job for sure, one that takes a lot of work. But hey, if it was easy everyone would do it.

 

If everyone could do it, the current players wouldn't be making what they are. Doesn't matter how hard people try, they will never run under a 5.0 or be 6 foot 8.