WaterMan Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 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. You don't need all that stuff to play football and use a camcorder, but it helps your argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redrumjuice Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 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. You just repeated what I said with less smartness. The players are gonna run a league? The same players who retire bankrupt after 5 years? Have 7 kids with seven women? Carry guns and get DUI's left and right? Yeah, good one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 SeaHawks In reply to some of your posts, you're just modeling a new league, same people, both sides minus owners, and you really believe this would happen. As stated by some, where? They going to build thier own stadiums which are anywhere from 500 mill on up. They're going to pay for promotion, which isn't cheap or you don't see the price of ads today. All these other people who promote, provide service for the league are not going to do it for less money either. What of agents? Or will the players decide their own salaries somehow? Yeah, I see that working out. The simple solution of yours opens a bigger can of worms than they currently face. They(the players) are already paid extremely well for what they do, and play a game. The NFL doen't control what the stadiums charge, or pay the attendants, ect. , the owners do. To suggest the players could do all this, and significantly upgrade their salaries is, as Rovers stated, assinine. If you don't like what you make, doing what you do, quit. Become an ordinary citizen, or gee, make a whole new league while most of these athletes can't even take care of themselves. While you're dreaming, I imagine you see that all fans will flock to this new league, to stadiums they don't have, and spend huge money on this new venture. Sorry, not this guy. You want me to spend more money, to cover 30 billion or whatever for 32 new stadiums, and so that, you, the player, can make significantly more money a year. While you're dreaming, what are these new significant salaries? 500 mill to Peyton, avg 100 mill a yr?? What does the lowest guy make a year? 20 mill?? Where's all this money going to come from? Just how are these players going to determine who's worth what to each other? That I'd really love to see. That wouldn't get past that hurdle alone. To assume the avg. joe is just going to switch, spend more money for spoiled athletes, and everythings just peach's and cream is absolute bulldiaper dirt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 (edited) Really the owners and players just need to work together. My point is it doesn't take owners for a game of football to be played. I don't think they will run a players only league, but it would be just like people running flag football leagues. Doesn't take billions of dollars to do. None of this will happen because everyone wants their money. It would be sad to see if the owners just dumped all of their players and filled their rosters with undrafted base salary players. But that's how businesses run. Clean house when the employees aren't happy, because at the end of the day it is ALL about the money. Edited January 19, 2011 by WaterMan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 Without the owners who funds the money for all expenses like stadiums? That would be Joe and Jill Taxpayer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeductiveNun Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osu1322 Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 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. This is supporting my philosiphy about how college teams should make football a degree. You teach them how to invest their money, how to live within or under their means, and other things that they are actually going to use during their Pro Career. They could also limit or require that to take these classes u have to be on the football team. They could also make it a pontenial double major so that the players that want to gain real world skills from are able to do that as well This would help prepare them for careers as pro football players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 Awesome breakdown of all the important dates DMD. 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. I've read differently. Let me see if I can find a link, but according to one article, they COULD lose those billion dollar television contracts if no football is played. But IMO, both sides are doing alot of posturing right now for things like demands/concessions and support. It stands to reason that they'd be playing tough to get the best possible deal on the table before an agreement is made... But no doubt they're all fully aware of how much stands to be lost with no football. The part that has me worried however, are the ones that may have more interest in letting it drag out: Lawyers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 Let me see if I can find a link Found the link, and looks like TV contracts are indeed a hairy part of the issue. A good article about how much stands to be lost: Over $12 billion could be sidelined if NFL lockout puts end to 2011 season Fan outrage would be the least of the fallout if a breakdown in negotiations leads to an NFL lockout during the 2011 season. Add up lost TV ad revenue and sponsor activations, canceled fantasy football leagues and websites, empty sports bars and out-of-work stadium personnel and the price tag would be somewhere north of $12 billion... "The football marketplace has just gone off the charts," said Larry Mann, exec VP for Chicago-based sports marketing firm rEvolution. "You take that away and you have big, big problems. It's a domino effect." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 If Brady said "hey Peyton, bring 45 of your friends, and I'll bring 45 of my friends, we'll rent a stadium and play some games", I'm pretty sure I would watch. Would you not? Or would you watch the Colts play the Pats with subpar former college players just so you could root for the owner and the uniform? If you watch, and I watch, and most of the rest of us watch, then the money is there instantly. There would be a line of investors from here to Texas. The players hire people to run their players union, the exact same way they do now. There is still a salary structure. The difference is the players group is the one taking the money off the top instead of some rich "owner". Again, I'm not stating that Albert Haynesworth is sitting at the negotiating table with NBC execs. You'll still need leadership, just like any other business. But the leadership is hired by the players. The players aren't just the hired help anymore, their group becomes the one doing the hiring. If we watch, it works. There are billions of dollars to be had in this day and age for the highest level of professional football, regardless of the name of the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyBalata Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 There are a couple of dates that will matter. April 28th - start of NFL draft. This would be interesting. No CBA means no acquiring free agents. So the draft becomes the first place teams look to fill holes. Draft would go on with all the same hoopla. NFL teams just could not actually sign them to a contract or work anyone out. They are merely getting rights to a player. So far, only difference would be no free agents and no players are getting paid. Player agents would be pissed with no cuts of big contracts. This is where I think all the fans should draw their own line in the sand. Let the NFL know that if they haven't solved everything by the draft, then we're not watching. Go on, have all your hoopla but we're holding our own little protest that weekend and not going to watch your draft. Boycott it. Yea I know, NFL fans are just as selfish as the Owners and Players and will still take what they can get so this probably wouldn't have any effect at all as everyone would still watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted January 19, 2011 Author Share Posted January 19, 2011 So instead of giving us a statement on the current situation as seen from the owners side, Goodell goes on record saying there isn't enough communication between the owners and NFLPA. It didn't help matters that the NFLPA chose yesterday to file there grievance either imo. The last time the 2 have come face to face at the bargaining table was before Thanksgiving. "This is not going to get resolved through litigation," Goodell said. "It will get resolved through negotiation." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted January 19, 2011 Author Share Posted January 19, 2011 Here is a good article on the TV revenue debate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted January 20, 2011 Share Posted January 20, 2011 It would be sad to see if the owners just dumped all of their players and filled their rosters with undrafted base salary players. But that's how businesses run. Clean house when the employees aren't happy, because at the end of the day it is ALL about the money. I guess I ment to say it would be sad if it happened again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1987_NFL_season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted January 20, 2011 Author Share Posted January 20, 2011 Anybody find it particularly odd that this is not getting any TV coverage? Usually, the networks and ESPN field stories with no regard. But I think this one is being pushed to the side for a very real reason. All bets are off after the SB, when this story becomes THE hot topic in all of sports. Public opinion hasn't formed yet because of this, expect of course us diehards that are on boards talking about it. Just you wait until the NFL can no longer keep this under wraps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted January 20, 2011 Share Posted January 20, 2011 You don't need all that stuff to play football and use a camcorder, but it helps your argument. Fox wouldn't pay billions for that. If Brady said "hey Peyton, bring 45 of your friends, and I'll bring 45 of my friends, we'll rent a stadium and play some games", I'm pretty sure I would watch. Would you not? Or would you watch the Colts play the Pats with subpar former college players just so you could root for the owner and the uniform? If you watch, and I watch, and most of the rest of us watch, then the money is there instantly. There would be a line of investors from here to Texas. The players hire people to run their players union, the exact same way they do now. There is still a salary structure. The difference is the players group is the one taking the money off the top instead of some rich "owner". Again, I'm not stating that Albert Haynesworth is sitting at the negotiating table with NBC execs. You'll still need leadership, just like any other business. But the leadership is hired by the players. The players aren't just the hired help anymore, their group becomes the one doing the hiring. If we watch, it works. There are billions of dollars to be had in this day and age for the highest level of professional football, regardless of the name of the league. And then they all lived happily ever after in Candyland... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted January 20, 2011 Share Posted January 20, 2011 This is where I think all the fans should draw their own line in the sand. Let the NFL know that if they haven't solved everything by the draft, then we're not watching. Go on, have all your hoopla but we're holding our own little protest that weekend and not going to watch your draft. Boycott it. Yea I know, NFL fans are just as selfish as the Owners and Players and will still take what they can get so this probably wouldn't have any effect at all as everyone would still watch. But I can't miss where my boy AJ Green goes! Unfortunately, hardcore football fans and homers are held hostage in this situation, but those involved would be wise to think about all of the fantasy "fans" who were already thinking about quitting after this year. Anyone can tell you that fantasy is only helping to drive the NFL's overall success. I don't know how many games I've watched until the bitter end when I might have been doing something else otherwise had I not had a stake in it. I love watching football, but not that much. Surely everyone here knows a guy (or especially gals) who never watched football, and now love it when they have a fantasy team to root for. In addition to all of the other ways they've successfully marketed football over the turn of the century, fantasy football has no doubt played a big part in the recent boom in ratings... Good luck having the fair-weather fans stay loyal like the hardcore fans (who you may even alienate with a lockout). It's just such bad-business that I can't fathom them not working it out, unless they're just that stubborn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted January 20, 2011 Author Share Posted January 20, 2011 (edited) Associated PressJan.19th WASHINGTON -- NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and union executive director DeMaurice Smith spoke face to face in New York on Wednesday, while more than a dozen current or former players were on Capitol Hill for face time with lawmakers and congressional staffers. Union spokesman George Atallah characterized Wednesday's session between Goodell and Smith as "an effort to advance the bargaining," rather than a formal negotiating session toward a new labor contract. Atallah would not discuss the substance of the meeting in any detail. NFL spokesman Greg Aiello declined to comment via e-mail -- and, indeed, would not even confirm that the two leaders were meeting. The league and union acknowledged last week that they have not held a large-group bargaining session since November. The present collective bargaining agreement -- it was agreed to in 2006, but owners activated an opt-out clause -- expires in early March, and the union expects owners to lock out the players. At an owners' meeting in Atlanta on Tuesday, Goodell complained that "there's not enough communication" between the sides. Also in Atlanta, Jeff Pash, the league's lead labor negotiator, took a swipe at the union by saying: "If our focus is going to be on litigating, on decertification, on meetings in Washington, on media events, it will be hard to get a deal done." The union has held team-by-team votes to approve decertification, which would allow the players to file an antitrust lawsuit against the league if there is a lockout. The union also has filed two claims with a special master -- one accuses the league of improperly assuring itself of TV revenues even if there are no games played next season; the other accuses teams of collusion in conspiring to restrict players' salaries last offseason. On Wednesday, 13 current NFL players and three former players headed to the Hill, trading in helmets, pads, uniforms and cleats for pinstriped suits, colorful ties and leather shoes. "The players are aware that the antitrust exemptions exist as a gift from Congress. The players are aware that the NFL has nonprofit status that's been given as a gift from Congress. So, look, we're not asking for anything. The players have been clear about that," said Atallah, the union spokesman. "Every business in America, especially a $9 billion industry, has a presence on the Hill. This is not negotiating through Congress. This is just players and employees sharing their issues with people that should care." Joe Briggs, the union's counsel for public policy and government relations, wanted to make clear: "We're not asking for members of Congress to get involved in this fight at all." The union has made previous trips to the Capitol, bringing players around to offices for meet-and-greet sessions. Arizona Cardinals running back Jason Wright sounded, well, just happy to be there. Calling Wednesday's visit to Congress "a neat little trip," Wright explained: "We're not here to accomplish anything; we're here to meet people." Before players dropped by his office, Rep. Lamar Smith, a Texas Republican who is the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, released a statement making it clear he doesn't think lawmakers should get involved with the NFL labor talks. "That is a business dispute," the statement said. "The owners and players are both literally and figuratively big boys and do not need Congress to referee every dispute for them." This made me laugh my arse off. Does he really think we are that stupid? Copyright 2011 by The Associated Press Ugh. Basically just a recap of the past few days. Yep...just as I thought. This will not get major television time until after the SB. Edited January 20, 2011 by tazinib1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted February 5, 2011 Author Share Posted February 5, 2011 JOINT NFL-NFLPA STATEMENT:The NFL and NFL Players Association met for two hours today in a continuing effort to narrow the differences and reach a fair agreement that will benefit the players, teams and fans. We plan to increase the number, length and intensity of bargaining sessions so that we can reach agreement before the March 4 expiration of the current CBA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.