Jackass Posted May 29, 2011 Share Posted May 29, 2011 this is an anonymous quote from an 'insider' and something i've heard before: • "(NFLPA executive director) DeMaurice Smith aspires to be a politician and is milking the labor situation for short-term fame to blow up his name and help earn a spot in office, with no regard for future of the NFL. The longer his name is in the headlines, the better for his career. It's unfortunate — a lockout is not as much about the players and owners as it is Smith's ego." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted May 29, 2011 Share Posted May 29, 2011 I'm curious as to why you guys support the owners when they won't remove the chastity belts around their financial information. Ummm, because employees have no right or business in seeing the finacials of privately owned companies in this country? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted May 29, 2011 Share Posted May 29, 2011 Where is the owners' numbers to prove their argument? Alot of press conferences and business suits, but no substance. The owners' financials are irrelevant in the negotiations, other than the submittal of league gross revenues and then only if they are tied to the CBA. I know this will shock you, but owners have no obligation to provide itemized financial record in negotiations with labor, nor is it any business of labor what ownership does with its share of revenue beyond what deal labor can strike for itself in contract negotiations. Furthermore, the numbers you posted earlier from that laughably slanted article you posted show beyond any question that the owners have been outstanding stewarts of the business over the past decade and appear to be continuing to do so in the stance they are taking right now in trying to hammer out a new agreement. The company saw extraordinary growth in the past couple of decades and they agreed to allow the players to share in a large portion of that growth in the 2006 extension. Now there are indictors that the growth is slowing and the owners are responding to that. That is reasonable, rational, and competent behavior on their part. What is not reaonable or rational is expecting the growth to continue at such an accelerated rate especially given all the economic indicators readily apparent over the past 3 years and continuing into the next 5 years or more, which is the players' position. Which side has put offers on the table; and which side ignores the offers, make no offers themselves, and looks to adjudicate the issue before the courts - despite being beneficaries of the exact grounds for which they are suing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted May 29, 2011 Share Posted May 29, 2011 this is an anonymous quote from an 'insider' and something i've heard before: • "(NFLPA executive director) DeMaurice Smith aspires to be a politician and is milking the labor situation for short-term fame to blow up his name and help earn a spot in office, with no regard for future of the NFL. The longer his name is in the headlines, the better for his career. It's unfortunate — a lockout is not as much about the players and owners as it is Smith's ego." I think the opposite affect is occurring. The more I see of Smith, the more I despise him and want to see him fail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted May 29, 2011 Share Posted May 29, 2011 (edited) this is an anonymous quote from an 'insider' and something i've heard before: • "(NFLPA executive director) DeMaurice Smith aspires to be a politician and is milking the labor situation for short-term fame to blow up his name and help earn a spot in office, with no regard for future of the NFL. The longer his name is in the headlines, the better for his career. It's unfortunate — a lockout is not as much about the players and owners as it is Smith's ego." What I don't understand is why the players tolerate his entirely counterproductive behavior (just like I do not understand why the owners want a militant d-bag like Jerry Richardson in the negotiations). But then again, documentation showing that almost 80% of the players being financially distressed or bankrupted within 2 years after retriring despite how much greater their earning power is relative to the rest of the country shows what kind of business sense these guys have, and so they are likley to believe any fairy tale told to them by someone allegedly working on their behalf. Edited May 29, 2011 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted May 29, 2011 Share Posted May 29, 2011 Why couldn't the season be jeopardized during the many years the Packeers sucked. My favorite team has a window right now to do great things. I would prefer that not be interrupted. Such is life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Posted May 29, 2011 Share Posted May 29, 2011 Agreed, wish this happened during the Millen years, not when we finallystart showing promise and drafting well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted May 29, 2011 Share Posted May 29, 2011 If the players wanted to get serious at all they would get together as teams and start organizing whole team practices and possibly even scrimmages. People would start showing interest and showing up. That would put pressure on the owners. But players don't want to do that. They want to Git Payd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 There's still time for that to happen. Especially after all these practices they are currently holding, imagine how bored they are going to feel with millions and no job to do? Maybe Peyton Manning afford to rent a stadium for one of those games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 You've posted some very misleading information. There was extensive research done on the numbers. That less than 4-year average career is a number based on all players who enter the draft. If you only take players who make a regular season roster, the average career is over 6 years. That makes the average gross earnings by players well over an average of $500K per year. Even guys picked at the bottom of the 7th round who make rosters sign contracts that average $500K per year, but the majority of players make more than that - some make much more. This is also easily verifiable - go to Rotoworld and you can see contract details on every player. That the players take on bodily risk is why they average way more than $500K per year, and it's part of why most other people in our society make vastly less than that. So you intend to penalize the owners who are making good money now when it literally took decades to build this league up to where it is? Do you hate capitalism? This is the way it is supposed to work. Well run businesses become profitable and gain substantial value as they grow. You want to get into the game now to reap the profits from all that hard work and diligence for some many years? Fine, now you need to be prepared to ante up some pretty good jack to buy a team. Again - that's the way it is supposed to work. Not sure why you would be against this unless you don't believe in capitalism. Finally, let's suppose the average player does make an average of $500K per year - which is false but we'll go along just for fun. How many players are there vs owners/owners groups? Let's see - some very simplistic basic math, 53 man rostersX32 teamsX$500K. That's about $850,000,000 that you have going to the players. But we know the most recent salary cap was around $128M per team. Let's say that on average teams spend at 90% of the cap. That's $128MX.9X32 teams , which is $3,700,000,000 (which is less than cumulative payroll actually was, BTW). You seem to have been duped. How could your number possibly be that far off? And that doesn't include all the extra benefits that players get - health care, pension, travel expenses, etc. Plus players get to pocket their endorsements that they get as a perk from being a NFL player. Sounds like you need to brush up on your math a bit and apply some common sense, instead of just buying into the union talking points. Let's not forget the ultimate perk - all the tail they get for being an NFL player. That alone should be worth it. 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.