Wondering where everyone stands on the CBA mess

[flea]

There are some owners that don't reinvest in their teams to keep them competative. Brown in Cincy has substandard workout facilities according to players. Bidwell has been rumored as underspending on winning for a while, but has had some good teams recently. Hell, some have accused the Bears of being cheap, due to scouting, assistant coaches and upfront money. But again, if I own a business, I don't want to be told how to invest MY money.

 

I believe the players deserve a piece, but the owners should solely in charge of how it is divided. Retired players should be entitled to a pension comensurate to their tenure. They should also have a great healthcare plan to take care of the injuries they have incurred over their career. The players should have also taken advantage of the free education they were offered in college. If not, they should have invested part of their contract in an education fund for when their 3 year career is over.(average)

 

I'm kinda split, but leaning toward being on the owners side. Yeah, they are rich, but isn't their ass on the line too? It's their business to manage and reap profit. Show me a player hurting for money and I'll show you an idiot.

 

Here's what I want to see:

16 game season is enough.

Players and owners keep the same piece of the pie.

Rookie salary cap.

Take care of the health of former players.

Add 2 playoff teams per conference. No more byes in the playoffs.Move the Superbowl to Saturday, so all can enjoy the parties without being unproductive the next day.

Play ball!

 

 

UUGGHHHHHH theres enough teams in the play-offs as is

[flea]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/nfl-loc...s-league-031211

 

good piece

[Mongo3451]

Mongo, that is what they were offered, almost to a Tee. And Players as for your " players deserve" They deserve equal share when they invest or buy a team themselves. Why should a Owner give Half his Profits to players?

 

Here is that idiot telling his players lay it on the line.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81eb...le=HP_headlines

Never said players deserve an equal share to the owners. I believe the pie should be divided the same as it has been. Everyone got fat off that. Why fix what wasn't broken on that subject?

[GrizzlyBear]

Ahh, Ok then thats cool. everytime I see that D Smith on TV I get the feeling he planned this to establish himself with the players just like Geen Upshaws Attempt in 87. Its following the same format and will result in the same end. NFLPA is risking allot with its decert, and I have a feeling with the current atmosphere of Unions the players are gonna be picketed while picketing.

[Mongo3451]

Ahh, Ok then thats cool. everytime I see that D Smith on TV I get the feeling he planned this to establish himself with the players just like Geen Upshaws Attempt in 87. Its following the same format and will result in the same end. NFLPA is risking allot with its decert, and I have a feeling with the current atmosphere of Unions the players are gonna be picketed while picketing.

With the economy the way it is, the fans are in no mood for anything resembling greed. All sides will lose the longer this goes.

[balta1701-A]

Never said players deserve an equal share to the owners. I believe the pie should be divided the same as it has been. Everyone got fat off that. Why fix what wasn't broken on that subject?

The ones who are insisting that it is broken are the owners.

[AZ54]

I will add that I think decertification is a stupid maneuver on the players part. Then they turn around and the richest players, whose argument I can't understand, sue the league because it's a monopoly. Sue the monopoly for which you have agreed to take part and which made you incredibly rich? If it's such a moral high ground why didn't they sue years ago before they signed those huge contracts? I don't recall them clamoring about how they couldn't get into the XFL years ago, nor do I see them bolting to Canada to exercise their free agent rights.

 

Are they really dissolving their union in the hopes that another football league starts up so there is more competition? Are they no longer going to negotiate with the owners? Who negotiates since D. Smith no longer works for the players? It seems clear this really was the intent of the players all along as those lawsuits ALL hit at the exact time the union dissolved and so they had no intentions of negotiating an agreement. In fact, they sat down at the negotiating table with the owners even after they had filed the decertification papers in court. That is clearly not good faith at the negotiating table and in fact it's deceitful. It seems clear the players just agreed to the negotiating delays solely so they wouldn't appear to be the bad guys but in the end just did what they wanted to do from the beginning.

 

The whole court BS is just a sideshow way of forcing the owners to open up their books and D. Smith feels his White House connections will only help him in this cause. That's ok but if that's all they wanted up front then that's what they should have pursued from the beginning instead of deceiving fans into thinking they were serious about negotiations the last few weeks. Now we wait to see if the legal process forces the owners to open their books.

 

I'm not necessarily supporting the owners but I can definitely say I no longer support the millionaire players at all now. To me their recent behavior just makes them look like spoiled brats. I just want football back and even though I still believe this will get solved before the season starts I'm more prepared now to move over to college football if this continues. Probably still watch my Bears but all those other games...not so much. I'm starting to think that the fans need to begin discussing a boycott and the most effective way IMO is to boycott Monday Night Football. It's just one game but it's the easiest way to tank the TV ratings and drop ad revenues which affect both parties. I think the MNF contract is a pretty big revenue source for the league.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[madlithuanian]

Interesting points...

 

I just see it as 2 groups of jackasses that take all of us fans for granted.

 

I would love nothing more than to see NFL ratings drop significantly because of the this. Sadly, I won't help, because I'm an addict.

 

But, for me, it's just impossible to get behind any group in this battle. However, I am irritated with both.

 

It reeks from all sides...

 

 

 

I will add that I think decertification is a stupid maneuver on the players part. Then they turn around and the richest players, whose argument I can't understand, sue the league because it's a monopoly. Sue the monopoly for which you have agreed to take part and which made you incredibly rich? If it's such a moral high ground why didn't they sue years ago before they signed those huge contracts? I don't recall them clamoring about how they couldn't get into the XFL years ago, nor do I see them bolting to Canada to exercise their free agent rights.

 

Are they really dissolving their union in the hopes that another football league starts up so there is more competition? Are they no longer going to negotiate with the owners? Who negotiates since D. Smith no longer works for the players? It seems clear this really was the intent of the players all along as those lawsuits ALL hit at the exact time the union dissolved and so they had no intentions of negotiating an agreement. In fact, they sat down at the negotiating table with the owners even after they had filed the decertification papers in court. That is clearly not good faith at the negotiating table and in fact it's deceitful. It seems clear the players just agreed to the negotiating delays solely so they wouldn't appear to be the bad guys but in the end just did what they wanted to do from the beginning.

 

The whole court BS is just a sideshow way of forcing the owners to open up their books and D. Smith feels his White House connections will only help him in this cause. That's ok but if that's all they wanted up front then that's what they should have pursued from the beginning instead of deceiving fans into thinking they were serious about negotiations the last few weeks. Now we wait to see if the legal process forces the owners to open their books.

 

I'm not necessarily supporting the owners but I can definitely say I no longer support the millionaire players at all now. To me their recent behavior just makes them look like spoiled brats. I just want football back and even though I still believe this will get solved before the season starts I'm more prepared now to move over to college football if this continues. Probably still watch my Bears but all those other games...not so much. I'm starting to think that the fans need to begin discussing a boycott and the most effective way IMO is to boycott Monday Night Football. It's just one game but it's the easiest way to tank the TV ratings and drop ad revenues which affect both parties. I think the MNF contract is a pretty big revenue source for the league.

 

[CrackerDog]

I'm usually on the side of labor in any dispute but not here. I disagree with Grizzly and his comment that labor unions are whatever he said they are. I've never been in one myself but they serve a purpose. Without collective bargaining, many large groups of people would be exploited in this country. Guaranteed.

 

With that said, I'm sick to death of the damn players protecting the absolute WORST in human behavior. Intolerable shit that the union defends at all costs. I'm sick of owners too, holding towns hostage to gain stadiums, but much of the push to get new stadiums was related directly to the need for new sources of buckets of cash so team could pay huge signing bonuses, again, to players.

 

In this case, I think the team owners deserve to be making a larger annual profit than Peyton Manning makes in salary. An owner put up hundreds of millions of dollars as an investment and deserves a return on that investment. There's a big difference between these a-holes and a couple thousand average joes getting together and demanding a reasonable wage from some douchebag fatcat Walmart exec.

 

At least thats the way I see it.

[GrizzlyBear]

Its fine that you disagree, But after being in union and hearing the local leader tell me there was nothing they need , but they will think of something totaly turned my stomach. I can guarnatee you that your wrong about Owners taking advantage of workers in any case nowa days. They are so heavily regulated with OSHA and labor safety regs that there is no way a person can be taken advantage unless they allow it. Law Suits with history backing them up would run wild in the country. Unions are fine I guess for Trades but for anything else its a situation that says, Lets get 50% of whatever the owner takes and then we will ask for more. I was union Before the Army and earning my Rank on Merit and testing rather then longevity and Tenure was much better, Because even in the Army there were slackers, We called em ROAD warriors, Retired on active duty. In the union they are kept No matter what. Proof in our schools. In the Army if you were not promoted with so many years under your belt your out. So we weeded out the sluffs. Unions keep the sluff and pay them more just because of Tenure. YOu tell me where that is good policy please.

[selection7]

They will not voluntarily lower prices. Limited supply and high demand leads to higher prices so they have no reason to lower prices when they are the most popular sport in the U.S.

 

Peace

No kidding they won't. And it won't be the first or the last time. They'll make their own bed and lie in it because they can't help themselves.

 

You're off the mark to say they have no reason though. It's why I said they "need" to lower prices. They can't grow to their potential if they only take as much money is on the table right now. When you have something with that kind of potential, you cultivate it. The nature of most capitalsim is never to go for the bigger gain in the longrun, I get that...those CEO's and shareholders will be gone by then anyway. But NFL owners are more stable so it behooves them to see the forest for the trees, economically speaking. The satellite deal is the perfect example. They're losing so much future money on that deal...probably even in the short term. Relatively speaking, NFL football is still just something some people pay attention to on Sundays. NCAA football is probably even more popular. If they cultivated what they have the NFL would be so popular it would make today's game look like field hockey.

[AZ54]

I'm going to have to re-evaluate my opinion on this matter. I didn't realize the millionaires were being held in slavery.

 

AP: It's modern-day slavery, you know? People kind of laugh at that, but there are people working at regular jobs who get treated the same way, too.

 

As a regular guy working a regular job I don't feel I entered into slavery. I agreed to do work for what I felt was a reasonable.wage. If I choose I can leave and pursue working at another place. So can Adrian Peterson.

[Connorbear]

I'm going to have to re-evaluate my opinion on this matter. I didn't realize the millionaires were being held in slavery.

 

AP: It's modern-day slavery, you know? People kind of laugh at that, but there are people working at regular jobs who get treated the same way, too.

 

As a regular guy working a regular job I don't feel I entered into slavery. I agreed to do work for what I felt was a reasonable.wage. If I choose I can leave and pursue working at another place. So can Adrian Peterson.

Wow. It seems the NFLPA forgot to tell the players to STFU while this was going on. Wow.

 

Peace

[Connorbear]

No kidding they won't. And it won't be the first or the last time. They'll make their own bed and lie in it because they can't help themselves.

 

You're off the mark to say they have no reason though. It's why I said they "need" to lower prices. They can't grow to their potential if they only take as much money is on the table right now. When you have something with that kind of potential, you cultivate it. The nature of most capitalsim is never to go for the bigger gain in the longrun, I get that...those CEO's and shareholders will be gone by then anyway. But NFL owners are more stable so it behooves them to see the forest for the trees, economically speaking. The satellite deal is the perfect example. They're losing so much future money on that deal...probably even in the short term. Relatively speaking, NFL football is still just something some people pay attention to on Sundays. NCAA football is probably even more popular. If they cultivated what they have the NFL would be so popular it would make today's game look like field hockey.

The problem is the supply and demand dictate a certain price level. They will not lower prices until demand dictates it.

 

Peace

[balta1701-A]

The problem is the supply and demand dictate a certain price level. They will not lower prices until demand dictates it.

 

Peace

Well, about the only thing I can think of that would seriously cut demand for NFL Football is a long work stoppage where people get away from the sport and even become vindictive about it.

[AZ54]

I also think the players asking the college guys to skip the draft is very selfish move. Why would you not want a guy who is going to join your ranks to celebrate one of the best days of his life with his family and friends on that stage? Few people get that opportunity in life and to try to deny them that experience solely for your own priorities is wrong. I realize negotiations will affect them but they have no control over it whatsoever. IMO they should be encouraging them to enjoy that moment and welcoming them with open arms into the union.

[balta1701-A]

I also think the players asking the college guys to skip the draft is very selfish move. Why would you not want a guy who is going to join your ranks to celebrate one of the best days of his life with his family and friends on that stage? Few people get that opportunity in life and to try to deny them that experience solely for your own priorities is wrong. I realize negotiations will affect them but they have no control over it whatsoever. IMO they should be encouraging them to enjoy that moment and welcoming them with open arms into the union.

First of all, right now there is no "union".

 

Secondly, the "Union" backed off on asking players to skip the draft.

[flea]

First of all, right now there is no "union".

 

Secondly, the "Union" backed off on asking players to skip the draft.

 

 

Once they realised how unpopular it was with the public. ESPN poll had 75% people against the boycott

[fudgeripple2000]

Once they realised how unpopular it was with the public. ESPN poll had 75% people against the boycott

 

What I liked is that how Goodell responded to the idea of the boycott. Basically saying that they can ditch it if they want. We will still do it. Personally I don't care about seeing the players with their families and friends crying. If I wanted to watch Oprah I would watch Oprah. I love the commentary and over analysis of all the picks and flashes into the war rooms. I don't need players for that.

 

There has also been talk that there will be a seperate event where the players would do interviews and the like. I wouldn't watch it. Also, I think it would be exceptionally poor form to have the NFL foot the bill for traveling to the draft and not do the hand shake/interview part.

[bowlingtwig]

Here's a great blog done by HH.

 

http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/grizzly-de...-118173304.html

[fudgeripple2000]

Here's a great blog done by HH.

 

http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/grizzly-de...-118173304.html

 

Good article, however I give as much credence to the opinion of a player like Hilli as I would to the opinion of an owner. The truth and resolution is somewhere in the middle. The example he gave of southwest is interesting. He is right southwest total revenue is over 12 billion however their net profit is more like 450 million. That is an enormous operating overhead. Now when revenue is down as is the norm with airlines there are layoffs to stay profitable. Players get cut but teams still have 53 players, practice squads, dozens of coaches and staff, as well as the cost to put butts in seats. So the operating cost of the average NFL team stays relatively constant even if the product (team) sucks and there is a drop in attendance. The players don't share in that financial loss.

 

[balta1701-A]

@AdrianPeterson is correct in his anology of this game. It is a lot deeper than most people understand.

 

Rashard Mendenhall

[balta1701-A]

Good article, however I give as much credence to the opinion of a player like Hilli as I would to the opinion of an owner. The truth and resolution is somewhere in the middle. The example he gave of southwest is interesting. He is right southwest total revenue is over 12 billion however their net profit is more like 450 million. That is an enormous operating overhead. Now when revenue is down as is the norm with airlines there are layoffs to stay profitable. Players get cut but teams still have 53 players, practice squads, dozens of coaches and staff, as well as the cost to put butts in seats. So the operating cost of the average NFL team stays relatively constant even if the product (team) sucks and there is a drop in attendance. The players don't share in that financial loss.

There's a lot of ways to effectively "cook the books" though, which is why the players were so strident on wanting to see the books. You can count employing 193 different members of the McCaskey family in the front office as a cost, when really they're all just the ownership. You can count the owner's 3 private jets as team expenses or private expenses. You can count the stadium as a fixed cost, but if you're creative with your bookkeeping you can ignore the several hundred million dollars chipped in by the city/state government to keep the team there. Do you really need 19 different assistant to the assistant coordinators, or are any of those jobs just makework?

 

If the Owners are being 100% honest and their costs have gone up at a faster rate than revenues, such that they're getting squeezed, I don't think the players would push very hard on cutbacks...but the players want that to be established for them. They don't trust the owners right now at all...and I'm not sure they should. No one here trusts the McCaskeys when they cry poor, I doubt many other cities trust their ownership when they cry poor.

[fudgeripple2000]

There's a lot of ways to effectively "cook the books" though, which is why the players were so strident on wanting to see the books. You can count employing 193 different members of the McCaskey family in the front office as a cost, when really they're all just the ownership. You can count the owner's 3 private jets as team expenses or private expenses. You can count the stadium as a fixed cost, but if you're creative with your bookkeeping you can ignore the several hundred million dollars chipped in by the city/state government to keep the team there. Do you really need 19 different assistant to the assistant coordinators, or are any of those jobs just makework?

 

If the Owners are being 100% honest and their costs have gone up at a faster rate than revenues, such that they're getting squeezed, I don't think the players would push very hard on cutbacks...but the players want that to be established for them. They don't trust the owners right now at all...and I'm not sure they should. No one here trusts the McCaskeys when they cry poor, I doubt many other cities trust their ownership when they cry poor.

 

I don't hear too many teams cry poor. My interpretation is that the financial risk will always fall on the owners. So a good portion of the profit should as well. I have worked for people before and was always annoyed that by my sweat I enriched their lives. Now I own my own business I get it. Sure teams get help from the communities to build and improve stadiums. My local city just built a soccer stadium and when there other events in the stadium the city makes money. Every business "cooks the books" to a degree. Those jets are a write off. Are they sometimes used for players? Sure. Let's not play the "absolute" game. Do the owners get a percentage of endorsements the players acquire? No. Is a player's employment on that team the vehicle whereby he signed that endorsement? Yep. The players can go out and sign shoe deals, be on the box of wheaties, or even be the spokesman for tampax, and all the money goes to them. So why should revenue a team has made be split with players.

[balta1701-A]

I don't hear too many teams cry poor. My interpretation is that the financial risk will always fall on the owners. So a good portion of the profit should as well. I have worked for people before and was always annoyed that by my sweat I enriched their lives. Now I own my own business I get it. Sure teams get help from the communities to build and improve stadiums. My local city just built a soccer stadium and when there other events in the stadium the city makes money. Every business "cooks the books" to a degree. Those jets are a write off. Are they sometimes used for players? Sure. Let's not play the "absolute" game. Do the owners get a percentage of endorsements the players acquire? No. Is a player's employment on that team the vehicle whereby he signed that endorsement? Yep. The players can go out and sign shoe deals, be on the box of wheaties, or even be the spokesman for tampax, and all the money goes to them. So why should revenue a team has made be split with players.

The whole point of this lockout is that the teams were crying poor. They wanted the players to give back a billion dollars in earnings per season relative to last year. They are saying that their profitability has deteriorated over the last few years.