PDA

View Full Version : Complete NFL Shutdown Possible



WARHORSE
05-09-2011, 01:19 AM
Well, dont let this little piece of news pass you by, cause it may just be the tip of the iceburg.

The initial rumors of a complete NFL shutdown if the courts order a lifting of the lockout are slowly swirling.

Cant say as I blame the owners. Nobody wants someone else telling them what to do in their own business, and if it were me, and I dont have the freedom to decide what happens, then I may as well shut my doors. I would never let a group of people that I employ dictate to me how things should be, simply because my business is lucrative.

That would include the union they scam under.


The players are making more money then they ever have before, and the money is SPREAD across the entire spectrum of players. The elite still take the biggest cut of the pie, but players that are further down build equity through their years. Can there be better retirement? Yes. Better medical? Yes.

But in the end, I believe in the NFL, its too violent a game to be taking money from those lower on the tier and giving it to those higher on the tier.

The NFL owners of teams that are struggling to stay afloat have a right to want to renegotiate. The owners had, and have excercised, their right to opt out of the current agreement.

They no longer wish to work under that agreement, and its their right.

The players also have a right, to walk away a go find employment somewhere else.

Perhaps they ought to look into being a union rep, I hear they take home quite a bit of money, and have GREAT death benefits for their family members.

Get rid of these players, and sign some new ones if they dont want to play in the NFL. The NFL isnt asking them individually to take pay cuts, and they will CONTINUE to make more and more money into the end of their careers.

If they dont, goodbye, and bring in the players of the future, the stars of the future, and the game of the future.

Start with this rookie class, and tell them if they want to play, today is the day.

The only other alternative is for the 32 NFL owners to merge into a single entity, with limited parnterships and structures that allow for individual handling of their teams.

D. Smith needs to take his union busting derby, put it on his head, face the north and keep on walking till he hits water.

Sorry players, I love the Denver Broncos, and if that aint you...........sayonara.


http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/05/08/rumors-fly-of-a-complete-nfl-shutdown/

BroncoStud
05-09-2011, 07:01 AM
Yep, ANYONE who is supporting the Players Union side on this simply doesn't understand free markets or business. Their case makes no sense, they risk NOTHING financially, and they already make a larger proportionate share of the revenue than the owners.

The retired veterans are who have been getting screwed and the current players aren't even addressing that -- too busy worrying about stuffing their pockets with more money.

Drew Brees and Co. have lost all my respect.

claymore
05-09-2011, 07:28 AM
Plenty of careers have long term injury risks. Not very many pay 6, 7 and 8 figures though.

I say football players deserve the same retirement as a construction worker, coal miner etc...

replace these jabrones with dudes willing to do it for a $100,000 dollars a year.

Slick
05-09-2011, 07:42 AM
Makes it hard for me to even talk about football at this point.

Our team really needed a normal off season.

Wake me up when this is over.

atwater27
05-09-2011, 08:26 AM
go owners.

MadMax
05-09-2011, 10:08 AM
I just wanted to point out that the NFL is not free market. A salary cap is not free market, rookie salary caps are not free market. If the lockout were ordered lifted, with no rules in place, the NFL would be free market (and it would probably be a disaster).

Plus NFL teams are not struggling, the only team to release financial details (the Packers), still made a healthy profit last year even though they are a small market team, and in the middle of the worst recession in 50 years.

SoCalImport
05-09-2011, 10:30 AM
I just wanted to point out that the NFL is not free market. A salary cap is not free market, rookie salary caps are not free market. If the lockout were ordered lifted, with no rules in place, the NFL would be free market (and it would probably be a disaster).

Plus NFL teams are not struggling, the only team to release financial details (the Packers), still made a healthy profit last year even though they are a small market team, and in the middle of the worst recession in 50 years.

I think it's the franchises overall value that has taken a hit. Not necessarily the same thing as profit. Besides that, I'm not sure if the Pack is a typical "small market" team. They're one of the most storied and popular NFL team ever. Jacksonville is a better example.

"Although the average team enterprise value (equity plus debt) remained unchanged from a year ago at $1 billion, eight teams declined in value. The biggest losers: Oakland Raiders (-7%), Detroit Lions (-6%) and Indianapolis Colts (-5%). This marked the first time in 10 years that any NFL team had gone down in value."
http://www.forbes.com/2009/09/02/nfl-pro-football-business-sportsmoney-football-values-09-values.html

Npba900
05-09-2011, 10:59 AM
go owners.

So the players cut a great deal in the last collective bargaining agreement, where they get 59 percent of all revenues after the owners take a billion dollars off the top. (It still cracks me up how that gets glossed over.) Now the owners feel they are entitled to take a cool $2 billion off the top. For what reason would this be the case exactly? Why are the owners reluctant to open their books? What are they hiding?

The players proposed back in March to split it down the middle. That prompted the owners to act like scorned 4-year-olds on the playground and get up from the negotiating table. That’s pathetic.

The players deserve 50 percent of all revenues. They are world-class athletes performing at the highest level. The NFL is a supply and demand corporate league.

The game has never been better or more popular, and that’s because of the players. We pay to see the players. We watch to see these compelling sporting events. We get mesmerized by Tom Brady, Andre Johnson, Troy Polamalu and Clay Matthews. They deserve it.

Denver Native (Carol)
05-09-2011, 11:03 AM
I just wanted to point out that the NFL is not free market. A salary cap is not free market, rookie salary caps are not free market. If the lockout were ordered lifted, with no rules in place, the NFL would be free market (and it would probably be a disaster).

Plus NFL teams are not struggling, the only team to release financial details (the Packers), still made a healthy profit last year even though they are a small market team, and in the middle of the worst recession in 50 years.

The whole picture needs to be considered - according to the following, the Packers' operating profit declined, due to player costs increasing.


In the team's latest financial report, a preview of which was released to the media this week, the Packers' operating profit for the 2010 fiscal year (ending March 31, 2010), was $9.8 million, down from $20.1 million the year prior. The primary reason for the decline, despite a $10.1 million increase in overall revenue, was a $22.1 million jump in player costs, which increased 15.9 percent from $138.7 million to $160.8 million. It marked the third consecutive year that operating profits declined, from $34.2 million (2007) to $21.4 million (2008) to $20.1 million (2009) to $9.8 million (2010).

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/Packers-open-books-prove-little?urn=nfl-256636

Within the above link, it references the following:

http://nfllabor.com/2010/07/14/green-bay-packers%E2%80%99-profits-continue-to-decline-player-costs-rising-faster-than-revenue-a-growing-concern/

rcsodak
05-09-2011, 11:25 AM
The whole picture needs to be considered - according to the following, the Packers' operating profit declined, due to player costs increasing.



http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/Packers-open-books-prove-little?urn=nfl-256636

Within the above link, it references the following:

http://nfllabor.com/2010/07/14/green-bay-packers%E2%80%99-profits-continue-to-decline-player-costs-rising-faster-than-revenue-a-growing-concern/
Exactly, and that's been the point. That the owners are making less and less, leading to the question 'where does it end?' Does a team actually have to LOSE money to wake up labor?

MNPatsFan
05-09-2011, 11:50 AM
So the players cut a great deal in the last collective bargaining agreement, where they get 59 percent of all revenues after the owners take a billion dollars off the top. (It still cracks me up how that gets glossed over.) Now the owners feel they are entitled to take a cool $2 billion off the top. For what reason would this be the case exactly?That doesn't get glossed over at all. From what I have read, that $1 billion off the top is used to help finance new stadiums etc. to improve the NFL, its competitiveness and the NFL fan experience (new and bigger video screens, etc in the stadiums). Moreover, the NFLPA has a say and some oversight over how this money is spent. I believe the owners are saying that they need the additional $1 billion to continue financing the new stadiums (like the one the Vikings are seeking) and other improvements to improve the competitiveness of the NFL and the fans' experience at the stadiums and games. Again, the NFLPA would have input and oversight into how this money is spent!


Why are the owners reluctant to open their books? What are they hiding?Guess you missed where the owners offered to provide the NFLPA with financial information for all 32 teams for the past five years, which is the length of time the new CBA had been in existence, but the NFLPA demanded 10 years.:tsk:


The players proposed back in March to split it down the middle. That prompted the owners to act like scorned 4-year-olds on the playground and get up from the negotiating table. That’s pathetic.I believe that was because the players were wanting 50 percent after only $1 billion, not $2 billion, was taken off the top.


The players deserve 50 percent of all revenues. They are world-class athletes performing at the highest level. The NFL is a supply and demand corporate league.I agree AFTER the $2 Billion has been taken off the top to finance new stadiums etc. I also believe the owners are okay with a 50-50 split once the $2 billion is taken off the top. If the current players aren't willing to agree to take $2 billion off the top, as you say the NFL is a supply and demand corporate league and there is a great supply of football players who will play for that money after the $2 billion is taken off the top.;)


The game has never been better or more popular, and that’s because of the players. We pay to see the players. We watch to see these compelling sporting events. We get mesmerized by Tom Brady, Andre Johnson, Troy Polamalu and Clay Matthews. They deserve it.It is partly because of the players and partly because of the owners. Without the owners negotiating increasingly better TV deals, expanding the exposure of the NFL and its players (think NFL.com and NFL Network), and financing the stadiums, operating costs and salaries, the players wouldn't have the opportunity to exhibit their talent.;)

Traveler
05-09-2011, 12:03 PM
The retired veterans are who have been getting screwed and the current players aren't even addressing that -- too busy worrying about stuffing their pockets with more money.

The bolded portion isn't factually true. The players (right or wrong) haven't asked for more money, just to keep their percentage of revenue where it is currently.

The Owners are the ones asking for more money-let me re-phrasse- a return of monies/ renegotiation in the percent of revenue because of the rise in player costs.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

silkamilkamonico
05-09-2011, 12:27 PM
So the players cut a great deal in the last collective bargaining agreement, where they get 59 percent of all revenues after the owners take a billion dollars off the top. (It still cracks me up how that gets glossed over.) Now the owners feel they are entitled to take a cool $2 billion off the top. For what reason would this be the case exactly? Why are the owners reluctant to open their books? What are they hiding?

The players proposed back in March to split it down the middle. That prompted the owners to act like scorned 4-year-olds on the playground and get up from the negotiating table. That’s pathetic.

The players deserve 50 percent of all revenues. They are world-class athletes performing at the highest level. The NFL is a supply and demand corporate league.

The game has never been better or more popular, and that’s because of the players. We pay to see the players. We watch to see these compelling sporting events. We get mesmerized by Tom Brady, Andre Johnson, Troy Polamalu and Clay Matthews. They deserve it.


The players receive their just due through advertisement, PR, marketing, and sponsorship deals, and that's including the ones that we go to watch every Sunday. I can guarantee you that nobody is heading to the stadium Sunday to watch Brady Quinn, Stanley Daniels, or Cassius Vaughn.

The players contracts are also increasing along with the game, and have done so since the popularity escalated. Minimum wage in the NFL increases every year. The cap increases, and contracts increase. The franchise tag increases every year.

Do people go and watch guys like Albert Haynesworth work their ass off for a huge contract, and then once he gets it, he quit on his team?

If players were really concerned about receiving their just worth, they would be attacking rookie contracts, and asking for a success/reward base system.

The argument of "players have made the game more popular which is why they should receive more from the pot" applies to maybe 5% of NFL players, and supports 95% freeloaders who are spinning success of that 5%.

Andre Johnson, Tom Brady, Troy Polamalu and Clay Matthews are well taken care of through endorsements, and rightfully so.

Npba900
05-09-2011, 12:45 PM
That doesn't get glossed over at all. From what I have read, that $1 billion off the top is used to help finance new stadiums etc. to improve the NFL, its competitiveness and the NFL fan experience (new and bigger video screens, etc in the stadiums). Moreover, the NFL PA has a say and some oversight over how this money is spent. I believe the owners are saying that they need the additional $1 billion to continue financing the new stadiums (like the one the Vikings are seeking) and other improvements to improve the competitiveness of the NFL and the fans' experience at the stadiums and games. Again, the NFL PA would have input and oversight into how this money is spent!

Guess you missed where the owners offered to provide the NFL PA with financial information for all 32 teams for the past five years, which is the length of time the new CAB had been in existence, but the NFLPA demanded 10 years.:tsk:

I believe that was because the players were wanting 50 percent after only $1 billion, not $2 billion, was taken off the top.

I agree AFTER the $2 Billion has been taken off the top to finance new stadiums etc. I also believe the owners are okay with a 50-50 split once the $2 billion is taken off the top. If the current players aren't willing to agree to take $2 billion off the top, as you say the NFL is a supply and demand corporate league and there is a great supply of football players who will play for that money after the $2 billion is taken off the top.;)

It is partly because of the players and partly because of the owners. Without the owners negotiating increasingly better TV deals, expanding the exposure of the NFL and its players (think NFL.com and NFL Network), and financing the stadiums, operating costs and salaries, the players wouldn't have the opportunity to exhibit their talent.;)

I understand the owners concerns. However, the reasons why I'm on the side of the players are several.

1.) Despite the megabucks contracts earned by Tom Brady, Peyton Manning and other superstars, keep in mind the average NFL salary of $1.8 million, is the lowest among the four major American sports. The minimum salary in the NFL also is the lowest.

2.) A few months back NFL color analyst Mark Schlereth noted that 10 percent of the players make 90 percent of the money. Schlereth noted the Steelers' 2010 season-opening roster, 25 players were making less than $1 million, including their prorated signing bonuses. Obviously, NFL players earn more than many of us but usually not for long. The reasons are because ...

3.) The NFL players have the shortest careers, an average of 3.5 years, than their counterparts in the other sports. What's really glaring is most NFL contracts are not guaranteed as in baseball, basketball and hockey, and players essentially are disposable parts easily cast aside.

4.) When it comes to the NFL no sport causes as many serious injuries and other afflictions that not only shorten the players careers, but also potentially hinder and/or shorten the lives of ex-players. If you haven't noticed the increased attention on head injuries and post-concussion syndrome, check it out if you get a chance.

5.) During the past six years, an average of more than 400 players have ended the season on injured reserve. That's about 23 percent of everyone who suited up at some point and that's training camp included. It does not take into account those who should have gone on IR but chose to tough it out.

6.) According to Forbes magazine, all 32 NFL teams rank among the top 44 most valuable sports franchises in the world. Toss out soccer and auto racing teams, and it's 32 of the top 35 (the others are the New York Yankees and Mets, and the Boston Red Sox). Forbes also reported that half of the NFL's 32 owners are billionaires.

7.) The NFL owners are sitting quite nice. NFL revenues well exceed MLB ($7 billion in 2010), the NBA ($4 billion) and NHL ($2.7 billion).

Again, I understand the owners have their arguments, and some are even valid. Once you include both sides of the issues things can get complicated and stalemated. But the playing field is definitely tilted to favor the owners.

As we find now, the NFL owners are not in danger of loosing their franchises even if the owners go 10-20 years without making the playoffs, the Super Bowl and let alone winning a Super Bowl. The owners can own their teams until they die (20-50 years). However, the players careers only last 3.5 years and their contracts are not guaranteed....just their signing bonuses.

Denver Native (Carol)
05-09-2011, 12:46 PM
The NFL owners have released their proposal to the NFL Players Association that was ultimately rejected when the NFLPA elected to decertify earlier Friday. The proposal includes several concessions the NFLPA was aiming for initially, including a split of the economic difference between the two sides, a rookie wage scale and a commitment that an 18-game schedule won't occur until after the 2012 season at the earliest.

The NFLPA was hoping the owners would reveal financial information from the last 10 years, which it alleges included the owners taking money that should have gone to the players off the table. The NFL owners balked and instead submitted a 10-point proposal that led with the following.

We more than split the economic difference between us, increasing our proposed cap for 2011 significantly and accepting the Union's proposed cap number for 2014 ($161 million per club).

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2011/3/11/2045327/nfl-lockout-owners-proposal-nflpa-cba

rcsodak
05-09-2011, 01:08 PM
The bolded portion isn't factually true. The players (right or wrong) haven't asked for more money, just to keep their percentage of revenue where it is currently.

The Owners are the ones asking for more money-let me re-phrasse- a return of monies/ renegotiation in the percent of revenue because of the rise in player costs.

Correct me if I'm wrong.
Regardless of the wording, each year, the players' pay will be increasing, if left unchecked.

Npba900
05-09-2011, 01:13 PM
Regardless of the wording, each year, the players' pay will be increasing, if left unchecked.

Why should players salaries be checked while owners profits are not checked?

rcsodak
05-09-2011, 01:19 PM
I understand the owners concerns. However, the reasons why I'm on the side of the players are several.

1.) Despite the megabucks contracts earned by Tom Brady, Peyton Manning and other superstars, keep in mind the average NFL salary of $1.8 million, is the lowest among the four major American sports. The minimum salary in the NFL also is the lowest.

2.) A few months back NFL color analyst Mark Schlereth noted that 10 percent of the players make 90 percent of the money. Schlereth noted the Steelers' 2010 season-opening roster, 25 players were making less than $1 million, including their prorated signing bonuses. Obviously, NFL players earn more than many of us but usually not for long. The reasons are because ...

3.) The NFL players have the shortest careers, an average of 3.5 years, than their counterparts in the other sports. What's really glaring is most NFL contracts are not guaranteed as in baseball, basketball and hockey, and players essentially are disposable parts easily cast aside.

4.) When it comes to the NFL no sport causes as many serious injuries and other afflictions that not only shorten the players careers, but also potentially hinder and/or shorten the lives of ex-players. If you haven't noticed the increased attention on head injuries and post-concussion syndrome, check it out if you get a chance.

5.) During the past six years, an average of more than 400 players have ended the season on injured reserve. That's about 23 percent of everyone who suited up at some point and that's training camp included. It does not take into account those who should have gone on IR but chose to tough it out.

6.) According to Forbes magazine, all 32 NFL teams rank among the top 44 most valuable sports franchises in the world. Toss out soccer and auto racing teams, and it's 32 of the top 35 (the others are the New York Yankees and Mets, and the Boston Red Sox). Forbes also reported that half of the NFL's 32 owners are billionaires.

7.) The NFL owners are sitting quite nice. NFL revenues well exceed MLB ($7 billion in 2010), the NBA ($4 billion) and NHL ($2.7 billion).

Again, I understand the owners have their arguments, and some are even valid. Once you include both sides of the issues things can get complicated and stalemated. But the playing field is definitely tilted to favor the owners.

As we find now, the NFL owners are not in danger of loosing their franchises even if the owners go 10-20 years without making the playoffs, the Super Bowl and let alone winning a Super Bowl. The owners can own their teams until they die (20-50 years). However, the players careers only last 3.5 years and their contracts are not guaranteed....just their signing bonuses.
You need to update your info on your outdated 3.5yrs. Its so 20th century.

Its more like 5.9yrs and for 1st rounders, almost double that.

And maybe the REASON nfl players are making less than nba/baseball, is the small amount of games the play.

3hrs a WEEK*16 WEEKS=48HRS A YEAR!

Oversimplistic, yes. But sometimes reality is a cold slap in the face.

rcsodak
05-09-2011, 01:22 PM
The NFL has come out and announced free agency rules this year will not be the same as 2010s.

BigSarge87
05-09-2011, 01:23 PM
The players and the owners are just going to keep taking turns choking their golden goose 'till it's dead.

Brilliant!

Gotta admit, as much as I would miss the NFL, it would give me some pleasure reading stories about some of these ****** failing to succeed in the real world.

If college football ever gets a playoff, I would care a whole lot less about what happens in the NFL.

Traveler
05-09-2011, 01:32 PM
Regardless of the wording, each year, the players' pay will be increasing, if left unchecked.

No argument from me there. Just pointing out the fact the players are not asking for more money as part of this new CBA.

Traveler
05-09-2011, 01:33 PM
The NFL has come out and announced free agency rules this year will not be the same as 2010s.

Link?

rcsodak
05-09-2011, 01:38 PM
Link?

Sorry.....they touched on it on Sirius NFL Radio. Should be on nfl.com......

Nomad
05-09-2011, 01:40 PM
The players and the owners are just going to keep taking turns choking their golden goose 'till it's dead.

Brilliant!

Gotta admit, as much as I would miss the NFL, it would give me some pleasure reading stories about some of these ****** failing to succeed in the real world.

If college football ever gets a playoff, I would care a whole lot less about what happens in the NFL.

Kickoff......Sept 3 2011 - 8:30pm et.......Dallas, Tx.......LSU Tigers vs Oregon Ducks!!

Football lives on with or without the NFL!:coffee:

Denver27og
05-09-2011, 01:41 PM
You need to update your info on your outdated 3.5yrs. Its so 20th century.

Its more like 5.9yrs and for 1st rounders, almost double that.

And maybe the REASON nfl players are making less than nba/baseball, is the small amount of games the play.

3hrs a WEEK*16 WEEKS=48HRS A YEAR!

Oversimplistic, yes. But sometimes reality is a cold slap in the face.

where did you get your stats bro??

man these NFl players.. yes they play the last games and have the shortest schedules.. but they have to stay in top physical condition all year long... dont forget that NBA MLB NHL thier contracts are guaranteed money.. in the NFL if you get hurt its bye bye with no money..

Denver27og
05-09-2011, 01:42 PM
You need to update your info on your outdated 3.5yrs. Its so 20th century.

Its more like 5.9yrs and for 1st rounders, almost double that.

And maybe the REASON nfl players are making less than nba/baseball, is the small amount of games the play.

3hrs a WEEK*16 WEEKS=48HRS A YEAR!

Oversimplistic, yes. But sometimes reality is a cold slap in the face.

48 hours a year he says?? hahah this guy has probably never even thrown a football in his life

rcsodak
05-09-2011, 01:45 PM
where did you get your stats bro??

man these NFl players.. yes they play the last games and have the shortest schedules.. but they have to stay in top physical condition all year long... dont forget that NBA MLB NHL thier contracts are guaranteed money.. in the NFL if you get hurt its bye bye with no money..

Those 'stats' came from the nfl, via sirius nfl radio, in a rebut to a DWilliams speech he was giving to a business college on the UVA campus earlier this year.

LTC Pain
05-09-2011, 01:49 PM
Link?

This is what rcsodak's talking about. "A working group of NFL types have been at work crafting possible 2011 free agency rules that will not necessarily replicate the 2010 rules in place."


http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/05/09/report-nfl-crafting-alternative-to-2011-rules/

LordTrychon
05-09-2011, 01:51 PM
You can't argue that the players deserve to make so much because they are the real reason that the NFL is profitable and then also argue that 'poor players' by posting stats about guys who are in the league for 3 years and make a minimum salary.

These guys aren't the reason the league is so successful... these guys are borderline talent that don't cut it in the NFL. So yeah... they're not making multiples of millions a year... but they're also not at as high of an injury risk (When all you do is special teams) and they are certainly not the reason the NFL is successful.

So they don't make it... but they get to play in the NFL for hundreds of thousands of dollars for a few years.

Meanwhile, the players who can claim they help make the NFL successful earn in the tens of millions... and are a little harder to feel sorry for.

WARHORSE
05-09-2011, 01:54 PM
So the players cut a great deal in the last collective bargaining agreement, where they get 59 percent of all revenues after the owners take a billion dollars off the top. (It still cracks me up how that gets glossed over.) Now the owners feel they are entitled to take a cool $2 billion off the top. For what reason would this be the case exactly? Why are the owners reluctant to open their books? What are they hiding?

The players proposed back in March to split it down the middle. That prompted the owners to act like scorned 4-year-olds on the playground and get up from the negotiating table. That’s pathetic.

The players deserve 50 percent of all revenues. They are world-class athletes performing at the highest level. The NFL is a supply and demand corporate league.

The game has never been better or more popular, and that’s because of the players. We pay to see the players. We watch to see these compelling sporting events. We get mesmerized by Tom Brady, Andre Johnson, Troy Polamalu and Clay Matthews. They deserve it.


Lets see....$1 Billion divided up among 32 teams.........$31,250,000.

Thats not what these billionaires are looking for.

Remember that the eventual horizon that the owners want to view is one of global football.

The big soccer teams are the ones that are still the magnates in this world, and I believe nothing drives a competitive team of billionaires more than being able to take over that distinction.

$31 million a year off the top simply is not going to crack the pie any time soon.

The Superbowl is the biggest single sports event, and that tells you of the drawing power of football.

1 Billion off the top isnt much. These owners have a more far reaching view of football than the career lives of these players, and they DONT like employees telling them how to run their businesses.


And I dont blame em.:salute:

Lonestar
05-09-2011, 01:57 PM
I just wanted to point out that the NFL is not free market. A salary cap is not free market, rookie salary caps are not free market. If the lockout were ordered lifted, with no rules in place, the NFL would be free market (and it would probably be a disaster).

Plus NFL teams are not struggling, the only team to release financial details (the Packers), still made a healthy profit last year even though they are a small market team, and in the middle of the worst recession in 50 years.

Other than the draft it is a free market. The Players are free to choose which team they play for after their initial contract is up.

As for money in no industry that I know of does the employees (all includiing the ceo down) make more than 65% of the gross revenues that would also include all benefits retirement, insurance taxes travel etc. They are looking for 60 % of it just for themselves as salary, not including retirement, owners matching portion of fed taxes FICA 8% iirc etc.

Are the owners making a profit I'd guess for the most part yes are they making more than if they would have invested in tax free munis. Probably not.

The owners are entitled to make a profit on their risk of owning a team.
When a journey man player is guaranteed &450,000.00 a year no one is being underpaid.

Are their risks involved in being paid for playing a game absolutely. But they are making more money than 95% of other college grads are when they step on the field.

Npba900
05-09-2011, 01:59 PM
The NFL has come out and announced free agency rules this year will not be the same as 2010s.

Must be another way to SCREW the players!!!:eek:

KCL
05-09-2011, 02:09 PM
Must be another way to SCREW the players!!!:eek:

Screw the players? Where else can a person work making MILLIONS
playing a game? With all the people out of work...I don't feel sorry for
these wealthy morons.

Npba900
05-09-2011, 02:20 PM
Other than the draft it is a free market. The Players are free to choose which team they play for after their initial contract is up.

Not quite. Once a players contract is up! Players can't just say "see ya". Teams can still apply designation of restricted and unrestricted status and demanding compisation in terms of draft picks to ultimately allow players to go to another team.

As for money in no industry that I know of does the employees (all includiing the ceo down) make more than 65% of the gross revenues that would also include all benefits retirement, insurance taxes travel etc. They are looking for 60 % of it just for themselves as salary, not including retirement, owners matching portion of fed taxes FICA 8% iirc etc.

The NFL is a different industry unlike a normal corporations. Due to the injury's and violents of the game alone. Your avg white collar professional employee does not face injuries and violence at work and can work at their professions for 30-40 years. NFL players only have a 3-5 career.

Are the owners making a profit I'd guess for the most part yes are they making more than if they would have invested in tax free munis. Probably not.

What's key for the owners are the amount of profits realized over a 30-40 years of ownership. Players careers end rather abruptly due to injuries and getting old. However, owners are not in danger of loosing their franchise even if these owners never make the playoffs and win between 2-6 games for 10 years or longer.

The owners are entitled to make a profit on their risk of owning a team.
When a journey man player is guaranteed &450,000.00 a year no one is being underpaid.

As with the players and owners, both sides understood the risk with becoming owners and players in the NFL. Again, the owners take financial risks, however, I can't recall NFL owner getting their franchcise sold to another owner due to not being able to field a winning team. Owners are guaranteed to stay owners so long as they follow the rules. Players due to the injury riddled violence of the NFL should also have guaranteed contracts as well and teams should honor the guaranteed contracts and pay them in full.

Are their risks involved in being paid for playing a game absolutely. But they are making more money than 95% of other college grads are when they step on the field.

Same can be said for NFL owners. They have less corporate risks of filling chapter 11 and going out of business than other Fortune 500 corporate company's. A college grad and an NFL player in terms of salaries cannot be compared due to the vastly different working conditions and the longevity of careers.

Npba900
05-09-2011, 02:24 PM
Screw the players? Where else can a person work making MILLIONS
playing a game? With all the people out of work...I don't feel sorry for
these wealthy morons.

How long can the players make millions versus how long the owners can make billions?????

The 10's of millions out of work were not born with DNA and genes to play in the NFL nor other professional sports. So you are comparing apples to oranges.:coffee:

KCL
05-09-2011, 02:31 PM
How long can the players make millions versus how long the owners can make billions?????

The 10's of millions out of work were not born with DNA and genes to play in the NFL nor other professional sports. So you are comparing apples to oranges.:coffee:

If the players are smart with their money..they can set themselves up for life.

I agree not everyone is born with the talent to play professional sports...you missed my point with what I said about the people who are unemployed...:coffee:

Slick
05-09-2011, 02:32 PM
Poor ********. sure would suck to have to fall back on that free basketweaving degree

I Eat Staples
05-09-2011, 02:32 PM
I have no sympathy for either side. Greedy, unyielding ******** all the way around.

Slick
05-09-2011, 02:33 PM
Amen staples

Npba900
05-09-2011, 02:39 PM
Lets see....$1 Billion divided up among 32 teams.........$31,250,000.

Thats not what these billionaires are looking for.

Remember that the eventual horizon that the owners want to view is one of global football.

The big soccer teams are the ones that are still the magnates in this world, and I believe nothing drives a competitive team of billionaires more than being able to take over that distinction.

$31 million a year off the top simply is not going to crack the pie any time soon.

The Superbowl is the biggest single sports event, and that tells you of the drawing power of football.

1 Billion off the top isn't much. These owners have a more far reaching view of football than the career lives of these players, and they DONT like employees telling them how to run their businesses.

And I dont blame em.:salute:

Where the owners make their money, profits and fortune is the longevity as NFL owners over 30-50 year period. The only way the players make money is thru longevity over the risk of career ending injuries and long term guaranteed contracts.

Sure the owners are the boss of the franchise they own. However, its the player's talent and performance that allow the NFL owner the prestige and watching the profits and networth or the team(s) in the billions of dollars.

Until I see an owner come down out their temperature controlled Luxury Boxes and show case on the field the same talents and performances as the players in uniform; its the players that are more important than the owners.

Npba900
05-09-2011, 02:46 PM
If the players are smart with their money..they can set themselves up for life.

I agree not everyone is born with the talent to play professional sports...you missed my point with what I said about the people who are unemployed...:coffee:

So its okay for NFL owners to put a loosing product out on the field for 10 years or more.....never make the playoffs, never winning playoff games, let alone sniffing the Super Bowl, and its okay that they continue on as owners and raking in $100's of millions-billions?

By the way, what does the unemployment rate have to do with the NFL strike/lockout? By the way one glaring difference between the NFL players and the currently unemployed are unions! The players can collectively bargain for pay, benefits, and retirement, whereas 10's of millions of the currently unemployed do not have that option.....Correct!

KCL
05-09-2011, 02:51 PM
So its okay for NFL owners to put a loosing product out on the field for 10 years or more.....never make the playoffs, never winning playoff games, let alone sniffing the Super Bowl, and its okay that they continue on as owners and raking in $100's of millions-billions?

By the way, what does the unemployment rate have to do with the NFL strike/lockout? By the way one glaring difference between the NFL players and the currently unemployed are unions! The players can collectively bargain for pay, benefits, and retirement, whereas 10's of millions of the currently unemployed do not have that option.....Correct!

Whatever dude..I am just posting my opinion.

Npba900
05-09-2011, 02:52 PM
Whatever dude..I am just posting my opinion.

You and I both are just posting OUR opinions.

KCL
05-09-2011, 02:56 PM
You and I both are just posting OUR opinions.

Right and my opinion is I don't feel bad for the players..making millions that if used with some sense would set them up for life long after their playing days are over...hard for me to feel sorry for millionaires when so many people are jobless..also no one is forcing them to play.

Npba900
05-09-2011, 03:04 PM
Right and my opinion is I don't feel bad for the players..making millions that if used with some sense would set them up for life long after their playing days are over...hard for me to feel sorry for millionaires when so many people are jobless..also no one is forcing them to play.

That's your opinion. I believe NFL owners who are worth billions shouldn't be crying that they are going broke! Especially when the nature of NFL ownership is to virtually ensure so long as the owners play by the rules, they are virtually never endanger of loosing their franchise and can therefore remain as owners for 30-50 years and longers should they're loveones inherit ownership.

Again, the jobless outhere out has nothing to do with the NFL lock out. Having no sympathy for millionaires while turning a blinds-eye towards billionaires is rather odd at best. But is your decision and opinion.

rcsodak
05-09-2011, 03:06 PM
Must be another way to SCREW the players!!!:eek:
:laugh:

Poor practice squad players only make $89k/yr.
REVOLT!
:lol:

rcsodak
05-09-2011, 03:12 PM
Poor ********. sure would suck to have to fall back on that free basketweaving degree
degree? I bet only 25% even HAVE ONE! Lol

And this shit about 3-5yrs....waaaaaaa! Most of them just end up washing out, getting replaced by better players. Its not like all of the players no longer in the league are these crippled, brain damaged out of work people DWilliams would like everyone to believe.

rcsodak
05-09-2011, 03:22 PM
Right and my opinion is I don't feel bad for the players..making millions that if used with some sense would set them up for life long after their playing days are over...hard for me to feel sorry for millionaires when so many people are jobless..also no one is forcing them to play.
Even a marginal player, in/out in 3yrs, makes 250k. ANY brains and they've got a hell of a base.

NightTerror218
05-09-2011, 04:22 PM
I understand the owners concerns. However, the reasons why I'm on the side of the players are several.

1.) Despite the megabucks contracts earned by Tom Brady, Peyton Manning and other superstars, keep in mind the average NFL salary of $1.8 million, is the lowest among the four major American sports. The minimum salary in the NFL also is the lowest.

2.) A few months back NFL color analyst Mark Schlereth noted that 10 percent of the players make 90 percent of the money. Schlereth noted the Steelers' 2010 season-opening roster, 25 players were making less than $1 million, including their prorated signing bonuses. Obviously, NFL players earn more than many of us but usually not for long. The reasons are because ...

3.) The NFL players have the shortest careers, an average of 3.5 years, than their counterparts in the other sports. What's really glaring is most NFL contracts are not guaranteed as in baseball, basketball and hockey, and players essentially are disposable parts easily cast aside.

4.) When it comes to the NFL no sport causes as many serious injuries and other afflictions that not only shorten the players careers, but also potentially hinder and/or shorten the lives of ex-players. If you haven't noticed the increased attention on head injuries and post-concussion syndrome, check it out if you get a chance.

5.) During the past six years, an average of more than 400 players have ended the season on injured reserve. That's about 23 percent of everyone who suited up at some point and that's training camp included. It does not take into account those who should have gone on IR but chose to tough it out.

6.) According to Forbes magazine, all 32 NFL teams rank among the top 44 most valuable sports franchises in the world. Toss out soccer and auto racing teams, and it's 32 of the top 35 (the others are the New York Yankees and Mets, and the Boston Red Sox). Forbes also reported that half of the NFL's 32 owners are billionaires.

7.) The NFL owners are sitting quite nice. NFL revenues well exceed MLB ($7 billion in 2010), the NBA ($4 billion) and NHL ($2.7 billion).

Again, I understand the owners have their arguments, and some are even valid. Once you include both sides of the issues things can get complicated and stalemated. But the playing field is definitely tilted to favor the owners.

As we find now, the NFL owners are not in danger of loosing their franchises even if the owners go 10-20 years without making the playoffs, the Super Bowl and let alone winning a Super Bowl. The owners can own their teams until they die (20-50 years). However, the players careers only last 3.5 years and their contracts are not guaranteed....just their signing bonuses.


The owner are owners for a reason they run a BUSINESS. When revenue drops and costs increase they fix it. Does matter if they are rich they are the owners. If you owned a team you would work on keeping your revenues up too. If you are losing 10% every year then you would fix it. You have to pay for the all teams supplies, NFL network, Super Bowls, stadiums, vendors, and general stadium maintenance. What do players pay? NOTHING!!!!! They are spoiled rich kids in my mind.

They offered more money to retired players. Which helps them out but currently players want more money and they dont have any expense except their millions in monthly diamonds/cars/vacations costs. 50% across the board give the players more money then they get now so of course the owners will not do that. People will be happy with "their team" when ever is in the uniforms, its about the team more then the individuals who play on the team. No matter who is in the broncos uniform I will cheer for them.

Yes a lot of players get injured that is why the NFL is working on reducing concussions and improving safety.

rcsodak
05-09-2011, 04:46 PM
Not only is the NFL the SMALLEST, in the number of games, but they also have the LARGEST amount of employees.

So much for apples to apples.

atwater27
05-09-2011, 06:21 PM
That's your opinion. I believe NFL owners who are worth billions shouldn't be crying that they are going broke! Especially when the nature of NFL ownership is to virtually ensure so long as the owners play by the rules, they are virtually never endanger of loosing their franchise and can therefore remain as owners for 30-50 years and longers should they're loveones inherit ownership.

Again, the jobless outhere out has nothing to do with the NFL lock out. Having no sympathy for millionaires while turning a blinds-eye towards billionaires is rather odd at best. But is your decision and opinion.

If all the jobs in this country were set up like the NFL, the country would be broke..... wait a minute....

workers shouldn't call the shots, the owners/ big bosses should. I could understand if the workers were treated badly and not given good compensation. If you think the NFL players are not given good compensation from their EMPLOYERS, you are smoking white rocklike substances.

rcsodak
05-09-2011, 06:37 PM
If all the jobs in this country were set up like the NFL, the country would be broke..... wait a minute....

workers shouldn't call the shots, the owners/ big bosses should. I could understand if the workers were treated badly and not given good compensation. If you think the NFL players are not given good compensation from their EMPLOYERS, you are smoking white rocklike substances.

Remember......they're treated like slaves.

gregbroncs
05-09-2011, 06:47 PM
Where the owners make their money, profits and fortune is the longevity as NFL owners over 30-50 year period. The only way the players make money is thru longevity over the risk of career ending injuries and long term guaranteed contracts.

Sure the owners are the boss of the franchise they own. However, its the player's talent and performance that allow the NFL owner the prestige and watching the profits and networth or the team(s) in the billions of dollars.

Until I see an owner come down out their temperature controlled Luxury Boxes and show case on the field the same talents and performances as the players in uniform; its the players that are more important than the owners.

Player's come and go. Most of the owners have been here longer than the players will be. And will be with the league long after the player's are forgotten or gone on to something else.

The owner's are more important as they have the money to finance this league. Without them there is no league and the players would be making 1/1000th or less than they currently make.

Lonestar
05-09-2011, 08:23 PM
Same can be said for NFL owners. They have less corporate risks of filling chapter 11 and going out of business than other Fortune 500 corporate company's. A college grad and an NFL player in terms of salaries cannot be compared due to the vastly different working conditions and the longevity of careers.

I hoPe your not serious. I suspect the only thing you have ever owned is a lemonade stand. Which no doubt was subsidized by your Mommy.

I have managed or owed businesses for going on 45 years.

I suspect I have had a tad more exprience than you in knowing what the real costs of doing business than someone that is obviously a uniionized worker.

No business I have ever been involved in can stay in buisness if your labor costs are over 65%. That is total labor costs not just what they are playing to the players.

They have other employees including themselves, trainers, secretaries, folks that do the laundry and fix the uniforms, from owner to CEO to the lowest employee in the manning charts. They Deserve to be paid also and my friend that has to come out if that 65%. And it is not just take home pay but all related employee costs and benifits. And that is if you are marginally profitable.

The players for the most part are being paid well and frankly I do not care I the career is only 3.5 years. At minimum contract $450,000.00 per year, that is $1,575,000.00.

Where else can an almost illiterate guy that has squandered the chance at a college degree, that if he was not a great athlete would be flipping burgers or selling drugs untill being incarcerated.


These morons for the most part are broke 4 years after leaving the game.


Sorry I have zero pity for any of them, poor guys selling their bodies for mega bucks.
If we paid them more would they them only be broke at 5 or 7 years.

Lonestar
05-09-2011, 08:32 PM
:laugh:

Poor practice squad players only make $89k/yr.
REVOLT!
:lol:

Not so sure it is 89k. Think they go on the PS at the rate of pay thy signed their cntract for.

Could be wrong. But then that might be the reason they are cut and THEN added to the PS.

Even so very few college gradS make that kind of coin first year out of college. But then SMS of these guys did nothing in school but practice for the couple of years they had to sonthey could enter the draft.

BigSarge87
05-09-2011, 09:41 PM
This thread is a pants-down spanking! I love it! Get that 'oh the poor players' crap outta here!

The owners say they need the money to invest it in the future of the game. They've done a pretty damn good job building the league so far and I have no reason to question their motives now.

The vast majority of the players who truely are responsible for building the league into what it is now are retired. If anything, those are they guys who should get the money. The millionaire players now wouldn't have jack shit if the OWNERS wouldn't have been so successful in building their OWN businesses.

I too would rather see the money invested back into the league than see what the players are going to use it for.

Bullgator
05-09-2011, 11:20 PM
Let me tell you I dont give a damn about the owners. and I could care less about the players too. But IMO the owners are the ones who started all this shit.

I hope they do shut down. then that would leave the door open for someone else to swoop in and fill the vacuum. The players will still need jobs and the fans still love football. **** the NFL, I would be ok cheering for the Denver Mustangs.

But it will never happen.

PS its EXTREMELY naive to side with the owners.... or the players. they both dont give a shit about you or me. to defend the owners is laughable.

BroncoStud
05-10-2011, 12:24 AM
I just wanted to point out that the NFL is not free market. A salary cap is not free market, rookie salary caps are not free market. If the lockout were ordered lifted, with no rules in place, the NFL would be free market (and it would probably be a disaster).

Plus NFL teams are not struggling, the only team to release financial details (the Packers), still made a healthy profit last year even though they are a small market team, and in the middle of the worst recession in 50 years.

It's irrelevant how well the organizations are doing... What does that matter? It's their RIGHT to do well, it's their Constitutional right to do well. The players are employees, when employees refuse to work and the employer is following the laws set forth in the land, get new employees.

I'm all for bringing in scabs and letting the players sweat it out for a few years. When the NFLPA decertified they lost their right and privilege to do business as a collective with the NFL. Let some of these "slaves" see how many trips to Las Vegas they can make without getting paid for a few years.

WARHORSE
05-10-2011, 12:48 AM
Where the owners make their money, profits and fortune is the longevity as NFL owners over 30-50 year period. The only way the players make money is thru longevity over the risk of career ending injuries and long term guaranteed contracts.

Sure the owners are the boss of the franchise they own. However, its the player's talent and performance that allow the NFL owner the prestige and watching the profits and networth or the team(s) in the billions of dollars.

Until I see an owner come down out their temperature controlled Luxury Boxes and show case on the field the same talents and performances as the players in uniform; its the players that are more important than the owners.


Totally disagree.

Sure the life of their contract is the total sum of what they'll make, but in the end, they are a commodity. How valuable a commodity depends on their skill level and durability. They have a shot at making far more money playing a game in a short amount of time, than most americans make in a lifetime.

The risk of injury is THEIR OWN RISK. If you dont want the risk: HINT: Dont play.

They want the money though, right?

Wrong.

If these players dont want to play, there will be 10 players waiting to step on the field in their place.

The only thing thats going to stay here is the game itself.

Make the money the best they can, while they can, and save it to invest wisely.

Did they finish school and get a degree? Well they should have.:coffee:

WARHORSE
05-10-2011, 12:54 AM
BTW..........for every crybaby whining that the players take all the risk, and this and that..........how many of you would give up your jobs to play at the salaries these guys are making today?


Point blank every single member of this board would absolutely LOVE to be athletic enough, and gifted enough to play the game we all love through and through.....and add to that making millions, or even hundreds of thousands just to play????


SIGN ME UP NOW!!

atwater27
05-10-2011, 08:23 AM
Point blank every single member of this board would absolutely LOVE to be athletic enough, and gifted enough to play the game we all love through and through.....and add to that making millions, or even hundreds of thousands just to play????


SIGN ME UP NOW!!

LMAO... the same people that have no problem with "gifted" athletes being genetically lucky enough to be a professional grade athlete getting multimillion dollar deals are the same ones who villify rich folks, corporations or in this case owners who are "gifted" or genetically lucky enough to have either inherited or created wealth with their own actions and ideas. Classic hypocrisy.

BigSarge87
05-10-2011, 09:20 AM
Let me tell you I dont give a damn about the owners. and I could care less about the players too. But IMO the owners are the ones who started all this shit.

I hope they do shut down. then that would leave the door open for someone else to swoop in and fill the vacuum. The players will still need jobs and the fans still love football. **** the NFL, I would be ok cheering for the Denver Mustangs.

But it will never happen.

PS its EXTREMELY naive to side with the owners.... or the players. they both dont give a shit about you or me. to defend the owners is laughable.

I know they don't care about me, and on a personal level I don't care about them either. But I do think they care about the NFL and it's continued growth and success.

Just judging from their actions, the players (via their agents, the NFLPA, and it's lawyers whom they have chose to represent them) don't care about the future of the game as much as getting every dime they can while they can and making a name for themselves in the process. If they get their way (i.e. no free agency, no salary cap, no draft, etc.) it will eventually ruin the game for good, IMO.

I have four little Bronco fans that I want to watch football with for the next 40 years, I'll sacrifice a little bit now to help ensure that is going to happen.

That's why I think it's extremely short-sighted NOT to side with the owners.