Sources: Talks trending 'backwards'

[Denver Native (Carol)]

HERE WE GO AGAIN - :tsk::tsk::tsk:


Optimism is waning after four consecutive days of negotiations between NFL owners and players and was described as trending "backwards," player sources told ESPN.

Player sources said owners have reneged on a simplified formula that would have given players 48 percent of all revenue.

Player sources reaffirmed a setback in talks occurred when owners last week went "retro" on the formula that will divide the estimated $9.3 billion in annual revenue. The players believed the two sides had reached an understanding on a simplified formula in which they would receive 48 percent of revenue, sources say owners reintroduced their previous formula by asking for $400 million to $500 million in expenses as credit off the top.

Players calculate that under the owners' proposal, it would leave them with approximately with a 45 percent take on revenue, an "unacceptable" amount that one player source said "sets us back to March 11 ... before the lockout."

A management source said the owners have not reneged on any revenue split, claiming "it's a negotiation, which is always subject to change"

A league source said the owners were more flexible Thursday afternoon on the revenue-split formula and maintained the theme "negotiations are negotiations."

Player sources contend the owners' terms changed when the two sides convened a day after owners met June 21 in Chicago. A source said the players went into Thursday's negotiating session with owners at the table, hoping to "get them back on track. They wouldn't move. It's disappointing."

rest of article - http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6721798

[TXBRONC]

HERE WE GO AGAIN - :tsk::tsk::tsk:



rest of article - http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6721798

I'm not to worried about this set back as long as they keep meeting.

[Canmore]

I'm not to worried about this set back as long as they keep meeting.

You are definitely more optimistic than I am. Lol.

[TXBRONC]

You are definitely more optimistic than I am. Lol.

There is a much better chance of getting things worked out if they continue to talk to each than then letting the lawyers get into legal pissing contest.

[Canmore]

There is a much better chance of getting things worked out if they continue to talk to each than then letting the lawyers get into legal pissing contest.

Lol. That's a given. I've never been optimistic for the season. I've changed my stance some. I think there is going to be some shortened version of the season. My wife says I'm crazy, (she's right) it's a multi billion dollar business and they are not going to screw it up. I hope she is the right one.

[TXBRONC]

Lol. That's a given. I've never been optimistic for the season. I've changed my stance some. I think there is going to be some shortened version of the season. My wife says I'm crazy, (she's right) it's a multi billion dollar business and they are not going to screw it up. I hope she is the right one.

Wives are usually right just ask them. :D

[Canmore]

Wives are usually right just ask them. :D

There you have it. I see the error in my ways. :laugh:

[Lonestar]

Lol. That's a given. I've never been optimistic for the season. I've changed my stance some. I think there is going to be some shortened version of the season. My wife says I'm crazy, (she's right) it's a multi billion dollar business and they are not going to screw it up. I hope she is the right one.

but you see the owners get paid by the networks whether the games are played or not. they have zip to lose.

the players will buckle after losing one or maybe two game day checks.. till the regular season starts or should start the players have really lost nothing since they are paid peanuts for TC and OTAs.

Once the season should start then they have lost money.. whereas the owners still get paid..

[TXBRONC]

but you see the owners get paid by the networks whether the games are played or not. they have zip to lose.

the players will buckle after losing one or maybe two game day checks.. till the regular season starts or should start the players have really lost nothing since they are paid peanuts for TC and OTAs.

Once the season should start then they have lost money.. whereas the owners still get paid..

No they don't that money is frozen.

[Canmore]

but you see the owners get paid by the networks whether the games are played or not. they have zip to lose.

the players will buckle after losing one or maybe two game day checks.. till the regular season starts or should start the players have really lost nothing since they are paid peanuts for TC and OTAs.

Once the season should start then they have lost money.. whereas the owners still get paid..

When this whole thing started, I felt when it came to dividing the revenue, both sides had drawn a line in the sand and weren't going to budge. Well months later, Carol's article says the owners haven't moved. That's not much real progress. Will we see the players buckle when they start missing game checks? Yes, but I think it is going to take a while and put the season in jeopardy or at least a sizable portion of it.

[Lonestar]

When this whole thing started, I felt when it came to dividing the revenue, both sides had drawn a line in the sand and weren't going to budge. Well months later, Carol's article says the owners haven't moved. That's not much real progress. Will we see the players buckle when they start missing game checks? Yes, but I think it is going to take a while and put the season in jeopardy or at least a sizable portion of it.

that be the truth..

the player miss 1/16 of their salary and the bills come due the settlement will be done real fast no way it gets past 1/8 of their yearly money.. that is week two for those that attended public schools..:laugh::laugh::laugh:

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

"It's a negotiation, which is subject to change." What a load of bull...call it what you want, I call it unethical.

[Canmore]

that be the truth..

the player miss 1/16 of their salary and the bills come due the settlement will be done real fast no way it gets past 1/8 of their yearly money.. that is week two for those that attended public schools..:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Let's say for sake of arguement that we settle after week 2. When could you realistically start a season. Free agency, rookie signings, training camp, preseason and supposedly the Superbowl is set in stone. Do you have a eight game season? ???

[Lonestar]

"It's a negotiation, which is subject to change." What a load of bull...call it what you want, I call it unethical.

Until you have it on paper and signed by both parties it is subject to change. Then it is voted on by the players.

[Lonestar]

Let's say for sake of arguement that we settle after week 2. When could you realistically start a season. Free agency, rookie signings, training camp, preseason and supposedly the Superbowl is set in stone. Do you have a eight game season? ???

No idea. That would really mean the players get half their yearly money. Not sure that it will take that long to ramp up.

But i'd guess more like ten wit alot of stuff condensed into a two week period. A longer cut down period of rookies and FA. Or maybe just a larger roster for the year

But this will be settled before the third regular season game.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Until you have it on paper and signed by both parties it is subject to change. Then it is voted on by the players.

I understand that....but that's not really what I was referring to.

[Ravage!!!]

but you see the owners get paid by the networks whether the games are played or not. they have zip to lose.



This has been shown to be wrong on several occasions.

TV contracts you are referring to only applies to DirectTV's NFL sunday ticket, which represents only 1 billion dollars of an 8 billion dollar industry. The other TV contracts all run based upon air time. If there are No Games, there is NO AIR Time. Air-time is 1/8th of the industry, which roughly translates to around 32 million per team where the average yearly rate of stadium debt and maintenance runs around 120 million (and the average stadium debt in total is 250 million per team).

120 million / 16 games is 7,500,000 per week the owners would be losing from TV contracts that you keep saying they are being supported on. Unless you think that -7,500,000 per week is "zip to lose."

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Unless this ruling has been overturned, it appears there will be no money paid to the owners, if there is no football:


Did a federal judge in Minnesota just save the 2011 National Football League season?

U.S. District Judge David Doty on Tuesday overturned an earlier ruling and said the league's TV contracts with CBS, NBC, ESPN, Fox and DirecTV—which allowed the NFL owners to still be paid a combined $4 billion in rights fees even if there were no NFL games next season—violated the NFL's collective bargaining agreement with the NFL Players Association.

rest of article - http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20110302/FREE/110309958

[Denver Native (Carol)]

MINNEAPOLIS -- A day after NFL owners and players negotiated for nearly 16 hours, the two sides opted for a much briefer gathering on Friday, with plans to reconvene meetings next week.

Both parties held conference calls Friday morning with their constituencies. The sessions will resume with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith and their staffs meeting Tuesday and Wednesday in New York. Players and owners will then join the meetings Thursday and Friday.

"We'll continue to meet next week and the goal is to get a deal done," Smith said as he exited Friday.

The two sides will build off an intriguing week of talks, which seemed to be in peril at one point Thursday before the parties negotiated for nearly nine more hours.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8208dddb/article/nfl-nflpa-schedule-talks-in-ny-after-brief-friday-meeting?module=HP_headlines

[NightTerror218]

Unless this ruling has been overturned, it appears there will be no money paid to the owners, if there is no football:



rest of article - http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20110302/FREE/110309958


That is the TV money correct?

[LordTrychon]

That is the TV money correct?

Yeah. That's the money that the owners secured to support them in the event of a lockout/strike that went into the season.

[Lonestar]

That is the TV money correct?

Yes it is and IIRC Doty's decision was overturned. One of the reAsons the owners have the upper hand as as speak.

[Canmore]

Yes it is and IIRC Doty's decision was overturned. One of the reAsons the owners have the upper hand as as speak.

Does that mean that the owners get paid even if there are no games? I thought the money was to be tied up and not paid to them if the players didn't play.

[LordTrychon]

Yes it is and IIRC Doty's decision was overturned. One of the reAsons the owners have the upper hand as as speak.

I don't remember that at all.

Last I remembered hearing on it was that the judgement was being delayed while the Judge hoped that the two sides would come to an agreement without having to come to a final ruling on it. That was right before heavy negotiations began.

[Canmore]

I don't remember that at all.

Last I remembered hearing on it was that the judgement was being delayed while the Judge hoped that the two sides would come to an agreement without having to come to a final ruling on it. That was right before heavy negotiations began.

That's my memory. The TV money is tied up for the moment.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

MINNEAPOLIS -- At 4 p.m. on Thursday, the NFLPA conducted a conference call with its player reps and executive committee members that painted a grim picture as the labor situation made a turn for the worse.

Then, everything changed.

As it turned out, the call, made after seven hours of negotiations at a downtown Minneapolis law firm, came less than halfway through the day's talks. And after those talks finished just before 1 a.m. CT, and another set was staged on Friday morning, a different story was emerging.

The owners and players still have much work to do, but major progress was made to fix the revenue split, the overriding issue in the entire labor battle, on Thursday night and Friday morning. In fact, one source said that if smaller pieces connected to it don't shift the numbers too much, it "might not even being a stumbling block going forward."

In addition, the parties took strides to work out disagreements over how to define "all revenue" in the model they plan to use, and also discarded some terms in the deal that the other side found unacceptable.

So one set of critical talks now gives way to another. The legal teams for each side will meet in New York on Tuesday and Wednesday, with players and owners returning to the table of Thursday and Friday. The format for the week follows the one set for this week's Minneapolis talks.

NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith said on his way out, "We'll continue to meet next week, and our goal is to get a deal done." NFL general counsel Jeff Pash, again citing the gag order on the parties on details, simply said, "We'll be back at it again next week."

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82092fd4/article/sides-make-progress-on-revenue-split-with-ny-talks-on-tap?module=HP_headlines

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Does anyone think that it is positive that the talks will resume in NY - headquarters of the NFL - where HOPEFULLY a positive announcement will be made shortly?

[Tned]

Does anyone think that it is positive that the talks will resume in NY - headquarters of the NFL - where HOPEFULLY a positive announcement will be made shortly?

Thanks for keeping the updates flowing. I haven't had time to dig around much for news, so knowing I'm always going to get the latest here is handy.

I would like to think it's a good sign, but since they have been bouncing all over, I'm not sure it means anything. I think they've met in three or four different places since the 'secret' meetings started a few weeks back.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Thanks for keeping the updates flowing. I haven't had time to dig around much for news, so knowing I'm always going to get the latest here is handy.

I would like to think it's a good sign, but since they have been bouncing all over, I'm not sure it means anything. I think they've met in three or four different places since the 'secret' meetings started a few weeks back.

STOP raining on my parade :mad::lol:

[Tned]

STOP raining on my parade :mad::lol:

On the other hand, since they are almost at zero hour, when they need it signed to have training camps and the full pre-season, maybe its a REAL good sign!! :D

[Denver Native (Carol)]

on the other hand, since they are almost at zero hour, when they need it signed to have training camps and the full pre-season, maybe its a real good sign!! :d

much better ;)

[Denver Native (Carol)]

more from article I posted earlier:


U.S. Magistrate Judge Arthur Boylan proved a pivotal figure when things were at their darkest Thursday. Boylan was able to rein the parties in, narrow their focus to what was important on the revenue split, and forge a very productive evening.

This was after issues that arose last week in Massachusetts (over the rookie salary system) and Monday (over what the players perceived as a deception play by owners on the revenue system) resurfaced and again proved explosive, with players and owners re-entering the room after legal teams handled the earlier part of the week.

Things went so well Thursday that Boylan implored the sides to keep going past 1 a.m. The players and owners convinced the judge -- who ran court-ordered mediation in April and May, but has no binding power in these talks -- that they were spent, but the positive momentum continued into Friday morning.

And realistic hope remains that the league will be able to stage the preseason in its natural form, without the cancellation of any games, which would save hundreds of millions of dollars. Internal deadlines to have a deal done in order to save the preseason sit around July 15, and part of the ratcheted-up sense of urgency is the acknowledgement by both sides that a settlement will be exponentially tougher to reach if significant revenue is subtracted from the equation.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82092fd4/article/sides-make-progress-on-revenue-split-with-ny-talks-on-tap?module=HP_headlines

[TXBRONC]

That is the TV money correct?

Yep.

[TXBRONC]

Yes it is and IIRC Doty's decision was overturned. One of the reAsons the owners have the upper hand as as speak.

No it was not overturned. Doty's decision that the owner's couldn't lock out players was overturned. The $4 billion that owners were going to get even if lock out continued into the regular season is still frozen as we speak.

[TXBRONC]

I don't remember that at all.

Last I remembered hearing on it was that the judgement was being delayed while the Judge hoped that the two sides would come to an agreement without having to come to a final ruling on it. That was right before heavy negotiations began.

The reason you don't remember it is because that decision wasn't overturned. What was overturned was Doty's decision that owner's could not lockout the players. That was right after day one of the draft.

[Canmore]

The reason you don't remember it is because that decision wasn't overturned. What was overturned was Doty's decision that owner's could not lockout the players. That was right after day one of the draft.

That's what my research found. The TV money is frozen and the lockout continues to run. Wonderful.

[TXBRONC]

That's what my research found. The TV money is frozen and the lockout continues to run. Wonderful.

I don't think either side wants wait to find out what to wait and find out if the courts give them clear distinct leverage in negotiations. To date the courts given them mixed bag results.

[Canmore]

I don't think either side wants wait to find out what to wait and find out if the courts give them clear distinct leverage in negotiations. To date the courts given them mixed bag results.

I don't know. There are some fans that think the owners are stalling because they think the makeup of the Eighth Circuit Court is in their favor, two Republican appointees to just one Democrat. Makes me wonder.

[Lonestar]

That's what my research found. The TV money is frozen and the lockout continues to run. Wonderful.

It is a matter of time that the courts will overturn the "freeze" not to worry.

the upper court reversed the BIASED ruling he made on the lockout. No reason to think the other will not be overturned .When it starts to impact the owners they will appeal it also.

SO far no games have been missed..

[Lonestar]

I don't know. There are some fans that think the owners are stalling because they think the makeup of the Eighth Circuit Court is in their favor, two Republican appointees to just one Democrat. Makes me wonder.

Opposed to the Democrat Doty and the other judge the players shopped for..

nothing to wonder about it is a matter of time that the courts will rule in favor for the NFL.. as it is the correct way to rule once you take the politics out of it..

[TXBRONC]

Opposed to the Democrat Doty and the other judge the players shopped for..

nothing to wonder about it is a matter of time that the courts will rule in favor for the NFL.. as it is the correct way to rule once you take the politics out of it..

Doubt it and on it's not correct way to rule once you take the politics out of it. The owners at the time of the agreement were negotiating the television contract on behalf of themselves and their partner the NFLPA. They didn't act in good faith. All this has already been reported on I'm surprised you didn't know.

[TXBRONC]

I don't know. There are some fans that think the owners are stalling because they think the makeup of the Eighth Circuit Court is in their favor, two Republican appointees to just one Democrat. Makes me wonder.

Didn't the owners already try to get ruling on the t.v. revenue overturned and failed?

[Canmore]

Didn't the owners already try to get ruling on the t.v. revenue overturned and failed?

I thought that was still up in the air but I was out of the loop a good portion of last week. Still if something that big had happened, I think we would all remember it.

[TXBRONC]

I thought that was still up in the air but I was out of the loop a good portion of last week. Still if something that big had happened, I think we would all remember it.

Seems logical to me.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

This article is dated March 2nd - there may be something dated after this


Several hours ago, a Federal judge said that the NFL owners will not have access to the NFL’s television revenue money in the event of a lockout. Previously, it was publicly reported that the owners anticipated that under lockout conditions, they would have the ability to access the TV revenues collected from ESPN, CBS, FOX and NBC. These revenues total $4 billion.

Until this point, the idea was that the owner’s were still going to get paid off this pool of television money. Assuming that believe was real, this is a huge blow to the owners and a gigantic gain for the players.

http://www.obsessedwithsports.com/2011/03/02/federal-judge-sides-with-nfl-union-in-tv-revenue-dispute/

[Canmore]

This article is dated March 2nd - there may be something dated after this



http://www.obsessedwithsports.com/2011/03/02/federal-judge-sides-with-nfl-union-in-tv-revenue-dispute/

Everything I've read today shows this as where the money is. The TV revenue is tied up. There seems to be some disagreement as to whether or not this includes DirecTV's Sunday Ticket package. I've seen it both included and not listed. I can't find anything on the state of appeal.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

from updated article:


NFL spokesman Greg Aiello made it clear Saturday that both sides plan to work through the holiday weekend.

"Are the NFL-NFLPA negotiators 'taking the weekend off?' Most definitely not," he tweeted. "Lawyers are drafting language for potential agreement, sharing it with PA. All kinds of phone, email exchanges going on. Work continues."

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82092fd4/article/sides-make-progress-on-revenue-split-with-ny-talks-on-tap?module=HP_headlines

[Lonestar]

I thought that was still up in the air but I was out of the loop a good portion of last week. Still if something that big had happened, I think we would all remember it.

The appeals court did not reverse the money part but no doubt will when it becomes Irreparable harm to the owners. As of yet they have not lost any money but will when the season starts. That should be looked at when the season starts.

Doty is in the players pocket and will/have given them false hope. But the law is cleary behind the owners onthis.

[Lonestar]

Let's hope the players will get their heads out o their rectums and get back to work. What they do not get there is only so much money and if the owners do nit get a fair return on investment they have zero reason to stay in business except for the couple of ego owners in WAS and Dallas.

Most of the owners have finite resources.

[Canmore]

Let's hope the players will get their heads out o their rectums and get back to work. What they do not get there is only so much money and if the owners do nit get a fair return on investment they have zero reason to stay in business except for the couple of ego owners in WAS and Dallas.

Most of the owners have finite resources.

If the Green Bay books are indicative of the state of return on a billion dollar enterprise, it is no wonder the owners want more money. What was Green Bay suppose to make this year, 5 million or was it 12 million? That's iirc. Whatever it was it was peanuts for a team worth close to a billion dollars.

[Lonestar]

If the Green Bay books are indicative of the state of return on a billion dollar enterprise, it is no wonder the owners want more money. What was Green Bay suppose to make this year, 5 million or was it 12 million? That's iirc. Whatever it was it was peanuts for a team worth close to a billion dollars.

Hell an owner with that kind of money can get a better return parking it in muni bonds that are mostly tax free. And probably safer also.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

If the Green Bay books are indicative of the state of return on a billion dollar enterprise, it is no wonder the owners want more money. What was Green Bay suppose to make this year, 5 million or was it 12 million? That's iirc. Whatever it was it was peanuts for a team worth close to a billion dollars.

from article:


The Packers earn much less than they did four years ago. Their operating profit fell 71 percent from $34.2 million in the year ended March 31, 2007 (which coincides with the start of the current collective-bargaining agreement), to $9.8 million in the year ended last March 31. Revenue rose 18 percent in that period to $257.9 million.

The primary reason for the sharply reduced profit was player costs (salaries and benefits), which swelled in those years to $160.8 million from $110.7 million.

“When your revenue goes up in a recessionary period, your profits should go up, but they diverge here and that’s attributable to higher player costs and team expenses,” said Marc Ganis, a sports industry consultant.

Murphy said, “Our player costs are growing at twice the rate our revenue is growing.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/28/sports/football/28packers.html

[Canmore]

Thanks Carol. I couldn't find the article and was quoting from memory. I don't like to think I side with either the owners or the players, there both greedy but the business models I've seen for Green Bay if indicative of the league or at least the smaller market teams looks unsustainable.

[Lonestar]

Thanks Carol your a wizard at finding those gems.

The players would have eaten the golden egg laying goose if the owners had not opted out last year. 09 IIRC.

Just have to have money to pay the share holders or owners and in some cases like Pat his share of loan/ mortgage on the stadium that he agreed to.

To keep the team in DEN.

[horsepig]

Thanks Carol. I couldn't find the article and was quoting from memory. I don't like to think I side with either the owners or the players, there both greedy but the business models I've seen for Green Bay if indicative of the league or at least the smaller market teams looks unsustainable.

Don't forget to add in the annual appreciation of the franchise value.

You might only show a small per/$ gain in daily revenues. Lets takew a pretty long and hard look at original investment $ vs current market value.

If the Packers happened to come up for sale' what would be a realistic asking price?

I'm guessing, one of the NFL's most storied franchises', with basically an East coast fanbase; 1.5 Billion, $, I mean.

[hamrob]

"It's a negotiation, which is subject to change." What a load of bull...call it what you want, I call it unethical.That's hillarious! Unethical? What's ethical about an "employee" telling their boss (the owner), you have to pay me more or I'll shut down your business?

If the player doesn't like what the pay scale is for the NFL....then take your butt to Canada! I hope the owners stay strong. Players get paid plenty and then some. Look at what has happened to the NBA. There is no way I would cave if I were an owner.

[T.K.O.]

as far as financial leverage,i think with very few exeptions, the players are not 1 paycheck (or even a years worth) away from the poorhouse.
if anything the owners have huge responsibility to other business partners,businesses etc...
most players probably have their houses paid for and enough money invested and in the bank to live pretty comfortably for a long while.
so the theory that they will cave as soon as they miss one or 2 checks is probably not accurate.
i would say there is equal pressure financially on both sides.
and trust me,if the owners do get paid by the networks for no games....theplayers and a boatload full of lawyers will either get their share or tie that money up in court for a loooooooooooong time:salute:

[Lonestar]

Don't forget to add in the annual appreciation of the franchise value.

You might only show a small per/$ gain in daily revenues. Lets takew a pretty long and hard look at original investment $ vs current market value.

If the Packers happened to come up for sale' what would be a realistic asking price?

I'm guessing, one of the NFL's most storied franchises', with basically an East coast fanbase; 1.5 Billion, $, I mean.

You do realize that in order to make that money that it has to be sold.

Dix you ever think that had they just put that original
Money in the bank that they just might have made more money on it than gambling on an NFL franchise.

It is obvious to me that the vast majority on here have never ventured into business for yourselves and do not have a clue on the risks these guys took way back when they plunked down hard cash to buy a dream.

Do you not think that they deserve a just return on investment. Or is it just they are rich and their money should be shared by all.

Someone mentioned that the owners have an investment in thus but the players only play in it. They can be replaced the owners can't be easily replaced without the threat of moving the clubs.

[Canmore]

Don't forget to add in the annual appreciation of the franchise value.

You might only show a small per/$ gain in daily revenues. Lets takew a pretty long and hard look at original investment $ vs current market value.

If the Packers happened to come up for sale' what would be a realistic asking price?

I'm guessing, one of the NFL's most storied franchises', with basically an East coast fanbase; 1.5 Billion, $, I mean.

In 2007 Forbes valued The Packers at $927 Million. Couldn't find anything more recent. Nfl franchises are in the billion neighborhood.

[Lonestar]

as far as financial leverage,i think with very few exeptions, the players are not 1 paycheck (or even a years worth) away from the poorhouse.
if anything the owners have huge responsibility to other business partners,businesses etc...
most players probably have their houses paid for and enough money invested and in the bank to live pretty comfortably for a long while.
so the theory that they will cave as soon as they miss one or 2 checks is probably not accurate.
i would say there is equal pressure financially on both sides.
and trust me,if the owners do get paid by the networks for no games....theplayers and a boatload full of lawyers will either get their share or tie that money up in court for a loooooooooooong time:salute: you are so wrong none or atleast very few pay cash for a house they all have mortgages just like you and I most of them are living large with expensive cars, clothes and jewelry

Not to mention what they have spent on their mothers houses cars clothes and things.

Then there is all of the buddies from the hood.

The vast majority of these morons are living check to check. And 60% are in bankruptcy 2'years after they quit playing.

So missing 1/16 of their yearly salary will get their attention and 1/8 will cripple most of them.

Plus we are also talking about missing ota money as well as workout bonus none of them hit we could be talking 100k or more for some of the "stars".

[Benetto]

Most of these NFLPA reps cry about post career benefits and retired players..Why not take that extra money and inject it into the retired players who paved the way for you showoff's who make 20-30 times more than they did. Affordable housing, Medical benefits, jobs, etc for retired players sounds a lot better than extra jewelry or yachts that costs more than what honest, hard working Americans make in 5 years.


Sorry had to vent a little about this....It's a sensitive subject for me how these clowns spend their money and flaunt like they own everyone and everything. And expect more in return for nothing. :coffee:

[Lonestar]

Good post Benetto.

When I was in HS the schools HC was a bronco. Had to have a second job to make ends meet.

When Elway first signed with the broncos he got a 7mil dollar contract not Per year but for 5-6 years iirc. He was the highest paid guy in the league back in 1983.

Most of the old timers played for one hell of a lot less. And some can't get health insurance because they Are pre-existing injuries.

Your correct it is shameful the way the newbies treat them.

[Lonestar]

Let me add the only thing these morons accomplish is stimulating the economy with their wasteful spending.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Most of these NFLPA reps cry about post career benefits and retired players..Why not take that extra money and inject it into the retired players who paved the way for you showoff's who make 20-30 times more than they did. Affordable housing, Medical benefits, jobs, etc for retired players sounds a lot better than extra jewelry or yachts that costs more than what honest, hard working Americans make in 5 years.


Sorry had to vent a little about this....It's a sensitive subject for me how these clowns spend their money and flaunt like they own everyone and everything. And expect more in return for nothing. :coffee:


SYRACUSE, N.Y. -- Hall of Fame running back Floyd Little expressed confidence Thursday that the NFL lockout won't impact the season, claiming "someone has to be an absolute idiot to walk away" from $9 billion in annual revenue, but he's concerned about whether a new labor agreement will provide enough financial support for retired players with health issues.

The matter is dear to Little, 68, a close friend of Hall of Famer John Mackey, who suffers from acute dementia and lives in a nursing home in the Baltimore area. Little -- introduced Thursday at his alma mater as Syracuse's new special assistant to the athletic director -- said the first person he met on campus nearly 50 years ago was Mackey, then a star tight end at Syracuse.

The charismatic Little lowered his voice to a whisper as he talked about Mackey. He keeps in touch with Mackey's wife, Sylvia, always checking on his old friend.

"John is in pretty bad shape," Little said. "I watched John here when they retired his jersey [in 2007]. He wasn't really himself. He lost a tooth. I asked Sylvia, 'What happened?' She said he's pulling his own teeth out. That's sad. For such a great player to end up in a nursing home, that's sad."

After initially refusing to pay for Mackey's health care, the league and players' association created the "88 Plan," named after Mackey's number. It provides $88,000 per year for assisted-living care.

Little hopes a new collective bargaining agreement will include more assistance for the ailing, older players.

rest of article - http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nfl/news/story?id=6594179

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Great article on Floyd Little, before his HOF selection. From article:


Little, who played for the Broncos from 1967-75, is from an NFL era in which pride mattered more than money. Why? Well, to tell the truth, nobody got filthy rich. As the No. 6 pick in the draft's opening round, Little's signing bonus with Denver was $10,000. And he grossed $78,000 in salary, but only if you combine all the paychecks from his first three seasons in the league.

"I used to cash my checks from the Broncos at 7-11. Got two Slurpees and the rest in twenties," said Little, laughing at the way things were back when the Fu Manchu of quarterback Joe Namath and coach Tom Landry 's fedora dominated the game's look.

"But you know what ticks me off? People try to tell me now that an annual salary of $25,000 was a lot of money 30 years ago. Well, (Seahawks running back) Shaun Alexander , a guy who couldn't carry my jock strap, signed a $62 million contract in 2006. Even with inflation, you know the relevancy between $25,000 and $62 million? None. There is no relevancy."

full article - http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_14303460

[Canmore]

Frome the article and Floyd Little


The life expectancy for an NFL player is 51 to 53 years. The quality of life, after that, isn't great if you make it beyond that.

This was an eye opener to me. Wow

[Lonestar]

Frome the article and Floyd Little



This was an eye opener to me. Wow

Got to remember they live a violent life and are NOW well compensated for being a gladiator on Sunday's.

They chose the life and life style hard to feel sorry for them.

No one held a gun to their heads, plus the alternative for most of the guys would be flipping burgers, running drugs , pimping or flat doing the drugs and being in jail most if their adult life.

Some of the players will still wind up doing the above things after they have burned through their millions.

Again I have little symphany for their choices.

[atwater27]

Most of these NFLPA reps cry about post career benefits and retired players..Why not take that extra money and inject it into the retired players who paved the way for you showoff's who make 20-30 times more than they did. Affordable housing, Medical benefits, jobs, etc for retired players sounds a lot better than extra jewelry or yachts that costs more than what honest, hard working Americans make in 5 years.


Sorry had to vent a little about this....It's a sensitive subject for me how these clowns spend their money and flaunt like they own everyone and everything. And expect more in return for nothing. :coffee:

That's the biggest hypocrisy of the NFLPA. They don't give a leap about the guys that built the game. They are all about themselves and themselves only.

[TXBRONC]

In 2007 Forbes valued The Packers at $927 Million. Couldn't find anything more recent. Nfl franchises are in the billion neighborhood.

I don't know if this has anything to do with it but Green Bay is one of the smallest if not the smallest market in the NFL. Also IIRC they're publicly owned.

[Canmore]

I don't know if this has anything to do with it but Green Bay is one of the smallest if not the smallest market in the NFL. Also IIRC they're publicly owned.

I found something more recent, dated 08/25/10 Forbes Magazine Valuations for NFL Franchises.

1 Dallas Cowboys 1.805 Billion
2 Washington Redskins 1.550 Billion
3 New England Patriots 1.367 Billion
10 Denver Broncos 1.049 Billion
14 Green Bay Packers 1.018 Billion
20 Kansas City Chiefs 965 Million
24 San Diego Chargers 907 Million
31 Oakland Raiders 758 Million
32 Jacksonville Jaguars 725 Million

Rest at

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/30/football-valuations-10_NFL-Team-Valuations_Rank.html