CBA Thread

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by GhostofJimmyDean:
How are the players being greedy? The owners are the ones who opted out of the previous CBA. They're the ones that want a bigger piece of the pie. If the NFL season doesn't go on as scheduled it'll be thanks to the owners.

They opted out because they got shafted in the previous CBA. Their costs are getting outrageous. Teams aren't making very much money.

See major league baseball if you like the players unions running a sport. Outrageous salaries and only 5 or 6 competitive teams.

i agree that the players had the better deal in the last CBA, but I don't think the MLB analogy is apt, because there is no salary cap or revenue sharing there. Yes, the MLB union is strong, but those other things also contribute to that disparity, which is a problem the NFL doesn't have.

Originally posted by Rubberneck36:
The owners IMO. Player salaries, operating cost, etc are way to high. I don't blame the owners for trying to get a grip on them before it is out of control.

However, when the two parties are arguing over money, I think it is silly that they will not open up and show the books. They are only showing the packers because it is owned by the people. They refuse to show the other teams. In a way, it makes the players think there are billions out there for the taking. That is probably just not the case.

Everytime they have to give the players more, up salaries, etc they add it back in on ticket costs. Then we lose.

Go into work tomorrow. Tell your boss that you want them to open up the books. That you want to see profit/loss statements, bank account info, and all financials - and if you don't, then you'll quit.

See the reaction you get, and then see if you still think it's silly the owners won't open up the books to their EMPLOYEES.

Originally posted by RDB4216:

Originally posted by Rubberneck36:
The owners IMO. Player salaries, operating cost, etc are way to high. I don't blame the owners for trying to get a grip on them before it is out of control.

However, when the two parties are arguing over money, I think it is silly that they will not open up and show the books. They are only showing the packers because it is owned by the people. They refuse to show the other teams. In a way, it makes the players think there are billions out there for the taking. That is probably just not the case.

Everytime they have to give the players more, up salaries, etc they add it back in on ticket costs. Then we lose.

Go into work tomorrow. Tell your boss that you want them to open up the books. That you want to see profit/loss statements, bank account info, and all financials - and if you don't, then you'll quit.

See the reaction you get, and then see if you still think it's silly the owners won't open up the books to their EMPLOYEES.

you are SO RIGHT! Those situations are SO EXACTLY THE SAME! can't believe people don't understand that when its looking them right in their FACES!

Neither. They need to think about the fans, the real people who make the league.

Originally posted by Kolohe:
Neither. They need to think about the fans, the real people who make the league.

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
I dont understand why people bash the players instead of the agents? There is no doubt in my mind the greedy little agents are the guys causing all the problems. They get a percentage of the cut, therefore it is in their interest to get the biggest contract there is. They negotiate the deals. I'm pretty sure Haynesworth, Bradford, Cassel...extc aren't the guys throwing out the numbers. It's some greedy little b*****d with no physical talent of his own setting the bar. You want to reduce the salaries? Find a way to cut the agents off at the knees.

Who hires those agents again?

Exactly. These guys don't come into the league and get handed an agent that they have to have around to negotiate their deals. They hire those jackasses on their own. None of them NEED an agent, yet most of them have one. They hire agents so they can get the most money out of their teams. Greedy little bast*rd agents are hired by greedy little bast*rd players.

Owners need money to make the team better. Players come and go.

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
I dont understand why people bash the players instead of the agents? There is no doubt in my mind the greedy little agents are the guys causing all the problems. They get a percentage of the cut, therefore it is in their interest to get the biggest contract there is. They negotiate the deals. I'm pretty sure Haynesworth, Bradford, Cassel...extc aren't the guys throwing out the numbers. It's some greedy little b*****d with no physical talent of his own setting the bar. You want to reduce the salaries? Find a way to cut the agents off at the knees.

Who hires those agents again?

Exactly. These guys don't come into the league and get handed an agent that they have to have around to negotiate their deals. They hire those jackasses on their own. None of them NEED an agent, yet most of them have one. They hire agents so they can get the most money out of their teams. Greedy little bast*rd agents are hired by greedy little bast*rd players.

Agents are needed, dude. If players didn't have representation the owners would screw them with all kinds of small print.

Originally posted by Janitor:
DeMaurice Smith is an a*****e. If he wasn't in charge of the Union it might already be over fixed by now.

From Wikipedia

DeMaurice "De" Smith is the executive director of the National Football League Players' Association (NFLPA). Formerly a trial lawyer and litigation partner at Patton Boggs,[1] he was elected to his current position on March 16, 2009.

Smith was elected on the first ballot by the 32 representatives -- one for each NFL team. Despite his lack of familiarity with NFL players, he beat out three strong contenders: former NFLPA presidents Troy Vincent and Trace Armstrong, and sports attorney David Cornwell, who re-emerged as a candidate after receiving the necessary written support of three player reps.


Sounds like the guy doesn't care about the NFL and is more interested in being in charge. I would love to have had someone who has a history in or with the game. Someone who loves the game... not someone who is a big shot lawyer. The guys gets elected 2 years ago and already there is a problem. Troy Vincent or Trace Armstrong would have been much better. Why don't they jump in and talk some sense into everybody? Are they still round?

Originally posted by Gore_21:

Originally posted by Janitor:
DeMaurice Smith is an a*****e. If he wasn't in charge of the Union it might already be over fixed by now.

From Wikipedia

DeMaurice "De" Smith is the executive director of the National Football League Players' Association (NFLPA). Formerly a trial lawyer and litigation partner at Patton Boggs,[1] he was elected to his current position on March 16, 2009.

Smith was elected on the first ballot by the 32 representatives -- one for each NFL team. Despite his lack of familiarity with NFL players, he beat out three strong contenders: former NFLPA presidents Troy Vincent and Trace Armstrong, and sports attorney David Cornwell, who re-emerged as a candidate after receiving the necessary written support of three player reps.


Sounds like the guy doesn't care about the NFL and is more interested in being in charge. I would love to have had someone who has a history in or with the game. Someone who loves the game... not someone who is a big shot lawyer. The guys gets elected 2 years ago and already there is a problem. Troy Vincent or Trace Armstrong would have been much better. Why don't they jump in and talk some sense into everybody? Are they still round?

Before his NFLPA gig, he worked as a lobbyist for Patton/ Boggs, one of the super power Washington DC political lobbying companies. He has also been very active in political campaigns for Democrats from John Kerry to Barack Obama. The common denominator in political campaigns was that he allied himself with the candidate with the strongest union support. Consequently, when it came time to vote for the Exec Dir, he was a no brainer choice to lead the union side.

Originally posted by JayBee:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
I dont understand why people bash the players instead of the agents? There is no doubt in my mind the greedy little agents are the guys causing all the problems. They get a percentage of the cut, therefore it is in their interest to get the biggest contract there is. They negotiate the deals. I'm pretty sure Haynesworth, Bradford, Cassel...extc aren't the guys throwing out the numbers. It's some greedy little b*****d with no physical talent of his own setting the bar. You want to reduce the salaries? Find a way to cut the agents off at the knees.

Who hires those agents again?

Exactly. These guys don't come into the league and get handed an agent that they have to have around to negotiate their deals. They hire those jackasses on their own. None of them NEED an agent, yet most of them have one. They hire agents so they can get the most money out of their teams. Greedy little bast*rd agents are hired by greedy little bast*rd players.

Agents are needed, dude. If players didn't have representation the owners would screw them with all kinds of small print.

That's what a lawyer is for. They read the fine print and tell you what it means, but they don't negotiate your pay.

Both sides are being greedy:

-The owners for requesting another billion dollars off the top to "cover costs" but then refusing to open their books so everyone can see exactly what those costs are.

-The players for continuing to push the current deal that gives them 60% of total revenues. In a weird way I don't blame them for not budging on this, but it's still greed. Bottom line is the players are EMPLOYEES for their respective organizations. I dont know about you, but no one I know brings home a salary, a signing bonus, AND 60% of company revenue.

The owners are asking them to agree to 50% instead, and to me that's not unreasonable considering the MUTUAL benefit it provides.

If I had my way the following would occur:

-The NFLPA and owners agree to a 50/50 revenue split. To me that's about as fair as it gets (concerning the money).

-A rookie wage scale is introduced, with the contracts being structured according the position players are drafted in. Contracts can NOT be renegotiated until a three year period has passed. However, players can be traded at anytime.

-Free Agency continues on as/is. Players are signed and traded according to market value.

-The 18 game schedule gets scrapped. It adds no competitive benefit, and is only being proposed to generate more money for the league. Nobody's being fooled here. And aside from it being two totally unnecessary games, it will cause increased injuries and shorten careers.

Originally posted by baltien:


-The players for continuing to push the current deal that gives them 60% of total revenues. In a weird way I don't blame them for not budging on this, but it's still greed. Bottom line is the players are EMPLOYEES for their respective organizations. I dont know about you, but no one I know brings home a salary, a signing bonus, AND 60% of company revenue.
.

maybe i'm wrong, but i was under the impression that salaries and bonuses are taken from that 60% pool.

AdamSchefter

As @MarkMaske reported, Federal mediator George Cohen invited NFL and NFLPA to meet and to try to help broker deal. First meeting Friday.




Adam Schefter AdamSchefter

NFLPA statement: "We hope that this renewed effort, through mediation, will help the players and owners reach a successful deal."



suggestions, recommendations. But he has no authorithy to impose settlements. Still up to NFL/NFLPA.

Originally posted by valrod33:
AdamSchefter

As @MarkMaske reported, Federal mediator George Cohen invited NFL and NFLPA to meet and to try to help broker deal. First meeting Friday.




Adam Schefter AdamSchefter

NFLPA statement: "We hope that this renewed effort, through mediation, will help the players and owners reach a successful deal."



suggestions, recommendations. But he has no authorithy to impose settlements. Still up to NFL/NFLPA.

http://views.washingtonpost.com/theleague/nflnewsfeed/2011/02/nfl-union-agree-to-federal-mediation.html

I think it's a good sign . . . we'll see.