Who is most at fault for this CBA mess?

Originally posted by blizzuntz:

Originally posted by global_nomad:

Originally posted by blizzuntz:

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by Paul_Hofer:

Originally posted by chico49erfan:

Without the owners there would be no such product. This is big business. Sorry players, but you need to accept that.

It is in this only that fans side with the Yorks.

It's fascinating to me to see this thread play out the dichotomy of labor vs. management we see in the world at large. One side believes in the divine right of kings and that people should know their place in the natural order of things while the other side believes in a democratic world where rights belong to everyone equally. The former sees the owners as the product while the latter sees the players as at least as important.

Democratic? I think you defined socialism. Also a king was born into his power and it can only be taken away by force. The original owners of the NFL built the product up with their own money and sweat. Current owners may have inherited their money or earned it themselves, irregardless that, own NFL franchises, which are a business. What I find interesting is the players getting a defined % of the revenue, and a lot of people are ok with that acting like the players are the only employees paid by the team. If the players are more important than the owners let them all quit and form their own league. Most of them aren't even of average intelligence and couldn't run a hot dog cart* if left to their own devices. The players need the owners more than the owners need them. Jerry Jones would find other business ventures to occupy his time and money and I am sure would do well. What would a guy like Chris Johnson of the Titans do with out the NFL? Jail would be my guess, I am sure he isn't smart enough to do something you could teach an 8 year old.

* No offense to anyone who owns a hot dog cart, in the right location I have heard you can make $150,000 a year. Just a reference to a business that isn't real hard to run.

The owners need TV $$$ and people watch the games for the players.

is it true the owners negotiated with networks that they will get paid $4 billion this year even if this season is canceled?

from my understanding, the owners put this $$ aside to afford a lockout. I believe that isnt allowed bc it is an unfair leverage for negotiations.

What? So it is unfair because the players can't save any money for a rainy day?

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by DesiDez:
Owners.

1) they opted out of the current CBA
2) They planned the lockout all along...look at the TV contracts they tried to negotiate if there would be no football.

But in reality I don't blame the owners for asking for more money, just like the don't mind the salaries that players make. This is America. If you haven't noticed, there are lot of rich people who make a lot of money and they aren't humanitarians, they aren't curing cancer, they're not doctors, or social workers, etc...No one complains about how much Oprah makes, or Rush Limbaugh, or Warren Buffet, or actors/actresses. So I don't care how much Arod, Tiger Woods, Kobe, etc make. If you don't like how much athletes make, then don't watch them play sports.

Personally, I don't like the socialism in the NFL. I'd rather it be run on a purely free market model like the EPL. No salary cap, no draft (free to choose your employer and not rewarding the crappy teams with high draft picks), no age restriction, no revenue sharing. Let the market determine your value. Yes, the big market teams/deep pocket owners will dominate sports but so what? Who said life is supposed to fair?

Christ, Gandhi, Mother Teresa...

Think about what you said. Eddie D is gone, no cap + Yorks = 0-16 every year.

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by blizzuntz:

Originally posted by global_nomad:

Originally posted by blizzuntz:

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by Paul_Hofer:

Originally posted by chico49erfan:

Without the owners there would be no such product. This is big business. Sorry players, but you need to accept that.

It is in this only that fans side with the Yorks.

It's fascinating to me to see this thread play out the dichotomy of labor vs. management we see in the world at large. One side believes in the divine right of kings and that people should know their place in the natural order of things while the other side believes in a democratic world where rights belong to everyone equally. The former sees the owners as the product while the latter sees the players as at least as important.

Democratic? I think you defined socialism. Also a king was born into his power and it can only be taken away by force. The original owners of the NFL built the product up with their own money and sweat. Current owners may have inherited their money or earned it themselves, irregardless that, own NFL franchises, which are a business. What I find interesting is the players getting a defined % of the revenue, and a lot of people are ok with that acting like the players are the only employees paid by the team. If the players are more important than the owners let them all quit and form their own league. Most of them aren't even of average intelligence and couldn't run a hot dog cart* if left to their own devices. The players need the owners more than the owners need them. Jerry Jones would find other business ventures to occupy his time and money and I am sure would do well. What would a guy like Chris Johnson of the Titans do with out the NFL? Jail would be my guess, I am sure he isn't smart enough to do something you could teach an 8 year old.

* No offense to anyone who owns a hot dog cart, in the right location I have heard you can make $150,000 a year. Just a reference to a business that isn't real hard to run.

The owners need TV $$$ and people watch the games for the players.

is it true the owners negotiated with networks that they will get paid $4 billion this year even if this season is canceled?

from my understanding, the owners put this $$ aside to afford a lockout. I believe that isnt allowed bc it is an unfair leverage for negotiations.

What? So it is unfair because the players can't save any money for a rainy day?

It's unfair because the judge read the contract that states a shared revenue and thus a war chest funded by the new TV $$ (shared revenue) violates the contract. The deal with TV was made before the current CBA ran out. I'm not crying for either side but the owners thought they had an ace up their sleeves and it turned out not to be so. The players won that round and may be overplaying their hand now, time will tell.

[ Edited by dtg_9er on Mar 13, 2011 at 17:50:18 ]

Originally posted by mike:

Originally posted by DesiDez:

Originally posted by mike:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by DesiDez:
Owners.

1) they opted out of the current CBA
2) They planned the lockout all along...look at the TV contracts they tried to negotiate if there would be no football.

But in reality I don't blame the owners for asking for more money, just like the don't mind the salaries that players make. This is America. If you haven't noticed, there are lot of rich people who make a lot of money and they aren't humanitarians, they aren't curing cancer, they're not doctors, or social workers, etc...No one complains about how much Oprah makes, or Rush Limbaugh, or Warren Buffet, or actors/actresses. So I don't care how much Arod, Tiger Woods, Kobe, etc make. If you don't like how much athletes make, then don't watch them play sports.

Personally, I don't like the socialism in the NFL. I'd rather it be run on a purely free market model like the EPL. No salary cap, no draft (free to choose your employer and not rewarding the crappy teams with high draft picks), no age restriction, no revenue sharing. Let the market determine your value. Yes, the big market teams/deep pocket owners will dominate sports but so what? Who said life is supposed to fair?

Christ, Gandhi, Mother Teresa...

Fair or not, small market teams still need to sell tickets and they won't if they know their team is at a significant disadvantage with no hope of improvement.

Yeah lets just let the patriots draft peterson, packers can have AJ green(driver's getting kinda old), while panthers,broncos and bills continue to be at the bottom of the league every single year. Sounds like a fun league to watch right?

The English Premier League doesn't seem to mind, neither do its fans judging from its popularity

Unless it's the world cup no one gives a rats ass about that league in any country other than England.

LOL...have you ever been to Asia or Europe? People are nuts about EPL and Champions League. Don't be silly.

But, yes - I disagree that NFL should have the same structure as EPL.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by blizzuntz:

Originally posted by global_nomad:

Originally posted by blizzuntz:

Originally posted by BobS:

Originally posted by Paul_Hofer:

Originally posted by chico49erfan:

Without the owners there would be no such product. This is big business. Sorry players, but you need to accept that.

It is in this only that fans side with the Yorks.

It's fascinating to me to see this thread play out the dichotomy of labor vs. management we see in the world at large. One side believes in the divine right of kings and that people should know their place in the natural order of things while the other side believes in a democratic world where rights belong to everyone equally. The former sees the owners as the product while the latter sees the players as at least as important.

Democratic? I think you defined socialism. Also a king was born into his power and it can only be taken away by force. The original owners of the NFL built the product up with their own money and sweat. Current owners may have inherited their money or earned it themselves, irregardless that, own NFL franchises, which are a business. What I find interesting is the players getting a defined % of the revenue, and a lot of people are ok with that acting like the players are the only employees paid by the team. If the players are more important than the owners let them all quit and form their own league. Most of them aren't even of average intelligence and couldn't run a hot dog cart* if left to their own devices. The players need the owners more than the owners need them. Jerry Jones would find other business ventures to occupy his time and money and I am sure would do well. What would a guy like Chris Johnson of the Titans do with out the NFL? Jail would be my guess, I am sure he isn't smart enough to do something you could teach an 8 year old.

* No offense to anyone who owns a hot dog cart, in the right location I have heard you can make $150,000 a year. Just a reference to a business that isn't real hard to run.

The owners need TV $$$ and people watch the games for the players.

is it true the owners negotiated with networks that they will get paid $4 billion this year even if this season is canceled?

from my understanding, the owners put this $$ aside to afford a lockout. I believe that isnt allowed bc it is an unfair leverage for negotiations.

What? So it is unfair because the players can't save any money for a rainy day?

It's unfair because the judge read the contract that states a shared revenue and thus a war chest funded by the new TV $$ (shared revenue) violates the contract. The deal with TV was made before the current CBA ran out. I'm not crying for either side but the owners thought they had an ace up their sleeves and it turned out not to be so. The players won that round and may be overplaying their hand now, time will tell.

Yeup, TV revenue is shared among the players and the owners. I don't know who advised them to do this.

Originally posted by LundyLove:

Originally posted by blizzuntz:

Originally posted by LundyLove:

Originally posted by blizzuntz:

Originally posted by LundyLove:
it would not be a billion dollar industry without the forsight of the owners and them spending money over the years to build the game up....

The owners give the players the forum to preform......

i would like to see the players try to run a league and see how far they would make it.............

If these players don't wanna play for 50 percent of the pie , the next best will and they will be forgotten

it is a billion dollar industry bc we want to watch rare talent, not average joes. There is a reason why SEC games are on TV and not division 3 games

so we should just give the players what they want.....

Let's see the players run and operate a billion dollar league........

the players arent asking for more money

Yes, but operating a business with 60 percent going to not even all the labor is absurd. Nobody is asking them to go to the poor house with the deal, they will still get paid and blow it as usual and be broke when they are out of the league.

60 percent to the players is asinine ........ I think they should get about 45-50. that's more than enough so that owners who have grown the game over the years can continue to grow the game...... and grow the pie........

Yes, the owners cut a bad deal..... but when they could so according to the last contract, they opted out so they could fix the issues that the league will face.......

Some of you are acting like players are above labor, and they are not....

They are just highly skilled workers and they are and will continued to get compensated as such even at 45-50 percent.

Yea...and currently they are getting about 40% of total revenue. They are gettin' 60% of the shared revenue, not total revenue.

Alex Smith.

Originally posted by bigmike55:
Alex Smith.

Another intelligent post by you.........

Originally posted by ChaunceyGardner:

agreed!!!!!!!!

Rashaun Woods

Originally posted by LundyLove:

Originally posted by blizzuntz:

Originally posted by LundyLove:
it would not be a billion dollar industry without the forsight of the owners and them spending money over the years to build the game up....

The owners give the players the forum to preform......

i would like to see the players try to run a league and see how far they would make it.............

If these players don't wanna play for 50 percent of the pie , the next best will and they will be forgotten

it is a billion dollar industry bc we want to watch rare talent, not average joes. There is a reason why SEC games are on TV and not division 3 games

so we should just give the players what they want.....

Let's see the players run and operate a billion dollar league........

That's a good idea. Players could install something like the Green Bay Packers' system.

Green Bay Packers, Inc., is governed by a seven-member Executive Committee, elected from a 45-member board of directors. The committee consists of a president, vice president, treasurer, secretary and three members-at-large. The president is the only officer to draw compensation; the rest of the committee is sitting "gratis." The committee directs corporate management, approves major capital expenditures, establishes broad policy and monitors management's performance in conducting the business and affairs of the corporation.

And the Packers just won the Super Bowl with no owners at all.

Originally posted by strickac:

Originally posted by DesiDez:
Owners.

1) they opted out of the current CBA
2) They planned the lockout all along...look at the TV contracts they tried to negotiate if there would be no football.

But in reality I don't blame the owners for asking for more money, just like the don't mind the salaries that players make. This is America. If you haven't noticed, there are lot of rich people who make a lot of money and they aren't humanitarians, they aren't curing cancer, they're not doctors, or social workers, etc...No one complains about how much Oprah makes, or Rush Limbaugh, or Warren Buffet, or actors/actresses. So I don't care how much Arod, Tiger Woods, Kobe, etc make. If you don't like how much athletes make, then don't watch them play sports.

Personally, I don't like the socialism in the NFL. I'd rather it be run on a purely free market model like the EPL. No salary cap, no draft (free to choose your employer and not rewarding the crappy teams with high draft picks), no age restriction, no revenue sharing. Let the market determine your value. Yes, the big market teams/deep pocket owners will dominate sports but so what? Who said life is supposed to fair?

Great! Then the Raiders will be the football equivalent of the Yankees. No salary cap would ruin football.

I think you're point has weight towards revenue sharing, but eliminating the cap and draft would destroy the sport.

We should switch to a model that has 4 champs in it's history and now has been reduced to a 2 team league.

Brilliant idea! We can watch the NFL lose team after team and waive bye bye to the 49ers. Competitive Super Bowls and playoff games think again. You're not going to be watching too many of those either.

I have never heard of any business that spends even 50% of their revenue on salaries. NONE. Most are less than 30%.

Originally posted by dj43:
I have never heard of any business that spends even 50% of their revenue on salaries. NONE. Most are less than 30%.

Well, I am prepared to bet that businesses like brokerages and merchant bankers do.

The players are the main asset of the individual franchise.

Originally posted by dj43:
I have never heard of any business that spends even 50% of their revenue on salaries. NONE. Most are less than 30%.

Quite a few businesses spend 40% or more on slaries and benefits. They are service businesses for the most part, which fits in with sports. Imagine a cleaning company for instance, that pays insurance and equipment, then the rest goes to salaries. Private schools spend a high percentage of income in salaries...accounting, law, medicine (doctors/dentists offices), etc. Companies that make products, such as car companies, spend more on materials.

I'm not arguing the merits of either side, but there is considerable risk to owning a major team. You have half a billion (or so) in equity tied up in an asset that may or may not return a profit...but that is true of any business, just on a grander scale. Most family businesses are sold when the owner retires because of that risk...kids don't want to assume responsibility for their parents retirement.

On the players side, the average career is very brief due to injury and competition, so they need to make as much as quickly as they can. That is one reason for not having a rookie cap...most of those rookies won't make it to the five year mark.

My only complaint about the amount of money they all make is the cost of tickets. TV money has inflated income to the point where gate money needs to be high to make sense. The actual cost of putting people in seats is expensive compared to putting the game on TV. So I believe TV money should subsidize ticket prices (more than it already does) to keep tickets within the means of average fans. Some teams would rather have empty seats, it costs less.