Ongoing CBA discussions

[freddyg12]

I know she's been beat up w/words here on the warpath, but Sally Jenkins always brings a well backed argument & challenges her readers. She is obviously on the side of the players and previous articles state that. In this one, she comes from the taxpayer side of it. I think it would tell alot if it could somehow be compared to subsidies & incentives that other businesses get from state & local gov't.

NFL housing plan: Owners get the keys, fans get the bills - The Washington Post

[mlmdub130]

got this letter from bruce allen this morning, so far he has been nothing but a great gm and dealt with the fans/season ticket holders as best he could given the circustances. that said it's just a basic letter from the nfl/owners point of view, just thought some people here might be interested... https://app.e2ma.net/app/view:Campai...bf9272290a5155

[saden1]

Originally Posted by mlmdub130

got this letter from bruce allen this morning, so far he has been nothing but a great gm and dealt with the fans/season ticket holders as best he could given the circustances. that said it's just a basic letter from the nfl/owners point of view, just thought some people here might be interested... https://app.e2ma.net/app/view:Campai...bf9272290a5155

I get it, the NFL cares more about retired players than the NFLPA...riiight.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by saden1

I get it, the NFL cares more about retired players than the NFLPA...riiight.

It appears they do. At least the NFL commish has responded, in writing, to the head of the NFLAA.....D. Smith won't even meet with him.

George Martin, director of NFL Alumni Association: DeMaurice Smith treats alums as 'afterthought'

Another brilliant PR strategy by D. Smith.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

It appears they do. At least the NFL commish has responded, in writing, to the head of the NFLAA.....D. Smith won't even meet with him.

George Martin, director of NFL Alumni Association: DeMaurice Smith treats alums as 'afterthought'

Another brilliant PR strategy by D. Smith.

That isn't any indication that the NFL cares more only that there is a relationship problem and mistrust between the two organizations. What is a fact, however, is that the NFLPA does not represent retired players and that the NFL doesn't care about players once they are out of the league. Honestly, no one gives a shit about them. They want benefits no one wants to provide for them but if someone was willing to it wouldn't be the owners that's for sure.

[CRedskinsRule]

Saden,

I said that I think the players could win every lawsuit they file, but still lose when the next CBA is written. The players are on very firm legal ground, in terms of antitrust law. The courts could rule the draft illegal. They could rule restricted free agency illegal. They could find the franchise tag illegal. They could find the salary cap/salary floor illegal.

After all those rulings for the players, the owners still could end up writing individual contracts that total less than the percentage of revenue that they are committed too via the CBA

[saden1]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Saden,

I said that I think the players could win every lawsuit they file, but still lose when the next CBA is written. The players are on very firm legal ground, in terms of antitrust law. The courts could rule the draft illegal. They could rule restricted free agency illegal. They could find the franchise tag illegal. They could find the salary cap/salary floor illegal.

After all those rulings for the players, the owners still could end up writing individual contracts that total less than the percentage of revenue that they are committed too via the CBA

What you don't realize is owners compete with each other for talent which implies costs control is lost!!!!!!! Not to mention the fact that unionization and CBA greatly benefits owners in small markets. A free-for-all system would be disastrous for most owners as is evident by their past desire to maintain a leash on free agency and rookie salaries.

It only takes a few owners to start dishing out big contracts and buy themselves championship before the rest of the owners revolt or take matters into their own hands by starting to shelling out big money too.


Bottom line, cost control is maintained in a fixed price system not in a free price system. Collectively players will never lose in a free-for-all free price system.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by saden1

What you don't realize is owners compete with each other for talent which implies costs control is lost!!!!!!! Not to mention the fact that unionization and CBA greatly benefits owners in small markets. A free-for-all system would be disastrous for most owners as is evident by their past desire to maintain a leash on free agency and rookie salaries.

It only takes a few owners to start dishing out big contracts and buy themselves championship before the rest of the owners revolt or take matters into their own hands by starting to shelling out big money too.


Bottom line, cost control is maintained in a fixed price system not in a free price system. Collectively players will never lose in a free-for-all free price system.

I do realize that. Heck that was the whole fear factor of the "Capless" year. But what I think they found out is that for every one megacontract they HAVE to write they can write multiple lowball contracts to make up their roster. Further an owner who doesn't want to pay megacontracts doesn't have to, so a Jerry Richardson or Bill Bidwell can pay well below what a salary floor would provide for the players.

I am not saying that this is the model I want to see, but I do think there are owners who are willing to bet that a free for all price war would still yield a % of revenue close to or below the current % they are forced to pay players under the now expired CBA. That in essence is why they opted out of the last CBA.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I do realize that. Heck that was the whole fear factor of the "Capless" year. But what I think they found out is that for every one megacontract they HAVE to write they can write multiple lowball contracts to make up their roster. Further an owner who doesn't want to pay megacontracts doesn't have to, so a Jerry Richardson or Bill Bidwell can pay well below what a salary floor would provide for the players.

I am not saying that this is the model I want to see, but I do think there are owners who are willing to bet that a free for all price war would still yield a % of revenue close to or below the current % they are forced to pay players under the now expired CBA. That in essence is why they opted out of the last CBA.

Agreed. I also think that owners can collude to engage in price-fixing better than some people seem to think.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I do realize that. Heck that was the whole fear factor of the "Capless" year. But what I think they found out is that for every one megacontract they HAVE to write they can write multiple lowball contracts to make up their roster. Further an owner who doesn't want to pay megacontracts doesn't have to, so a Jerry Richardson or Bill Bidwell can pay well below what a salary floor would provide for the players.

I am not saying that this is the model I want to see, but I do think there are owners who are willing to bet that a free for all price war would still yield a % of revenue close to or below the current % they are forced to pay players under the now expired CBA. That in essence is why they opted out of the last CBA.

In that scenario revenue sharing will be out the window and it will be like baseball. I can't imagine NFL owners except maybe big market teams wanting to model the league after the MLB. I remember Danny Boy being upset that the Bengals weren't spending his share of the pool money to compete not too long ago...I can't imagine him wanting to share any money with owners like that.

[BuckSkin]

31 of 32 teams currently "may" require season ticket holders to pay for their tix in a lockout shortened season.

NFL LOCKOUT: 31 Of 32 NFL Teams Requiring Payments For 2011 Season Tickets

[CRedskinsRule]

NC_Skins: try to understand that not all fans who support the owners think that this is a pure employer employee struggle a la your local pipe fitter union (or any other job). Many people, myself among them, understand the simple fact that NFL player are among the most elite athletes in this world. And that nearly all train their whole life in order to play in that elite stratosphere. Further, I don't know of anyone who doesn't acknowledge they should be paid very well for the risk to their body and for the skill they demonstrate.
Given all that, I still support the owners more than the players. Its my view that the players are not really looking to negotiate, but to protect what they got in the last CBA (which they can do, but doesn't mean I have to agree with them) while the owners are trying to roll back a CBA that in their current view went to far(which they also are entitled to do, but doesn't mean you have to agree with them).

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by BuckSkin

31 of 32 teams currently "may" require season ticket holders to pay for their tix in a lockout shortened season.

NFL LOCKOUT: 31 Of 32 NFL Teams Requiring Payments For 2011 Season Tickets

The Panthers are currently asking season ticket holders for 10% of the invoice with the other 90% of it after the CBA is negotiated. Jerry Richardson may be a greedy bastard, but he is fan friendly.

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Given all that, I still support the owners more than the players. Its my view that the players are not really looking to negotiate, but to protect what they got in the last CBA .

Just curious, but did you read that article I posted from Forbes. Read it, if you still are behind the owners after you read it then I'll concede. I think showing the books could possibly be the missing key to why their profits may be declining.

[NC_Skins]

Speaking of Jerry Richardson.

Sources: Panthers' owner Richardson wants to protect staffers' jobs - CharlotteObserver.com

Wonder if Danny boy is protecting all of his workers like Jerry Richardson is?

"He wants us to know he's serious about taking care of us, and that's something he takes pride in," one Panthers staffer said of Richardson. "No one wants to take that for granted, but for now, he's telling us we're OK."

Can we trade Danny Boy and 2 first rounders for Jerry Richardson?

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Speaking of Jerry Richardson.

Sources: Panthers' owner Richardson wants to protect staffers' jobs - CharlotteObserver.com

Wonder if Danny boy is protecting all of his workers like Jerry Richardson is?



Can we trade Danny Boy and 2 first rounders for Jerry Richardson?

I think lots of Panthers' fans would love to make that trade. Snyder may not be "loved" by everyone in DC, but Richardson would not get a lot of votes if he ran for mayor in Charlotte either...