growing player dissatisfaction with Goodell (1 Viewer)

[fatness]

Link

Goodell, as part of his weeklong bus trip to seven NFL camps with Hall of Fame coach and broadcasting icon John Madden, initiated locker-room meetings with players at each stop, and the level of interrogation he faced became increasingly charged as players expressed anxiety and anger over a potential lockout next spring.

At one point in the commissioner’s visit with the Cleveland Browns, linebacker Scott Fujita(notes), a member of the NFL Players Association’s executive committee, asked: “What do the owners want? What’s it going to take to get a deal done?”

“I can’t answer that,” Goodell replied.

“You’re the NFL commissioner,” Fujita shot back. “You’re here as the mouthpiece for the owners, and you can’t even tell us what they want? The CBA [collective bargaining agreement] is up in March. Don’t you think you need to start giving us some answers?”

By the end of his visit with the Browns, players were referring to the league’s chief executive as “Roger the Dodger.” It got worse for Goodell during the final visit of his tour, this stop coming at the Indianapolis Colts’ training camp. According to two sources familiar with the meeting, some Colts players admonished Goodell with swear words, to the point where star quarterback Peyton Manning(notes) was embarrassed by their behavior. Veteran center Jeff Saturday(notes), another executive committee member, cut the meeting short to keep the situation from escalating further.

 

[jonessed]

I'm not sure I would want to go on record trying to stipulate the owner's positions on all of the issues to the players. That's an easy way to get yourself into hot water. Those things are hashed out in negotiations.

I understand the player's frustrations with the owners, but Goodell isn't an agent to the owners.

 

[CalBear]

At one point in the commissioner’s visit with the Cleveland Browns, linebacker Scott Fujita(notes), a member of the NFL Players Association’s executive committee, asked: “What do the owners want? What’s it going to take to get a deal done?”

“I can’t answer that,” Goodell replied.

“You’re the NFL commissioner,” Fujita shot back. “You’re here as the mouthpiece for the owners, and you can’t even tell us what they want? The CBA [collective bargaining agreement] is up in March. Don’t you think you need to start giving us some answers?”

Go Bears.

 

[FavreCo]

Sounds like some players, probably wearing $50000 earrings, are starting to sweat.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

I'm not sure I would want to go on record trying to stipulate the owner's positions on all of the issues to the players. That's an easy way to get yourself into hot water. Those things are hashed out in negotiations.I understand the player's frustrations with the owners, but Goodell isn't an agent to the owners.

He isn't?

 

[jurb26]

So what exactly was this meeting intending to accomplish?

 

[CalBear]

Sounds like some players, probably wearing $50000 earrings, are starting to sweat.

Sounds like some owners like Randy Lerner (worth ~$1.5 billion, which he inherited from his daddy), are trying to screw over Super Bowl winners like Scott Fuijita, who puts his body on the line every week for an exciting new contract with just $8M guaranteed.Makes sense. When the franchise you own has not made the playoffs in the 7 years you've been in charge, and has a combined record of 38-74 over that period, you certainly deserve to extract money out of the guys who actually do the work. Heck, at $14M for three years, Fuijita can catch up with Lerner in terms of wealth in just 321 years of playing football (assuming he doesn't spend any money). Don't cry for the owners.

 

[Patriotsfatboy1]

I'm not sure I would want to go on record trying to stipulate the owner's positions on all of the issues to the players. That's an easy way to get yourself into hot water. Those things are hashed out in negotiations.I understand the player's frustrations with the owners, but Goodell isn't an agent to the owners.

He isn't?

Of course he is. Goodell is paid by the owners, not the players. Goodell is trying to broker a deal by making these tours. However, he is looking to broker a deal that is beneficial to the owners. I think that both sides are posturing big-time, so I don't see the players as being the good guys in how they react, but I understand what they are saying.

 

[Rovers]

I'm not sure I would want to go on record trying to stipulate the owner's positions on all of the issues to the players. That's an easy way to get yourself into hot water. Those things are hashed out in negotiations.I understand the player's frustrations with the owners, but Goodell isn't an agent to the owners.

He isn't?

Of course he is. Goodell is paid by the owners, not the players. Goodell is trying to broker a deal by making these tours. However, he is looking to broker a deal that is beneficial to the owners. I think that both sides are posturing big-time, so I don't see the players as being the good guys in how they react, but I understand what they are saying.

The players are paid by the owners too, so what? Lest we forget that Goodell also hands out fines and penalties to franchises as well as players. He oversees everything from tampering to videogate to drug suspensions, doling out discipline to both owners and players. It's a leap to think Goodell is trying to broker anything. I think this goes to show just how screwed up the NFLPA is. They are supposed to be keeping their membership informed, not the NFL offices. They should be asking their own player reps these questions, not the commisioner who is supposed to be impartial. What Goodell's objectives for the tour are should be better understood. Heck, he's traveling with Madden. Is Madden a tool of the owners too? If anything, instead of getting on Goodell's case, they should be asking him if there is anything they can do to help the process, not sacpegoating the guy. Players can be pretty stupid.

 

[griff321]

Love the move by the players after the anthem. GET IT DONE!

 

[Patriotsfatboy1]

I'm not sure I would want to go on record trying to stipulate the owner's positions on all of the issues to the players. That's an easy way to get yourself into hot water. Those things are hashed out in negotiations.I understand the player's frustrations with the owners, but Goodell isn't an agent to the owners.

He isn't?

Of course he is. Goodell is paid by the owners, not the players. Goodell is trying to broker a deal by making these tours. However, he is looking to broker a deal that is beneficial to the owners. I think that both sides are posturing big-time, so I don't see the players as being the good guys in how they react, but I understand what they are saying.

The players are paid by the owners too, so what?

Goodell works for the owners. They decide who the commissioner is and they tell him what to do. The players have NO say in what the commissioner does.As far as the other stuff of dealing with the owners on fines, that is irrelevant. The owners tell him to do that and to enforce the by-laws of the game. He does not report to individual owners, but the majority of owners. If you think that Goodell is on the same level as the players, then you are sadly mistaken.The NFLPA is keeping the players informed. They are telling them what they want them to know. The owners are keeping certain information to themselves, which is EXACTLY what is frustrating the players during these sessions. They are hoping to get some real answers from Goodell, but he would be foolish to divulge anything during negotiations.

 

[Da Guru]

The very first thing that Goodell should have said is "Above all thing we need to get first rd draft picks contracts in order so that vets that have earned the money can get paid"

 

[gsmayes]

Goodell is a tyrant, not surprised the players don't like him.

 

[Rovers]

LMAO. The players sound like they are blaming Goodell for the labor impasse, and clueless fans are starting to as well. No small wonder it will all end in a lockout.

 

[otis68]

Remember the owners are in a two front war. The Snyders and Jones want to exclude revenue from being shared with the Wilsons and Rooneys, and then all of them want to exclude revenue from being shared with the players.

Unlikely the first war will be resolved any time soon, and the second front won't be dealt with until the first is done.

 

[VaTerp]

Remember the owners are in a two front war. The Snyders and Jones want to exclude revenue from being shared with the Wilsons and Rooneys, and then all of them want to exclude revenue from being shared with the players.

Unlikely the first war will be resolved any time soon, and the second front won't be dealt with until the first is done.

Exactly.Here is a link to the thread with the whole article.

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=553470

 

[FantasyTrader]

I'm not sure I would want to go on record trying to stipulate the owner's positions on all of the issues to the players. That's an easy way to get yourself into hot water. Those things are hashed out in negotiations.I understand the player's frustrations with the owners, but Goodell isn't an agent to the owners.

He isn't?

Of course he is. Goodell is paid by the owners, not the players. Goodell is trying to broker a deal by making these tours. However, he is looking to broker a deal that is beneficial to the owners. I think that both sides are posturing big-time, so I don't see the players as being the good guys in how they react, but I understand what they are saying.

The players are paid by the owners too, so what? Lest we forget that Goodell also hands out fines and penalties to franchises as well as players. He oversees everything from tampering to videogate to drug suspensions, doling out discipline to both owners and players. It's a leap to think Goodell is trying to broker anything. I think this goes to show just how screwed up the NFLPA is. They are supposed to be keeping their membership informed, not the NFL offices. They should be asking their own player reps these questions, not the commisioner who is supposed to be impartial. What Goodell's objectives for the tour are should be better understood. Heck, he's traveling with Madden. Is Madden a tool of the owners too? If anything, instead of getting on Goodell's case, they should be asking him if there is anything they can do to help the process, not sacpegoating the guy. Players can be pretty stupid.

The player's need to pressure their reps, not Goodell

 

[Clarkmeister]

The NFLPA already has the worst deal in major organized team sports. Not sure exactly how the owners expect to squeeze much more from them.

 

[FantasyTrader]

The NFLPA already has the worst deal in major organized team sports. Not sure exactly how the owners expect to squeeze much more from them.

Which is why football will not be played in 2011. I'm growing more and more convinced of it.

 

[Daywalker]

The NFLPA already has the worst deal in major organized team sports. Not sure exactly how the owners expect to squeeze much more from them.

Which is why football will not be played in 2011. I'm growing more and more convinced of it.

Reports have the Pittsburgh Pirates making $30mill last year. I'd be suprised if NFL owners were not making five times that a year not even including franchises appreciation which is like another $50mill/year.Redskins are worth more then the Yankees yet the Yanks can make huge profits and have a payroll 2.5 times greater then the Redskins?Not of it adds up. Add in old-time players who made the league are breaking down and not being taken care of and now the greedy owners want to extend the season by 2 games.Owners should be ashamed of themselves.

 

[Saints-Man]

...

Reports have the Pittsburgh Pirates making $30mill last year. I'd be suprised if NFL owners were not making five times that a year not even including franchises appreciation which is like another $50mill/year.

Redskins are worth more then the Yankees yet the Yanks can make huge profits and have a payroll 2.5 times greater then the Redskins?

Not of it adds up. Add in old-time players who made the league are breaking down and not being taken care of and now the greedy owners want to extend the season by 2 games.

Owners should be ashamed of themselves.

If I was a player, this is where I would draw the line in the sand. As a player, I actually think a salary cap benefits the players, but no way would I agree to an 18-game season. And, I would still fight hard for only a 2 game preseason and a rookie salary cap structured similar to the NBA. You are automatically slotted, but all 1st round picks have guaranteed contracts. With more sensible contracts, I think this is a concession that can be had from the owners.

 

[roadkill1292]

The very first thing that Goodell should have said is "Above all thing we need to get first rd draft picks contracts in order so that vets that have earned the money can get paid"

Then you cant "draft" employees. Let em get hired as anyone else who walks out of college... the open market.

Kill the draft.

 

[HellToupee]

The NFLPA already has the worst deal in major organized team sports. Not sure exactly how the owners expect to squeeze much more from them.

I hope they get a better deal so my $90 seat goes to $150

 

[Cantonese32]

I find it comical that both owner and player camps feel compelled to vie for the sympathy of the fan base. From my perspective, the fan base is really the third party in this issue. As such, perhaps the fan base should flex our financial muscles by completely boycotting all NFL-related functions during a full non-bye week later this season as a show of our solidarity. Perhaps this will demonstrate what the financial impact would be to both the owners and players if this issue is not resolved in a timely manner.

Pipe-dream? Sure! But, what if?

 

[dirtywaters20]

Love the move by the players after the anthem. GET IT DONE!

Really? Cause I have my own version of the 1 finger salute for them. I do the same salute with my other hand, but that one is reserved for the owners. The country is mired in the worst economic mess since the Great Depression and these guys are both trying to take their labor dispute public to curry favor? F every one of them. I hope both sides enjoy their sabbatical. I can just as easily spend Saturdays watching football and spend Sundays doing something gainful.

 

[Patriotsfatboy1]

The NFLPA already has the worst deal in major organized team sports. Not sure exactly how the owners expect to squeeze much more from them.

I don't know that I agree with that. The NFL CBA provides for 58% of gross revenue being spent on salaries (it was 59% in the capped years). Not sure what industry you are in, but check to see if 58% of every dollar that your company takes in goes directly to salaries for the employees.As a point of reference, the NBA players take in 57% of gross revenues in salaries and the MLB (with no cap or floor at all) spends 53% on salaries (some estimates have it as low as 51%). The NHL playes sort of take in 57%, but it is capped as part of some weird formula and they have give-backs if certain things happen.The only thing that the NFL does not have for its players is "guaranteed" contracts, but the reality is that signing bonuses and other provisions that are used make this a moot point. Brady's deal supposedly has some $48M+ that is guaranteed. Even if he does not play a down, he gets that dough.As was mentioned earlier, this is a battle on several fronts. I think that the owners still have to figure out their revenue sharing mess (no small task) before they come to the players to address that revenue sharing mess. The reality is that there are people have no real voice in these negotiations who will be affected greatly. These include former players, college players who will become pros and the fans.

 

[WVU Alum]

Love the move by the players after the anthem. GET IT DONE!

Really? Cause I have my own version of the 1 finger salute for them. I do the same salute with my other hand, but that one is reserved for the owners. The country is mired in the worst economic mess since the Great Depression and these guys are both trying to take their labor dispute public to curry favor? F every one of them. I hope both sides enjoy their sabbatical. I can just as easily spend Saturdays watching football and spend Sundays doing something gainful.

Nope, if there is a lockout you will still watch football on sundays, the networks will just roll some of their college games over to sunday. Got to keep the cash rolling.

 

[Vultan]

Love the move by the players after the anthem. GET IT DONE!

Really? Cause I have my own version of the 1 finger salute for them. I do the same salute with my other hand, but that one is reserved for the owners. The country is mired in the worst economic mess since the Great Depression and these guys are both trying to take their labor dispute public to curry favor? F every one of them. I hope both sides enjoy their sabbatical. I can just as easily spend Saturdays watching football and spend Sundays doing something gainful.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

After the second big baseball strike, I stopped watching baseball for a decade.

I hope the owners and players are smart enough to not have intercourse with the canine here...

 

[benbadman]

Goodell is a socialist weasel. Look at the way he handled the Rush Limbaugh joint bid on the St. Louis Rams last year. Magnifying the problem is that the players chose their union chief as a labor lawyer who worked w/ Obama. Hope the players have some stimulus saved!

If the NFL has no season next year, or a partial season like the NBA did in the 90s lockout... I'd look for another sport to swoop in with a TV deal and start to catch on even more.... goodbye Monday Night Football, hello Monday Night Fights w/ UFC!!

 

[VaTerp]

The NFLPA already has the worst deal in major organized team sports. Not sure exactly how the owners expect to squeeze much more from them.

I don't know that I agree with that. The NFL CBA provides for 58% of gross revenue being spent on salaries (it was 59% in the capped years). Not sure what industry you are in, but check to see if 58% of every dollar that your company takes in goes directly to salaries for the employees.

As a point of reference, the NBA players take in 57% of gross revenues in salaries and the MLB (with no cap or floor at all) spends 53% on salaries (some estimates have it as low as 51%). The NHL playes sort of take in 57%, but it is capped as part of some weird formula and they have give-backs if certain things happen.

The only thing that the NFL does not have for its players is "guaranteed" contracts, but the reality is that signing bonuses and other provisions that are used make this a moot point. Brady's deal supposedly has some $48M+ that is guaranteed. Even if he does not play a down, he gets that dough.

As was mentioned earlier, this is a battle on several fronts. I think that the owners still have to figure out their revenue sharing mess (no small task) before they come to the players to address that revenue sharing mess.

The reality is that there are people have no real voice in these negotiations who will be affected greatly. These include former players, college players who will become pros and the fans.

First, it is not 58% of gross revenues. It's 58% of the revenue that the owners share, which is basically the TV money and the gate. They term this "total revenue" when in fact, the owners have many other revenue streams such as luxury boxes, seat licenses, concessions, local marketing/tv deals, independently marketed products, and other things. None of this money is shared with the players.Secondly, "seeing if 58% of every dollar your company takes in goes directly to employee salary" is an apples to oranges comparison. As I stated above the 58% figure is not even close to "every dollar" NFL owners take in. And the NFL is a unique business in that the players are by and large the product. So it's not even comparable to other industries where companies spend a great deal of money on buying material and other things that are converted to products. Much of NFL owners "material" cost is player salary.

Third, the part about the guaranteed contracts is not a moot one. A lot of the "guaranteed" money in NFL contracts is tied to roster bonuses. So Brady would not collect that money if he never played another down. Most likely he would have to be on the roster for X amount of years to collect it. So if a player with a lot of "guaranteed" money suffers a career ending injury they would not collect all of their money as they do in the NBA and MLB. They would likely get an injury settlement at a fraction of what was "guaranteed" in their contracts.

 

[treat88]

I understand he is more symptom than cause, but the labor situation is just another of a myriad of reasons to despise Gooddell.

He is the epitome of a weasel.

 

[moondog]

Just to be clear it is the owners who opted out of the current labor contract. The players were willing to extend the CBA as it had been done several times before.

The NFL is facing a real problem with declining attendance. Watching games at home on a big screen HDTV is the first choice of many fans. These new billion $ plus stadiums are susposed to enhance the in person game experience but have also resulted in skyrocketing ticket/parking and concession prices.

Player salaries are all driven by what the owners pay the 1st round draft picks. The owners are their own worst enemy when it come to player salaries.

 

[Patriotsfatboy1]

The NFLPA already has the worst deal in major organized team sports. Not sure exactly how the owners expect to squeeze much more from them.

I don't know that I agree with that. The NFL CBA provides for 58% of gross revenue being spent on salaries (it was 59% in the capped years). Not sure what industry you are in, but check to see if 58% of every dollar that your company takes in goes directly to salaries for the employees.

As a point of reference, the NBA players take in 57% of gross revenues in salaries and the MLB (with no cap or floor at all) spends 53% on salaries (some estimates have it as low as 51%). The NHL playes sort of take in 57%, but it is capped as part of some weird formula and they have give-backs if certain things happen.

The only thing that the NFL does not have for its players is "guaranteed" contracts, but the reality is that signing bonuses and other provisions that are used make this a moot point. Brady's deal supposedly has some $48M+ that is guaranteed. Even if he does not play a down, he gets that dough.

As was mentioned earlier, this is a battle on several fronts. I think that the owners still have to figure out their revenue sharing mess (no small task) before they come to the players to address that revenue sharing mess.

The reality is that there are people have no real voice in these negotiations who will be affected greatly. These include former players, college players who will become pros and the fans.

First, it is not 58% of gross revenues. It's 58% of the revenue that the owners share, which is basically the TV money and the gate. They term this "total revenue" when in fact, the owners have many other revenue streams such as luxury boxes, seat licenses, concessions, local marketing/tv deals, independently marketed products, and other things. None of this money is shared with the players.Secondly, "seeing if 58% of every dollar your company takes in goes directly to employee salary" is an apples to oranges comparison. As I stated above the 58% figure is not even close to "every dollar" NFL owners take in. And the NFL is a unique business in that the players are by and large the product. So it's not even comparable to other industries where companies spend a great deal of money on buying material and other things that are converted to products. Much of NFL owners "material" cost is player salary.

Third, the part about the guaranteed contracts is not a moot one. A lot of the "guaranteed" money in NFL contracts is tied to roster bonuses. So Brady would not collect that money if he never played another down. Most likely he would have to be on the roster for X amount of years to collect it. So if a player with a lot of "guaranteed" money suffers a career ending injury they would not collect all of their money as they do in the NBA and MLB. They would likely get an injury settlement at a fraction of what was "guaranteed" in their contracts.

The 58% is tied to gross revenues under the current CBA, including "luxury boxes, seat licenses, concessions, local marketing/tv deals, independently marketed products, and other things". The old CBA was 60% of "shared revenues", which excluded the items that you mention and equated to about 54% of gross revenues. That was the key sticking point on the last negotiation. You could argue that there is an exclusion of gross revenues, which is $1B and that money is tied to stadium improvements.I did not only compare revenue sharing to other industries. I also included how it compared directly to professional sports.

As far as the guaranteed contracts go, they are definitely being handled by signing bonuses and guarantees. There are some guarantees that are different than others. I would also argue that the guarantees in other sports (NBA and MLB, in particular) are bad for the sport in that they get even further away from paying on performance.

 

[CrossEyed]

After the second big baseball strike, I stopped watching baseball for a decade.I hope the owners and players are smart enough to not have intercourse with the canine here...

I never started watching baseball again. Sure, some of that has to do with the Pirates.But if the NFL doesn't play in 2011 I think my interest will not likely return to the level it has been. Hard to get real excited about watching a bunch of guys who all make more money than they need (players and owners) and can't come up with a reasonable solution on how to distribute it. In the meantime, prices for the fans just keep going up to the point that the average person can barely afford to go to a game.

 

[Hastur]

After the second big baseball strike, I stopped watching baseball for a decade.I hope the owners and players are smart enough to not have intercourse with the canine here...

I know baseball took a huge 'dip' in popularity and revenue after the second strike. I'm curious if anyone knows what the average baseball player made during that time. What I mean is, did players suffer in terms of money during the years after the strike? Or did their salaries remain the same, hence the owners taking the brunt of the financial hit?The answer might be a lesson and a key point of negotiation.

 

[VaTerp]

The NFLPA already has the worst deal in major organized team sports. Not sure exactly how the owners expect to squeeze much more from them.

I don't know that I agree with that. The NFL CBA provides for 58% of gross revenue being spent on salaries (it was 59% in the capped years). Not sure what industry you are in, but check to see if 58% of every dollar that your company takes in goes directly to salaries for the employees.

As a point of reference, the NBA players take in 57% of gross revenues in salaries and the MLB (with no cap or floor at all) spends 53% on salaries (some estimates have it as low as 51%). The NHL playes sort of take in 57%, but it is capped as part of some weird formula and they have give-backs if certain things happen.

The only thing that the NFL does not have for its players is "guaranteed" contracts, but the reality is that signing bonuses and other provisions that are used make this a moot point. Brady's deal supposedly has some $48M+ that is guaranteed. Even if he does not play a down, he gets that dough.

As was mentioned earlier, this is a battle on several fronts. I think that the owners still have to figure out their revenue sharing mess (no small task) before they come to the players to address that revenue sharing mess.

The reality is that there are people have no real voice in these negotiations who will be affected greatly. These include former players, college players who will become pros and the fans.

First, it is not 58% of gross revenues. It's 58% of the revenue that the owners share, which is basically the TV money and the gate. They term this "total revenue" when in fact, the owners have many other revenue streams such as luxury boxes, seat licenses, concessions, local marketing/tv deals, independently marketed products, and other things. None of this money is shared with the players.Secondly, "seeing if 58% of every dollar your company takes in goes directly to employee salary" is an apples to oranges comparison. As I stated above the 58% figure is not even close to "every dollar" NFL owners take in. And the NFL is a unique business in that the players are by and large the product. So it's not even comparable to other industries where companies spend a great deal of money on buying material and other things that are converted to products. Much of NFL owners "material" cost is player salary.

Third, the part about the guaranteed contracts is not a moot one. A lot of the "guaranteed" money in NFL contracts is tied to roster bonuses. So Brady would not collect that money if he never played another down. Most likely he would have to be on the roster for X amount of years to collect it. So if a player with a lot of "guaranteed" money suffers a career ending injury they would not collect all of their money as they do in the NBA and MLB. They would likely get an injury settlement at a fraction of what was "guaranteed" in their contracts.

The 58% is tied to gross revenues under the current CBA, including "luxury boxes, seat licenses, concessions, local marketing/tv deals, independently marketed products, and other things". The old CBA was 60% of "shared revenues", which excluded the items that you mention and equated to about 54% of gross revenues. That was the key sticking point on the last negotiation. You could argue that there is an exclusion of gross revenues, which is $1B and that money is tied to stadium improvements.I did not only compare revenue sharing to other industries. I also included how it compared directly to professional sports.

As far as the guaranteed contracts go, they are definitely being handled by signing bonuses and guarantees. There are some guarantees that are different than others. I would also argue that the guarantees in other sports (NBA and MLB, in particular) are bad for the sport in that they get even further away from paying on performance.

I stand corrected. I was looking at the old CBA.Agree with you on the guarantees being bad for other sports but was just pointing out the difference and I know you compared with other professional sports as well but still think the comparison to "our" jobs and industries is apples to oranges.

 

[Patriotsfatboy1]

The NFLPA already has the worst deal in major organized team sports. Not sure exactly how the owners expect to squeeze much more from them.

I don't know that I agree with that. The NFL CBA provides for 58% of gross revenue being spent on salaries (it was 59% in the capped years). Not sure what industry you are in, but check to see if 58% of every dollar that your company takes in goes directly to salaries for the employees.

As a point of reference, the NBA players take in 57% of gross revenues in salaries and the MLB (with no cap or floor at all) spends 53% on salaries (some estimates have it as low as 51%). The NHL playes sort of take in 57%, but it is capped as part of some weird formula and they have give-backs if certain things happen.

The only thing that the NFL does not have for its players is "guaranteed" contracts, but the reality is that signing bonuses and other provisions that are used make this a moot point. Brady's deal supposedly has some $48M+ that is guaranteed. Even if he does not play a down, he gets that dough.

As was mentioned earlier, this is a battle on several fronts. I think that the owners still have to figure out their revenue sharing mess (no small task) before they come to the players to address that revenue sharing mess.

The reality is that there are people have no real voice in these negotiations who will be affected greatly. These include former players, college players who will become pros and the fans.

First, it is not 58% of gross revenues. It's 58% of the revenue that the owners share, which is basically the TV money and the gate. They term this "total revenue" when in fact, the owners have many other revenue streams such as luxury boxes, seat licenses, concessions, local marketing/tv deals, independently marketed products, and other things. None of this money is shared with the players.Secondly, "seeing if 58% of every dollar your company takes in goes directly to employee salary" is an apples to oranges comparison. As I stated above the 58% figure is not even close to "every dollar" NFL owners take in. And the NFL is a unique business in that the players are by and large the product. So it's not even comparable to other industries where companies spend a great deal of money on buying material and other things that are converted to products. Much of NFL owners "material" cost is player salary.

Third, the part about the guaranteed contracts is not a moot one. A lot of the "guaranteed" money in NFL contracts is tied to roster bonuses. So Brady would not collect that money if he never played another down. Most likely he would have to be on the roster for X amount of years to collect it. So if a player with a lot of "guaranteed" money suffers a career ending injury they would not collect all of their money as they do in the NBA and MLB. They would likely get an injury settlement at a fraction of what was "guaranteed" in their contracts.

The 58% is tied to gross revenues under the current CBA, including "luxury boxes, seat licenses, concessions, local marketing/tv deals, independently marketed products, and other things". The old CBA was 60% of "shared revenues", which excluded the items that you mention and equated to about 54% of gross revenues. That was the key sticking point on the last negotiation. You could argue that there is an exclusion of gross revenues, which is $1B and that money is tied to stadium improvements.I did not only compare revenue sharing to other industries. I also included how it compared directly to professional sports.

As far as the guaranteed contracts go, they are definitely being handled by signing bonuses and guarantees. There are some guarantees that are different than others. I would also argue that the guarantees in other sports (NBA and MLB, in particular) are bad for the sport in that they get even further away from paying on performance.

I stand corrected. I was looking at the old CBA.Agree with you on the guarantees being bad for other sports but was just pointing out the difference and I know you compared with other professional sports as well but still think the comparison to "our" jobs and industries is apples to oranges.

Fair enough. My original premise was that the NFLPA does not have the worst deal in all of sports and that even a fair/mediocre deal in professional sports is not overly slanted towards owners when you look at other industries. I think that both the players and owners have some changes that they would like to see made to the CBA. Since there are so many billions of dollars involved, the stubborness and greed elements are elevated.

 

[RockHard]

Remember the owners are in a two front war. The Snyders and Jones want to exclude revenue from being shared with the Wilsons and Rooneys, and then all of them want to exclude revenue from being shared with the players.Unlikely the first war will be resolved any time soon, and the second front won't be dealt with until the first is done.

 

[Grateful Parrot]

In the meantime, prices for the fans just keep going up to the point that the average person can barely afford to go to a game.

They are already above what the average person can afford. The chose was clear for me. I get a whole season of SEC football for what it would cost me to go to 2 Titans games.

 

[QUEZILLA]

I wonder if Jeff Garcia will play arena football or in the CFL when he loses his UFL job to a better QB. I think the arena game may really fit his style of play.

 

[benbadman]

The NFL is facing a real problem with declining attendance. Watching games at home on a big screen HDTV is the first choice of many fans. These new billion $ plus stadiums are susposed to enhance the in person game experience but have also resulted in skyrocketing ticket/parking and concession prices.

Agreed. NFL Sunday ticket for $300 (or whatever we negotiate) is a steal compared to the cost of going to a NFL home game.

 

[benbadman]

In the meantime, prices for the fans just keep going up to the point that the average person can barely afford to go to a game.

They are already above what the average person can afford. The chose was clear for me. I get a whole season of SEC football for what it would cost me to go to 2 Titans games.

Go Dores! Plus you can scalp/sell one of the premium games, and pretty much pay for the cost of the season ticket. Especially when Kentucky basketball plays here