What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

********Press Conference********** (1 Viewer)

BigTex

BigTex

Don't mess with Texas
I just heard the pieces of the Press Conference and it was said that it's at a "dead lock" and that the players association is so unrealistic that there will be no new talks.

I didn't get to hear who was talking, but my guess he was representing the owners. But he said that all talks are off.

Personally, I thought the'd get it done today, but it doesn't look that way and I'm very surprised. This is not going to end well.

If anyone heard more please post.

 
It was Tags and in a nutshell:

The NFLPA has a demand on the table that is not realistic with our financial situation.

We are indeed deadlocked because of the excessive demands.

There is no need to have further deliberations at this point. This was agreed on by 100% of the owners. Talks are broken off.

 
NFL News Click here to find out more!

Owners break off talks with players union Click here to find out more!

NFL.com wire reports

NEW YORK (March 2, 2006) -- NFL owners voted unanimously Thursday to break off talks with the players' union on a contract extension, leaving the current salary cap in place with the start of free agency looming -- and possibly forcing the mass dumping of veterans.

The owners, who met for 57 minutes Thursday morning, endorsed a recommendation by their management council executive committee to reject the union's latest proposal.

NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue was expected to have a news conference later Thursday morning.

 
NFL News Click here to find out more!

Owners break off talks with players union Click here to find out more!

NFL.com wire reports

NEW YORK (March 2, 2006) -- NFL owners voted unanimously Thursday to break off talks with the players' union on a contract extension, leaving the current salary cap in place with the start of free agency looming -- and possibly forcing the mass dumping of veterans.

The owners, who met for 57 minutes Thursday morning, endorsed a recommendation by their management council executive committee to reject the union's latest proposal.

NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue was expected to have a news conference later Thursday morning.
Click to expand...
Thanks derek,I wonder if this is just a move by the owners just to see what the PA is going to do.

 
cool, well it's been fun. I'm done watching football.

 
The player's union is shooting themselves in the foot IMO.

The owners are already prepared for the possibility of no agreement, I am not so sure the players have the same foresight?

:shrug:

 
Time for Upshaw to come back to the table with a counteroffer. You can't be seen as the one to blow up the league.

If the owners refuse THAT offer, then you can walk away.

 
Cuts will be fast and furious now...I still would bet a lot of $$$$ that there's no uncapped year in '07, however it appears we're in for one entertaining '06 offseason. :yes:

 
I think there will be a salary cap again, remember the NFL owners have broken the players twice already and gotten what they wnated, tis going to happen again...

I don't understand why they need 60% of the money that comes in anyways, that seems kind of high to me...

I see the salary cap returning in 2008, if not 2007...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cuts will be fast and furious now...I still would bet a lot of $$$$ that there's no uncapped year in '07, however it appears we're in for one entertaining '06 offseason. :yes:
Click to expand...
J-Wood, I admit I was a bit skeptic but I'm a believer now. 07 could very well be uncapped. Jerry Jones will be like a kid in a candy store.
 
think of the odds in vegas for winning the super bowl. i bet there will be some volatile changes often based on this topic and money spent in offseason

 
Oh man, this is bad. Upshaw should be fired right now. He is seriously underestimating the owners willingness to play under the terms of the CBA. His intention is to decertify the union, thus forcing the owners to continue under the terms of this last CBA. As in, if the league changes any rules that the players don't like then they can sue under anti-trust law.

Well, the poison pills in the CBA to get the players to agree to a new deal are BAD. Everyone keeps talking about uncapped years, no salary cap, no rookie draft starting in '08, etc. All of it means jack. The big thing for the players is that it now takes 6 freakin' years to become an unrestricted free agent. What's the average length of an NFL players career again? 2.5 years? What percentage get to 7+ years? Upshaw is supposed to represent ALL of the players, not just the superstar veterans.

Plus teams now get an extra transition tag to keep players off the market. And the 30% rule will limit the early deals done this year. That gives the teams way too much of a bargaining position.

The transition to these new rules is going to be ugly. The players who are looking for huge new deals are not going to find them. And I bet that almost all first round draft picks this year miss training camp, preseason, and maybe some of the regular season because the owners' offers are going to be a pittance compared to previous years.

 
The big thing for the players is that it now takes 6 freakin' years to become an unrestricted free agent. What's the average length of an NFL players career again? 2.5 years? What percentage get to 7+ years? Upshaw is supposed to represent ALL of the players, not just the superstar veterans.
Click to expand...
I think the 6-year think only pertains if the NFLPA doesn't decertify. If they do, it would be a violation of the NFL to dictate when an employee can and cannot change teams. I might be doing to much speculating on this comment, take it with a grain of salt.

 
cool, well it's been fun. I'm done watching football.
Click to expand...
As I've said in other threads, if the NFL becomes MLBish, I'm with you.For right now, though, I'm still hoping that this is more brinksmanship and that someone will soon blink.

 
Guess the NFLPA wasn't watching as the NHLPA got their butts handed to them by the NHL owners.
Click to expand...
Different situation. You didn't have all these multi billion dollar TV deals with the NHL. Plus the fact that no one really cared that Hokey was gone really hurt the NHLPA
 
Off the wall idea. Purely speculation and made up in my own mind. Not even seriously, just 'what if'.

What about the return of the NFL/AFL? A high-market league and a low-market league? Who would get to be the next Joe Namath?

 
It going to be very interesting, most likely FA chaos. How do you draw up a contract with all the unknowns for 2008 and beyond? Not to mention all the new hassles placed on contracts signed this year including, only 4 years to spread out signing bonuses, incentives need to be included toward the salary cap in the same year, and only 30% allowed base salary increases.

 
Off the wall idea. Purely speculation and made up in my own mind. Not even seriously, just 'what if'.

What about the return of the NFL/AFL? A high-market league and a low-market league? Who would get to be the next Joe Namath?
Click to expand...
The owners want to go in two seperate directions, and the NFLPA may find itself in jeopardy. :fishing:

 
It going to be very interesting, most likely FA chaos. How do you draw up a contract with all the unknowns for 2008 and beyond? Not to mention all the new hassles placed on contracts signed this year including, only 4 years to spread out signing bonuses, incentives need to be included toward the salary cap in the same year, and only 30% allowed base salary increases.
Click to expand...
I think you're going to see a lot of one year deals (ie Chris Simms) this offseason.
 
Danny Snyder, Jerry Jones and all other high cash flow teams: Happy Birthday! Merry Christmas! Mardi Gras!

I watched football back in the "glory days" and I will continue to watch. I just hope we don't have a repeat of the strike games.

 
Danny Snyder, Jerry Jones and all other high cash flow teams: Happy Birthday! Merry Christmas! Mardi Gras!

I watched football back in the "glory days" and I will continue to watch. I just hope we don't have a repeat of the strike games.
Click to expand...
:confused: It's only good news for those guys if there's no deal in place by next year. People are getting confused...the break off in talks in no way cements an uncapped 2007.

And meanwhile, 2006 is going to be ugly, particularly for Danny Snyder.

 
Guess the NFLPA wasn't watching as the NHLPA got their butts handed to them by the NHL owners.
Click to expand...
Different situation. You didn't have all these multi billion dollar TV deals with the NHL. Plus the fact that no one really cared that Hokey was gone really hurt the NHLPA
Click to expand...
Here's where free agency is finally coming back to bite the NFLPA in the behind - more and more fans are now used to rooting for "the laundry," not the players. The owners know this, and feel emboldened in their negotiations with the players union. This is a theory, but I believe that a lot of hockey fans were tired of ever-escalating player contracts and seeing the players turned into pampered millionaires. They were willing to sacrifice a season to see the players get taken down a notch.

The NFL fan base, by attending scab games in the '80s, has already demonstrated that their loyalties are with the teams, not the players. There will certainly be a huge outcry if a strike or lockout occurs, but I guarantee that if it does the players will be the first ones to blink. They simply have more to lose.

 
Danny Snyder, Jerry Jones and all other high cash flow teams: Happy Birthday!  Merry Christmas!  Mardi Gras!

I watched football back in the "glory days" and I will continue to watch.  I just hope we don't have a repeat of the strike games.
Click to expand...
:confused: It's only good news for those guys if there's no deal in place by next year. People are getting confused...the break off in talks in no way cements an uncapped 2007.

And meanwhile, 2006 is going to be ugly, particularly for Danny Snyder.
Click to expand...
Especially after the Redskins cut 15-20 players from last years 53 man roster. :eek:
 
Guess the NFLPA wasn't watching as the NHLPA got their butts handed to them by the NHL owners.
Click to expand...
Different situation. You didn't have all these multi billion dollar TV deals with the NHL. Plus the fact that no one really cared that Hokey was gone really hurt the NHLPA
Click to expand...
Here's where free agency is finally coming back to bite the NFLPA in the behind - more and more fans are now used to rooting for "the laundry," not the players. The owners know this, and feel emboldened in their negotiations with the players union. This is a theory, but I believe that a lot of hockey fans were tired of ever-escalating player contracts and seeing the players turned into pampered millionaires. They were willing to sacrifice a season to see the players get taken down a notch.

The NFL fan base, by attending scab games in the '80s, has already demonstrated that their loyalties are with the teams, not the players. There will certainly be a huge outcry if a strike or lockout occurs, but I guarantee that if it does the players will be the first ones to blink. They simply have more to lose.
Click to expand...
That is true...but I dont think we would ever get to the point of having a strike/lockout. The TV execs that have invested way too much money would get involved at some point in time (very quietly but they will have the owners collective ear).
 
It was Tags and in a nutshell:

The NFLPA has a demand on the table that is not realistic with our financial situation.

We are indeed deadlocked because of the excessive demands.

There is no need to have further deliberations at this point. This was agreed on by 100% of the owners. Talks are broken off.
Click to expand...
Any idea what the excessive demand is?
 
Guess the NFLPA wasn't watching as the NHLPA got their butts handed to them by the NHL owners.
Click to expand...
Different situation. You didn't have all these multi billion dollar TV deals with the NHL. Plus the fact that no one really cared that Hokey was gone really hurt the NHLPA
Click to expand...
Here's where free agency is finally coming back to bite the NFLPA in the behind - more and more fans are now used to rooting for "the laundry," not the players. The owners know this, and feel emboldened in their negotiations with the players union. This is a theory, but I believe that a lot of hockey fans were tired of ever-escalating player contracts and seeing the players turned into pampered millionaires. They were willing to sacrifice a season to see the players get taken down a notch.

The NFL fan base, by attending scab games in the '80s, has already demonstrated that their loyalties are with the teams, not the players. There will certainly be a huge outcry if a strike or lockout occurs, but I guarantee that if it does the players will be the first ones to blink. They simply have more to lose.
Click to expand...
No, the REAL difference between the NFL and NHL is the fiscal balance and responsibility of the ownership groups. The reason the owners were willing to initiate a lockout for 1+ years in the NHL is because, collectively, they were losing money and it was actually better to NOT have a product on the ice from a fiscal standpoint.In the NFL, with the advent of revenue sharing many, many years ago, there's not one owner in the league that isn't turning a profit. Not even close. The cap also ensures that owners can't get stupid and start outspending their annual intake, which is what the majority of NHL owners ended up doing.

The new NHL agreement merely protects owners from themselves. The NFL owners long ago took care of that risk.

 
Guess the NFLPA wasn't watching as the NHLPA got their butts handed to them by the NHL owners.
Click to expand...
Different situation. You didn't have all these multi billion dollar TV deals with the NHL. Plus the fact that no one really cared that Hokey was gone really hurt the NHLPA
Click to expand...
Here's where free agency is finally coming back to bite the NFLPA in the behind - more and more fans are now used to rooting for "the laundry," not the players. The owners know this, and feel emboldened in their negotiations with the players union. This is a theory, but I believe that a lot of hockey fans were tired of ever-escalating player contracts and seeing the players turned into pampered millionaires. They were willing to sacrifice a season to see the players get taken down a notch.

The NFL fan base, by attending scab games in the '80s, has already demonstrated that their loyalties are with the teams, not the players. There will certainly be a huge outcry if a strike or lockout occurs, but I guarantee that if it does the players will be the first ones to blink. They simply have more to lose.
Click to expand...
That is true...but I dont think we would ever get to the point of having a strike/lockout. The TV execs that have invested way too much money would get involved at some point in time (very quietly but they will have the owners collective ear).
Click to expand...
I would tend to agree. But as a hockey fan, I didn't think a cancelled season was a possibility either. If the NFL owners feel they have to make a stand, they will do so and not look back. After all, if the NFL loses a season, what are we really going to do? Start going to Arena games?
 
It was Tags and in a nutshell:

The NFLPA has a demand on the table that is not realistic with our financial situation.

We are indeed deadlocked because of the excessive demands.

There is no need to have further deliberations at this point. This was agreed on by 100% of the owners. Talks are broken off.
Click to expand...
Any idea what the excessive demand is?
Click to expand...
I think they want at least a minimum of 60% of 'total revenue'. I believe they were getting about 54% of 'shared revenue last season'. Currently the owners are offering about 56.x% of 'total revenue'.No link, trying to pull this from memory of articles over the past few weeks.

 
It was Tags and in a nutshell:

The NFLPA has a demand on the table that is not realistic with our financial situation.

We are indeed deadlocked because of the excessive demands.

There is no need to have further deliberations at this point. This was agreed on by 100% of the owners. Talks are broken off.
Click to expand...
Any idea what the excessive demand is?
Click to expand...
No, he didn't elaborate, these were his direct qoutes as to why talks are broken off.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The quesiton is- Will we be seeing replacement players in 2008?

With the average lifespan of NFL players at around 3 years, they can not afford potential lost time. For that reason, the NFL owners will always win an extended labor conflict.

 
I think they want at least a minimum of 60% of 'total revenue'. I believe they were getting about 54% of 'shared revenue last season'. Currently the owners are offering about 56.x% of 'total revenue'.
Click to expand...
Gene Upshaw was quoted as saying "our number has to begin with a 6."
 
I think they want at least a minimum of 60% of 'total revenue'.  I believe they were getting about 54% of 'shared revenue last season'.  Currently the owners are offering about 56.x% of 'total revenue'.
Click to expand...
Gene Upshaw was quoted as saying "our number has to begin with a 6."
Click to expand...
Yep. The difference between 56% and 60% is about $340 million.
 
I think they want at least a minimum of 60% of 'total revenue'.  I believe they were getting about 54% of 'shared revenue last season'.  Currently the owners are offering about 56.x% of 'total revenue'.
Click to expand...
Gene Upshaw was quoted as saying "our number has to begin with a 6."
Click to expand...
Yep. The difference between 56% and 60% is about $340 million.
Click to expand...
Spread over 32 teams = $10.625 Million per team
 
I think they want at least a minimum of 60% of 'total revenue'.  I believe they were getting about 54% of 'shared revenue last season'.  Currently the owners are offering about 56.x% of 'total revenue'.
Click to expand...
Gene Upshaw was quoted as saying "our number has to begin with a 6."
Click to expand...
I'm glad you put the ' 's in there Onion. If that's the case, that sounds like a HUGE difference in $. That would make sense that the owners won't allow the salary cap to become more than the lowest owning team can make in revenue. If the owners can't agree on how to share $, they have to keep the league in the black and not allow teams to lose $. However, maybe there are too many teams in the NFL as it stands...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think they want at least a minimum of 60% of 'total revenue'.  I believe they were getting about 54% of 'shared revenue last season'.  Currently the owners are offering about 56.x% of 'total revenue'.
Click to expand...
Gene Upshaw was quoted as saying "our number has to begin with a 6."
Click to expand...
I'm glad you put the ''s in there. If that's the case, that sounds like a HUGE difference in $. That would make sense that the owners won't allow the salary cap to become more than the lowest owning team can make in revenue. If the owners can't agree on how to share $, they have to keep the league in the black and not allow teams to lose $. However, maybe there are too many teams in the NFL as it stands...
Click to expand...
I dont think there are too many teams right now. NFL is still the only professional league where every owner makes $$$
 
I think they want at least a minimum of 60% of 'total revenue'.  I believe they were getting about 54% of 'shared revenue last season'.  Currently the owners are offering about 56.x% of 'total revenue'.
Click to expand...
Gene Upshaw was quoted as saying "our number has to begin with a 6."
Click to expand...
I'm glad you put the ''s in there. If that's the case, that sounds like a HUGE difference in $. That would make sense that the owners won't allow the salary cap to become more than the lowest owning team can make in revenue. If the owners can't agree on how to share $, they have to keep the league in the black and not allow teams to lose $. However, maybe there are too many teams in the NFL as it stands...
Click to expand...
I dont think there are too many teams right now. NFL is still the only professional league where every owner makes $$$
Click to expand...
Probably not for long as the low-market teams will have a harder and harder time selling tickets/merchandise and everything else if they can no longer be competitive.
 
I dont think there are too many teams right now. NFL is still the only professional league where every owner makes $$$
Click to expand...
But is that because of the revenue sharing structure? If all 32 teams were left to fend for themselves more than they currently do, would they all still be profitable?
 
Cuts will be fast and furious now...I still would bet a lot of $$$$ that there's no uncapped year in '07, however it appears we're in for one entertaining '06 offseason. :yes:
Click to expand...
I agree there is a cap or a lockout.
 
The short-term will be painful for those clubs over the cap, but certain teams are salivating over the prospects beginning in 2007. This is why I think the Redskins and Cowboys, among others, are looking forward to an uncapped future. They can begin to keep their good backups and grab high ticket guys off the free agency market. This opinion is of course based upon the premise that there will be no salary cap beginning in 2007.

A year ago, noone could envision matters reaching this point. Now, many are having problems seeing things reach the point where there is no salary cap. Hubris has no bounds in the NFL.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JohnnyU
Let's talk Sleeper Hosting Site Pros and Cons
Replies
20
Views
510
Soulfly3
Soulfly3
G
MFL Dsicount for 2024?
2
Replies
70
Views
2K
zed2283
Z
U
Cleveland Browns road to the number 1 seed!
Replies
8
Views
768
Gatorman
Gatorman

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top