Issues surrounding NFL CBA discussions

[psubills62]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5401366

The article has a number of comments by the NFL VP Pash and NFLPA President DeMaurice Smith. This probably recaps a lot of stuff people already knew about why the sides are currently far apart on a new deal, but I thought the stuff towards the end about a rookie pay scale was interesting:

On Wednesday, Smith said the players proposed a rookie wage scale that would take $200 million out of the rookie signing pool and redistribute $100 million to retiree benefits and the other $100 million to proven veterans.

However, Pash revealed, the players' demand that rookies be limited to three-year contracts and then be eligible for unrestricted free agency was a deal-breaker. Players currently are eligible for unrestricted free agency after their fourth season and first-round picks typically sign for at least five years.

[Night Train]

Re: Issues surrounding NFL CBA discussions

On Wednesday, Smith said the players proposed a rookie wage scale that would take $200 million out of the rookie signing pool and redistribute $100 million to retiree benefits and the other $100 million to proven veterans.

Reportedly,the owners don't want $100 Mil going towards the retiree benefits, rather all $200 going towards proven veterans. This would help them pay salaries if the schedule is expanded to 18 games.

The only way the old vets will ever see a dime in retiree benefits is to sue the NFL. Many NFL owners hate the idea of subsidizing the small market teams in revenue sharing and see retiree benefits as another welfare payment they will not tolerate

It's sad but it's moves like this that show how this is more often business over actual sport.

[Spiderweb]

Re: Issues surrounding NFL CBA discussions

On Wednesday, Smith said the players proposed a rookie wage scale that would take $200 million out of the rookie signing pool and redistribute $100 million to retiree benefits and the other $100 million to proven veterans.

Reportedly,the owners don't want $100 Mil going towards the retiree benefits, rather all $200 going towards proven veterans. This would help them pay salaries if the schedule is expanded to 18 games.

The only way the old vets will ever see a dime in retiree benefits is to sue the NFL. Many NFL owners hate the idea of subsidizing the small market teams in revenue sharing and see retiree benefits as another welfare payment they will not tolerate

It's sad but it's moves like this that show how this is more often business over actual sport.

In short, with respect to the retired players, doing the right thing by them is of no interest to the owners........and the current players want as much as they can get for themselves. All of which leaves the retired players where they have been for years, out in the cold.

[Goobylal]

Re: Issues surrounding NFL CBA discussions

The only way the old vets will ever see a dime in retiree benefits is to sue the NFL. Many NFL owners hate the idea of subsidizing the small market teams in revenue sharing and see retiree benefits as another welfare payment they will not tolerate.

Well then, they should have gotten their acts together well before the start of FA in 2006, and given the NFLPA at least a semblance of a fight (instead of bending over). The previous CBA had worked great for 13 years. They should have given them a 2% raise in total revenue, but kept the cap based on the shared revenue.