BREAKING NEWS: NFLPA files to decertify, effectively disbanding

[X-Era]

Kevin Mawae:

“We’ve asked for financial transparency, and audited financials since May of 2009 and anybody that will report that we’ve gotten that information and rejected it is simply not telling the truth,”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-09/nfl-players-union-wants-team-by-team-financial-results-talks-continue.html

DeMaurice Smith:

Smith says Wednesday that what the NFL has provided "would be meaningless in determining whether to write an $800 million check"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110309/ap_on_sp_fo_ne/fbn_nfl_labor

Pash:

"We've made more information available in the course of this negotiation than has ever been made available in decades of collective bargaining with the NFLPA," Pash said. "Far more information. And we've offered to make even more information [available], including information that we do not disclose to our own clubs."

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/14792619/nfls-pash-says-union-has-enough-financial-data/rss

Drew Rosenhaus:

"If the owners turn their back on the players they will regret it and will be crushed in court just like the tv $ case!"

http://twitter.com/#!/RosenhausSports/status/45641517829857280

They all were keeping their mouths shut and giving the mediation a chance by adhering to the rules until yesterday and today. Just shut up and work it out. You all will still be rich in the end.

[Prov401]

Is there anybody truly worried about this? That's an honest question.

There is way too much money to be lost if an agreement isn't reached. Both the owners and players would suffer. Even if the deadline is passed, it's not like everybody shuts off their cell phones, deletes their email accounts, and snubs their noses at the situation. They are still going to talk, and somewhere down the line, an agreement will be reached.

[X-Era]

Is there anybody truly worried about this? That's an honest question.

There is way too much money to be lost if an agreement isn't reached. Both the owners and players would suffer. Even if the deadline is passed, it's not like everybody shuts off their cell phones, deletes their email accounts, and snubs their noses at the situation. They are still going to talk, and somewhere down the line, an agreement will be reached.Yes, they will at some point. I'm commenting more on how they are acting in the past few days. Just stick to the plan, allow for mediation, and keep your yaps shut. IMO, they can resolve this weeks or maybe even months earlier if they just can keep from openly talking about it.

[DraftBoy]

Talk means ****.

[Dujek]

It's the guys on the players' side of the argument that are looking like bigger and bigger *******s as this goes on. The league have already met some of the union's demands, it's about time for the union to make an effort to come towards the league.

[NOT THE DUDE...]

I am optimistic, i think it will get done today...

[ddaryl]

the season is toast.. they're not going ot work this out... it will take the litigation

[ddaryl]

It's the guys on the players' side of the argument that are looking like bigger and bigger *******s as this goes on. The league have already met some of the union's demands, it's about time for the union to make an effort to come towards the league.

disagree.. open the books for all to see... That ends all of that discussion.

Hell i want to see what these teams are making...because I PAY THE BILLS, as do the rest of you.

It may be a business, but it is also a big part of communities...

I fail to see why the owners won't release it all unless they are keeping things hidden. Obviously what we will see will open up lots and lots of controversy for the owners. My bet is it is the big markets that don't want to expose themsleves

Now if the owners tell the fans that prices on everything NFL will decrease by 20% then I'll side with the owners. Until then I want to see those books

And no I don't care if anyone believes they don't have to.. I still want to see

[X-Era]

I think they will get a deal done. I think it will be soon, but probably not today.

But I think the NFL is making serious concessions as is the NFLPA.

[Dujek]

I think they will get a deal done. I think it will be soon, but probably not today.

But I think the NFL is making serious concessions as is the NFLPA.

The NFLPA has given the NFL **** all squared to this point, the league have done all the the giving and the players have refused to budge from their initial position.

[Night Train]

Doesn't mean a damn thing.

The negotiations go on, despite anyones babble.

[Mski]

Personally i think the last thing the NFLPA will do is decertify, if they do that, who's to say the owners wont treat their teams like any other non-union employer and tell them their employment is "at will" and "this is what you get, if you dont like it you are free to look for employment somehwere else"

[X-Era]

Personally i think the last thing the NFLPA will do is decertify, if they do that, who's to say the owners wont treat their teams like any other non-union employer and tell them their employment is "at will" and "this is what you get, if you dont like it you are free to look for employment somehwere else"Because they can't get NFL game ticket or TV money from UFL scab players.

[X-Era]

The NFLPA has given the NFL **** all squared to this point, the league have done all the the giving and the players have refused to budge from their initial position.Real quick.

Can you imagine going into your employer and demanding that they show their financial records so that you can then tell them how much you should be paid?

[Michael82]

The NFLPA has given the NFL **** all squared to this point, the league have done all the the giving and the players have refused to budge from their initial position.

Agreed! I'm getting more and more pissed at the players lately. They aren't doing **** to get this done. The owners have budged quite a bit, but the players keep sitting there and refusing to compromise.

[X-Era]

Agreed! I'm getting more and more pissed at the players lately. They aren't doing **** to get this done. The owners have budged quite a bit, but the players keep sitting there and refusing to compromise.Demanding detailed financial records is simply ridiculous.

Talk about arming a pyromaniac with gas and a lighter.

Think of the damage they could do by outing private records to the media, leverage it will give them against the owners, what they pay certain exec's, what they pay for this or that, how much they pocket, the possibilities are just endless. The media would drool over the stories it would generate.

What a huge mess that would cause.

[Mski]

Because they can't get NFL game ticket or TV money from UFL scab players. If the union decertifies, it ceases to exist, therefore there will be no need for scab players

[Michael82]

Demanding detailed financial records is simply ridiculous.

Talk about arming a pyromaniac with gas and a lighter.

Think of the damage they could do by outing private records to the media, leverage it will give them against the owners, what they pay certain exec's, what they pay for this or that, how much they pocket, the possibilities are just endless. The media would drool over the stories it would generate.

What a huge mess that would cause.

Agreed! They are crazy to be asking for that. Just imagine how big of a mess the league will be if all the other owners get detailed information of how much they are making, what they are spending and all that....

[X-Era]

If the union decertifies, it ceases to exist, therefore there will be no need for scab playersThe union ceases to exist. The teams can then hire anyone they choose.

[Michael82]

The NFL Players Association has filed papers to decertify, effectively disbanding the union and giving it the chance to sue under antitrust laws if there is a lockout.

The move follows a 16th day of federally mediated negotiations in which the union, presented with a proposal from the league's owners group late Friday afternoon as a 5 p.m. decertification deadline approached, rejected the offer as "significant differences continue to remain," union chief DeMaurice Smith said. Without decertification, the union would've had to wait six months to file a suit after the expiration of the collective bargaining agreement.

Smith had said 10 years of audited financial records must accompany any request from the owners for an extension before the deadline , which was allowed to pass.

The owners' group convened among themselves late Friday afternoon to discuss the next steps, sources told ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter.

"They have financials. They just want to get to court," a management source told ESPN business analyst Andrew Brandt.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6205936

[Mski]

"POOF" dumbest thing a union can do is file paperwork to stop being a union, this has gone from a potential owner lockout, to employee walk out. all the momentum the players gained with the television law suit is now gone

[Michael82]

This is now going to be handled in the courts. What the ****! I can't believe that the players are still demanding all of the NFL financial information. The league caved with quite a few things, but the players didn't compromise on anything. :mad:

[split71]

"Smith had said 10 years of audited financial records must accompany any request from the owners for an extension before the deadline , which was allowed to pass."

Smith is nuts...what private business would share any financial info with a union?

Now it gets ugly.

[Michael82]

drewbrees (http://twitter.com/#!/drewbrees) Drew Brees



Not once have the players asked for more money during this negotiation. That is a FACT. I don't expect anyone to feel sorry for us

31 minutes ago (http://twitter.com/#!/drewbrees/status/46332387214372864) Favorite (http://twitter.com/#)Retweet (http://twitter.com/#)Reply (http://twitter.com/#)

I'm sorry Brees. The owners asked for you guys to take a pay cut. They realize they gave you too much in the last CBA. Of course you didn't ask for more money...you are already getting a ton! And you're damn right. We have no sympathy for you!

[Extremebillsfan247]

"Smith had said 10 years of audited financial records must accompany any request from the owners for an extension before the deadline , which was allowed to pass."

Smith is nuts...what private business would share any financial info with a union?

Now it gets ugly.

It was Smith's intention all along to decertify. Even if the Owners put him on the spot and provided those financial records, Smith would have gone with another excuse to decertify. He is trying to make a name for himself. It's going to back fire in a major way though. Now the players have no right to collectively bargain for wages or benefits. The NFL is going to win here. It's kind of a Wisconsin deal in reverse. Instead of a Governer style stripping union rights to get their way, The NFL got the NFLPA to do it for them. lol

[ChristopherWalken]

Bring on the Buffalo SCABS!

[Mski]

It was Smith's intention all along to decertify. Even if the Owners put him on the spot and provided those financial records, Smith would have gone with another excuse to decertify. He is trying to make a name for himself. It's going to back fire in a major way though. Now the players have no right to collectively bargain for wages or benefits. The NFL is going to win here. It's kind of a Wisconsin deal in reverse. Instead of a Governer style stripping union rights to get their way, The NFL got the NFLPA to do it for them. lol if that is the case you may see the "nobody" players file suit against Smith

[X-Era]

Bring on the Buffalo SCABS!That's not the players we have now?

[Mski]

Bring on the Buffalo SCABS!there is no more Union, there for there are no stike lines to cross, therefor there will be no "scabs"

[Extremebillsfan247]

Bring on the Buffalo SCABS!If that happened we might actually put out a better team. lol

[Michael82]

Interesting....



ProFootballMgmt (http://twitter.com/#!/ProFootballMgmt) Howard Shatsky by JasonLaCanfora



One immediate consequence of decertification, Ive already received an email saying the NFLPA is discontiniuing its agent regulation system.

6 minutes ago (http://twitter.com/#!/ProFootballMgmt/status/46342351425241088) Favorite (http://twitter.com/#) Retweet (http://twitter.com/#) Reply (http://twitter.com/#)

So now the agents can poach players from other agents. Watch out for Drew Rosenhaus!

[X-Era]

there is no more Union, there for there are no stike lines to cross, therefor there will be no "scabs"The definition doesn't matter. Call them what you want, the teams can hire whatever player they like. And it's a forgone conclusion that the leagues best players won't be signing up anytime soon.

That means lower level of play.

[Michael82]

Dwan Edwards had this to say.....


http://a2.twimg.com/profile_images/1263478305/dwan_3_normal.jpg
DTrain_98 (http://twitter.com/#!/DTrain_98) Dwan Edwards



This is the worst day of 2011. I'm speachless.

3 minutes ago (http://twitter.com/#!/DTrain_98/status/46343545270968321) Favorite (http://twitter.com/#) Undo Retweet (http://twitter.com/#) Reply (http://twitter.com/#)

[X-Era]

I merged the two threads.

[Michael82]

“This obviously is a very disappointing day for all of us,” Mara said. “I’ve been here for the better part of two weeks now. And essentially during that two-week period the union’s position on the core economic issues has not changed, one iota. Their position has basically been ‘take it or leave it,’ and they’ve in effect they’ve been at the same position since last September.
“We made an offer to them today to basically split the difference between the two sides. We made that approximately at 12 o’clock, and at 4 o’clock they came back and said that it was insufficent and they apparently have decided to decertify.

“One thing that became painfully apparent to me during this period was that their objective was to go the litigation route. I think that they believe that that gives them the best leverage. I never really got the feeling during the past two weeks that they were serious about negotiating, and it’s unfortunate because that’s not what collective bargaining is all about. I think eventually we’ll be back at the table, but unfortunately now we’re going to have to go through this process now, where we’re in court.”

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/11/john-mara-says-union-wasnt-serious-about-negotiating/



I agree with John Mara. The NFLPA never wanted to negotiate. This is such a joke! :ill:

[Michael82]

I merged the two threads.

Why did you merge those two threads? They're completely different.

[X-Era]

[/color]


I agree with John Mara. The NFLPA never wanted to negotiate. This is such a joke! :ill:I truly believe the Union wants the books and is willing to go to any length to see them. I think they think they can get the books through litigation and that a court will rule to force the numbers to be shown. I think the Union wants that information to use as leverage for now and for the future.

One quick thought.

1.8 bill off the top means if the only make 1.8 bill in any year, the players get nothing. To me that's what off the top means.

[X-Era]

Why did you merge those two threads? They're completely different.Common topic that's been ongoing. I can split again if you really want.

[Michael82]

Common topic that's been ongoing. I can split again if you really want.

Nah, I don't really care. But the threads were different. You were talking about comments that were said on March 9th. Mine was specificially the breaking news that the NFLPA has filed to decertify.

[X-Era]

Nah, I don't really care. But the threads were different. You were talking about comments that were said on March 9th. Mine was specificially the breaking news that the NFLPA has filed to decertify.Thats true. Just wanted to keep it organized. :peace:

[Michael82]

I truly believe the Union wants the books and is willing to go to any length to see them. I think they think they can get the books through litigation and that a court will rule to force the numbers to be shown. I think the Union wants that information to use as leverage for now and for the future.

One quick thought.

1.8 bill off the top means if the only make 1.8 bill in any year, the players get nothing. To me that's what off the top means.

I agree that the union wants the books opened badly. But I don't think the league will be forced to show all their books. The last 10 years is ridiculous. The league has offered to give up too much already. The players want the league to give up everything and basically renew the crappy CBA they agreed to last time. The owners will NOT do that.

[X-Era]

If you're a draft fan, the only real football news for the next few months will be the draft.

:couch:

[HHURRICANE]

Is it okay if I hate both sides? In the end the NFL was created before there was a player on the field. They should get more than the players, plain and simple.

[X-Era]

I agree that the union wants the books opened badly. But I don't think the league will be forced to show all their books. The last 10 years is ridiculous. The league has offered to give up too much already. The players want the league to give up everything and basically renew the crappy CBA they agreed to last time. The owners will NOT do that.Agreed.

This "off the top" concept seems a bit troubling though.

Why not a simple % of revenue. If the league makes 1 buck, they get 50 cents, if they make 100 billion, they get 50 billion.

[Michael82]

If you're a draft fan, the only real football news for the next few months will be the draft.

:couch:

True, but why would anyone give a **** about the draft when these players are basically going to sit for a while without being with the team and without us being able to see what they look like. They won't have contracts anytime soon. Actually, I bet a lot of these rookies will now be holdouts in the middle of the season.

[X-Era]

Is it okay if I hate both sides? In the end the NFL was created before there was a player on the field. They should get more than the players, plain and simple.Absolutely. I blasted Thrum, Drew Brees, and George Atallah on my Twitter... I'm sure they read it. :rolleyes:

The middle class should have no sympathy for either side. Both sides will still be rich regardless. STFU and just play football.

[Michael82]

Is it okay if I hate both sides? In the end the NFL was created before there was a player on the field. They should get more than the players, plain and simple.

Nope. It's okay to hate both sides. I can't stand either of them, but feel the NFLPA is more at fault. Smith is a dumbass and just wants the publicity he is getting. The players that aren't making millions are the ones that will hurt the most and will probably be begging the NFL to let them play.

[X-Era]

True, but why would anyone give a **** about the draft when these players are basically going to sit for a while without being with the team and without us being able to see what they look like. They won't have contracts anytime soon. Actually, I bet a lot of these rookies will now be holdouts in the middle of the season.I hope the owners peel back much of what they offered.

Personally I want a 18 games season with 2 pre-season games and I also want a hard rookie cap. Hard rookie cap means no holdouts in my book.

[Michael82]

http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/657785492/alex__mcfadden_normal.jpg
mortreport (http://twitter.com/#!/mortreport) Chris Mortensen



Manning, Brady, Brees are among 9 plaintifffs who have filed antitrust claims in 8th Circuit Court - includes Tex A&M rookie Von Miller

3 minutes ago (http://twitter.com/#!/mortreport/status/46349046473957377) Favorite (http://twitter.com/#) Retweet (http://twitter.com/#) Reply (http://twitter.com/#)

-------------------

Why the hell did Von Miller sign onto this? Is he trying to get the NFL teams to not draft him? What a moron!

[Michael82]

I hope the owners peel back much of what they offered.

Personally I want a 18 games season with 2 pre-season games and I also want a hard rookie cap. Hard rookie cap means no holdouts in my book.

I hope they peel back too. They were offering a lot in the latest offer. Now they should go back to their offer last week and stick with a hard rookie cap, with a cheap salary. I don't want the 18-game season though. Just imagine 2 more games of 2010. That would be depressing.

[Mski]

an 18 game season would be great, hard rookie cap would be great. I think if your names not brady manning or brees, you have NO leverage with the owners, who are now their "employers" and no longer "buisness partners"

its been mentioned before.... try going to your boss and demanding he show you exactly how much money the company makes so you can negotiate your pay, and see how long it takes before you need to look for a new employer... no judge will side with you on that argument

[BuffaloBlitz83]

Th books will be opened. The players will prevail. I side with the millionaires over the billionaires.

[Michael82]

its been mentioned before.... try going to your boss and demanding he show you exactly how much money the company makes so you can negotiate your pay, and see how long it takes before you need to look for a new employer... no judge will side with you on that argument

That's the thing that bothers me the most. There's no way in hell any of us would be able to do that at our jobs.

[Buddo]

One of the first things that ought to be thrown out of any court, is the demand for 10 years audited accounts. The current CBA existed for 5 years, anything previous to that, is irrelevant.

Imho, the Owners should now just impose their 'last, best offer', and be done with it. Pull the rug from under the players, by implementing everything that had managed to be agreed upon, in the negotiations up to now, and then taking whatever their last compromise offer was, and staying with it. Let the courts sift through the rest of the garbage, as they will undoubtedly do, but at least the game still has an opportunity to carry on.
Do that, and there will be little to no sympathy for the players, and within short order.

[ddaryl]

its been mentioned before.... try going to your boss and demanding he show you exactly how much money the company makes so you can negotiate your pay, and see how long it takes before you need to look for a new employer... no judge will side with you on that argument


but in this case the Players ARE THE PRODUCT... they're not just employees they are the product you are willing to spend money on....

[NOT THE DUDE...]

the owners literally have no argument, this is the most profitable safe business in the world... players should not have to take a pay cut, period

[BuffaloBlitz83]

the owners literally have no argument, this is the most profitable safe business in the world... players should not have to take a pay cut, period

I'm sure everyone here who received a raised 2 years ago would be all for that boss saying Hey it is tough times, we need to cut your salary 20k.

[Michael82]

I'm sure everyone here who received a raised 2 years ago would be all for that boss saying Hey it is tough times, we need to cut your salary 20k.

No, but it happens. Or else that person is laid off!

[Buddo]

the owners literally have no argument, this is the most profitable safe business in the world... players should not have to take a pay cut, period

Under the current CBA, it is nowhere near the most profitable, safe business in the world - especially not for the majority of smaller market teams.
Under the CBA as it stood, there will be teams who will probably be sustaining losses, within 5 years - and the current SB champions would likely be one of them.

[Slim]

PFT is reporting that Free Agency could begin at midnight tonight. Crazy. He say's Doty could force the doors to remain open.

[X-Era]

Under the current CBA, it is nowhere near the most profitable, safe business in the world - especially not for the majority of smaller market teams.
Under the CBA as it stood, there will be teams who will probably be sustaining losses, within 5 years - and the current SB champions would likely be one of them.I'm sorry but hearing the NFL's own lawyer (Pash) saying that every team was profitable makes me question that.

Ralph has one of the cheapest ticket prices in the league yet he sells out most every game regardless of his teams performance. Then turns around and claims "small market" necessitates the "cash to crap" philosophy. Either he's unbelievably stupid or he's making plenty of money.

Jags game this year was the first blackout since 06:

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/10/buffalo-bills-get-first-tv-blackout-since-2006-detroit-lions-get-24-hour-extension/1

Browns and Lions game were also blacked out. So 5 of 8 games were sell outs in a 4 and 12 season.

[BuffaloBlitz83]

There is no SMALL MARKET in Today's NFL. There is Big Market and smaller Markets. Opening the books will prove it. Smaller markets are seeing the revenue of the Dallas's and New York's and want there piece of the pie. So they see cutting player revenue as a way to deepen there already deep pockets.

[X-Era]

There is no SMALL MARKET in Today's NFL. There is Big Market and smaller Markets. Opening the books will prove it. Smaller markets are seeing the revenue of the Dallas's and New York's and want there piece of the pie. So they see cutting player revenue as a way to deepen there already deep pockets.I don't think it's Ralph arguing for more concessions from the players... He's probably comfortable with his profits. It's greedy scumbags like Jerry Jones.

Just so that I'm clear, I'd like several parties on both sides to get screwed. The only thing that both sides agree on is greed.

[Mski]

but in this case the Players ARE THE PRODUCT... they're not just employees they are the product you are willing to spend money on....

Ralph has one of the cheapest ticket prices in the league yet he sells out most every game regardless of his teams performance.

Jags game this year was the first blackout since 06:

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/10/buffalo-bills-get-first-tv-blackout-since-2006-detroit-lions-get-24-hour-extension/1

Browns and Lions game were also blacked out. So 5 of 8 games were sell outs in a 4 and 12 season.

fans will still be fans regardless of who plays for their team, thats like saying the patriots would never sell another ticket if they traded tom brady

[X-Era]

fans will still be fans regardless of who plays for their team, thats like saying the patriots would never sell another ticket if they traded tom bradyI think if you re-read my comments you would see that I agree.

[Mski]

i agree x-era i was usuing your quote to argue against ddaryl

[X-Era]

i agree x-era i was usuing your quote to argue against ddarylI'll expand.

I think the Bills ticket sales shows two things... 1) we won't stop going just because we suck and 2) the Bills could raise ticket prices and we still would sell-out.

If Bills Co. had a clue they would raise the prices, and reinvest that money in the team. As the team gets better, they can charge more and make more money. Simple business.

[justasportsfan]

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/09000d5d81eb8db6/Disappointment-in-D-C?module=HP_video

[X-Era]

Just to side with the players on one issue.

How would you feel if your company told you you needed to give money back because of "losing" money but failed to prove they are losing money and you had information (TV contracts, DirecTV, Super Bowl ratings, etc...) that said that they were posting record profits?

Tough pill to swallow based only on "trust" in what they say. Especially when you are the product.

Still, you're still rich so quit *****ing.

[Mski]

Just to side with the players on one issue.

How would you feel if your company told you you needed to give money back because of "losing" money but failed to prove they are losing money and you had information (TV contracts, DirecTV, Super Bowl ratings, etc...) that said that they were posting record profits?

Tough pill to swallow based only on "trust" in what they say. Especially when you are the product.

Still, you're still rich so quit *****ing.ask the UAW how that worked out, cut our wages by 45%, and all along were making a killing in profits, but creative accounting showed losses.

the NFL owners can do the same thing, accountants can ""cook the books"" legally to show what ever trend they want, the players getting the true books will never happen

[X-Era]

ask the UAW how that worked out, cut our wages by 45%, and all along were making a killing in profits, but creative accounting showed losses.

the NFL owners can do the same thing, accountants can ""cook the books"" legally to show what ever trend they want, the players getting the true books will never happen

Nor do I think it should personally. I think every boss and employee should respect the boss/employee relationship.

Simply set a dollar figure in your mind for what you are worth and bargain on that. Forget the books. The NFL will always reward performers through free agency at the very least.

[Buddo]

There is no SMALL MARKET in Today's NFL. There is Big Market and smaller Markets. Opening the books will prove it. Smaller markets are seeing the revenue of the Dallas's and New York's and want there piece of the pie. So they see cutting player revenue as a way to deepen there already deep pockets.

'Smaller markets' get limited extra monies from the NFL atm.
This is possibly what is keeping some of them afloat.
There is an awful lot of extra money that the likes of Dallas, Redskins and Pats make, from their 'Luxury Suites' etc., that they get to keep under the now previous CBA.

"Small market crunch
As we saw in the previous post (http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2011/2/21/2004505/nfl-lockout-2011-revenue-gap-problem), the current revenue sharing model puts the small-market teams at a systemic disadvantage because all the sponsor and luxury box money generated by the big-market teams isn't shared. But it still causes the salary cap, and more importantly, the salary floor, to increase.
There is a very real danger that as a result, operating costs for low-revenue teams, like in the Lions example above, will eventually surpass their revenue streams. This is issue at the core of the current labor situation. In the last CBA, the owners agreed to a deal that didn't include enough revenue-sharing to make specifically the small market teams viable in the long run."


http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2011/2/21/2005431/nfl-lockout-2011-the-haves-and-have-nots-of-the-nfl

This is an interesting article, and is the last of a series of three, which should go some way to clarifying the situation.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2011/2/18/2000707/nfl-lockout-cba-2011-revenue-sharing
(The first of the three).

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2011/2/21/2004505/nfl-lockout-2011-revenue-gap-problem
(The second of three).

[X-Era]

'Smaller markets' get limited extra monies from the NFL atm.
This is possibly what is keeping some of them afloat.
There is an awful lot of extra money that the likes of Dallas, Redskins and Pats make, from their 'Luxury Suites' etc., that they get to keep under the now previous CBA.

"Small market crunch
As we saw in the previous post (http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2011/2/21/2004505/nfl-lockout-2011-revenue-gap-problem), the current revenue sharing model puts the small-market teams at a systemic disadvantage because all the sponsor and luxury box money generated by the big-market teams isn't shared. But it still causes the salary cap, and more importantly, the salary floor, to increase.
There is a very real danger that as a result, operating costs for low-revenue teams, like in the Lions example above, will eventually surpass their revenue streams. This is issue at the core of the current labor situation. In the last CBA, the owners agreed to a deal that didn't include enough revenue-sharing to make specifically the small market teams viable in the long run."


http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2011/2/21/2005431/nfl-lockout-2011-the-haves-and-have-nots-of-the-nfl

This is an interesting article, and is the last of a series of three, which should go some way to clarifying the situation.

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2011/2/18/2000707/nfl-lockout-cba-2011-revenue-sharing
(The first of the three).

http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2011/2/21/2004505/nfl-lockout-2011-revenue-gap-problem
(The second of three).Pash said all teams are profitable. Profit is profit. Whether the teams are willing to do what's necessary to win a Super Bowl is another matter entirely. I will take that issue more seriously when a team actually folds due to money.

[Ingtar33]

that's the end of the off season.

I had a friend tell me at the end of last year that DeMaurice Smith, the head of the NFLPA was just using this whole fiasco to boost his political career. That he would intentionally draw this out to last as long as possible in order to grandstand and make a name for himself. and that he thought the NFLPA wouldn't talk seriously until 2 or 3 weeks prior to the regular season's start date.

[X-Era]

that's the end of the off season.

I had a friend tell me at the end of last year that DeMaurice Smith, the head of the NFLPA was just using this whole fiasco to boost his political career. That he would intentionally draw this out to last as long as possible in order to grandstand and make a name for himself. and that he thought the NFLPA wouldn't talk seriously until 2 or 3 weeks prior to the regular season's start date.The players who make him what he is will only support that just so long. It will become apparent to them. This will get solved, it's just pathetic it has to go to the courts.

BTW, I think it's a real possibility that FA will start at 12:01 tonight.

[X-Era]

Stevie with a antagonizing comment on Twitter:

http://twitter.com/#!/StevieJohnson13/status/46374396364988416

Why Y'all Bashing 13 I'm not the reason you chose a job you don't love! #imjustsaying (http://twitter.com/#%21/search?q=%23imjustsaying) I Want to play football.

Love the guy but that won't make friends.

[BertSquirtgum]

just in case anybody hasn't realized this yet......there is not going to be a 2011 nfl season.

[X-Era]

just in case anybody hasn't realized this yet......there is not going to be a 2011 nfl season.IMO, yes there will be.

Even if the entire NFL and players were filled with short-bus window-lickers, no one will leave 9 bill on the table.

But, correct me if I'm wrong, any deal will have to include revenue sharing details and several owners including Ralph don't like the details.

Point is, an agreement between the NFL and players isn't the end, theres lots of stuff that still has to be agreed upon.

[BertSquirtgum]

I'll expand.

I think the Bills ticket sales shows two things... 1) we won't stop going just because we suck and 2) the Bills could raise ticket prices and we still would sell-out.

If Bills Co. had a clue they would raise the prices, and reinvest that money in the team. As the team gets better, they can charge more and make more money. Simple business.

i wouldn't pay any more that i already pay for my season tickets. i would sit at home and watch them on my tv.

[X-Era]

i wouldn't pay any more that i already pay for my season tickets. i would sit at home and watch them on my tv.Everyone wants the best deal, and no one wants to pay more.

But I have no doubt that someone would take your spot.

They can charge more and still sellout, I have no doubt.

[BertSquirtgum]

if anyone would be willing to pay more than 480 for seven games where i sit then they are fuggin stoopid.

[X-Era]

if anyone would be willing to pay more than 480 for seven games where i sit then they are fuggin stoopid.If you're looking for me to argue against many in the general population being stupid...

[BertSquirtgum]

i thought about it and you're right. there are definitely people stupid enough and willing to pay more than 480 for season tickets where i am currently located.

[BuffaloBlitz83]

i thought about it and you're right. there are definitely people stupid enough and willing to pay more than 480 for season tickets where i am currently located.

You'd be surprised how much more Jets and giants season tickets cost. The Jets were bad for a long time too. and people buy. 480 is a bargain. For any seat.

[psubills62]

I'm still trying to figure out how the NFLPA decertification won't be ruled a sham.

How on earth can a union just decertify purely so they get some leverage in labor talks and then re-form later on? How is that not a complete farce? It's turning the judicial system into a joke. That's like Microsoft "decertifying" if they get sued and then saying "Hey, we're not actually a company right now, so we can't be sued." Huh? They're a union, they've been a union, and they will continue to be a union after a new CBA is reached. This decertification stuff smells absolutely rotten to me, and I don't see how it can NOT be called a sham by everyone involved. If the union decertifies, they shouldn't be allowed to re-form a union within the next 5 years, in my opinion.

/rant

[X-Era]

I'm still trying to figure out how the NFLPA decertification won't be ruled a sham.

How on earth can a union just decertify purely so they get some leverage in labor talks and then re-form later on? How is that not a complete farce? It's turning the judicial system into a joke. That's like Microsoft "decertifying" if they get sued and then saying "Hey, we're not actually a company right now, so we can't be sued." Huh? They're a union, they've been a union, and they will continue to be a union after a new CBA is reached. This decertification stuff smells absolutely rotten to me, and I don't see how it can NOT be called a sham by everyone involved. If the union decertifies, they shouldn't be allowed to re-form a union within the next 5 years, in my opinion.

/rantThoughts:

1) You can't legally make someone be part of a union.
2) You can't legally force a union to exist.

Once the players become individual employees, not a collective union, 32 separate businesses (the teams) can't act collectively. That's anti-trust.

[ddaryl]

fans will still be fans regardless of who plays for their team, thats like saying the patriots would never sell another ticket if they traded tom brady


I don't think so.... it will take years to rebuild the teams back up to where people will be willing to fork over 100's of $$$ to watch them play. Meanwhile NFL teams will struggle to pay the bills and will lose monies.


I know I will not support replacement players. The replacement players back in the 80's barely filled 1/3 of stadiums with reduced prices

[ddaryl]

ask the UAW how that worked out, cut our wages by 45%, and all along were making a killing in profits, but creative accounting showed losses.

the NFL owners can do the same thing, accountants can ""cook the books"" legally to show what ever trend they want, the players getting the true books will never happen

they want audited books and the have professional bankers/accountants looking at these sheets. They'll find the discrepancies, and if they find it they expose the owners to the IRS amongst other forms retribution for cooking the books, or using creaticve accounting practices.

The UAW (I assume United Auto Workers) had no choice because there was government bailout money being given to the big 3, and that was part of the deal. Not that I support that decision cause I don't.

[X-Era]

I don't think so.... it will take years to rebuild the teams back up to where people will be willing to fork over 100's of $$$ to watch them play. Meanwhile NFL teams will struggle to pay the bills and will lose monies.


I know I will not support replacement players. The replacement players back in the 80's barely filled 1/3 of stadiums with reduced pricesTo be honest man, I think that's BS. The majority of football fans just want to watch football, their feelings don't get that hurt by the CBA. If a game gets cancelled, they shrug their shoulders, say "that sucks" and watch college hoping for next week.

The type of fans here are hardcore but we aren't the majority by any means... were much more extreme.

Agree though that no one is going to pay NFL ticket prices to watch UFL level play.

[X-Era]

they want audited books and the have professional bankers/accountants looking at these sheets. They'll find the discrepancies, and if they find it they expose the owners to the IRS amongst other forms retribution for cooking the books, or using creaticve accounting practices.

The UAW (I assume United Auto Workers) had no choice because there was government bailout money being given to the big 3, and that was part of the deal. Not that I support that decision cause I don't.And I think it goes way beyond that. The union then will start nit picking every expense, how much exec's make, how teams spend their money, and can of course make all of it public. It will be a giant mess and embarrassment to the league. Ultimately the employees don't have the right to demand the books from private companies. Green Bay is the only exception. The owners had enough money to buy the team and are responsible for keeping it profitable. If they fail, they should lose their team. The players should simply worry about their individual contracts and just like any other job, they should be competed for and paid based on their viewed worth.

I cant understand why the union doesn't simply allow players to earn whatever they can get. Bargain on the cap, the benefits, season length, rookie wage scale, but quit the whole % of revenue crap. If you can never get the real books you can't ever solve that issue. What's the point? I mean teams will continue to pay big contracts, the contracts will still be there, 32 businesses means they compete against each other for the product which is the players. That will always drive up the contracts.

[DraftBoy]

they want audited books and the have professional bankers/accountants looking at these sheets. They'll find the discrepancies, and if they find it they expose the owners to the IRS amongst other forms retribution for cooking the books, or using creaticve accounting practices.

The UAW (I assume United Auto Workers) had no choice because there was government bailout money being given to the big 3, and that was part of the deal. Not that I support that decision cause I don't.

Keep in mind what happened with the NBA owners opened their books to the NBAPA. The NBAPA claimed the books were cooked and nothing happened.

They NFLPA is not going to expose the owners in anyway.

[X-Era]

Keep in mind what happened with the NBA owners opened their books to the NBAPA. The NBAPA claimed the books were cooked and nothing happened.

They NFLPA is not going to expose the owners in anyway.Nor should they have to. Unless the company is publicly held the org has the right to keep it private.

The way both sides are treating this is frikking ridiculous and crazy.

[alohabillsfan]

I hate unions....They are broken.

[Dujek]

Real quick.

Can you imagine going into your employer and demanding that they show their financial records so that you can then tell them how much you should be paid?

I see the financial records as I carry out internal audits on them before the auditors come in every year, but I see where you're coming from, which again makes the players look bad not the owners.

[NOT THE DUDE...]

Under the current CBA, it is nowhere near the most profitable, safe business in the world - especially not for the majority of smaller market teams.
Under the CBA as it stood, there will be teams who will probably be sustaining losses, within 5 years - and the current SB champions would likely be one of them.

thats why we have revenue sharing, it makes teams like dallas share profits with smaller market teams which in turn keep 32 teams instead of 20, which in turn increases profits more...

btw no small market team is losing revenue, could you please show some data where a nfl team lost revenue???:wtf:

[NOT THE DUDE...]

thats why we have revenue sharing, it makes teams like dallas share profits with smaller market teams which in turn keep 32 teams instead of 20, which in turn increases profits more...

btw no small market team is losing revenue, could you please show some data where a nfl team lost revenue???:wtf:

the tv contracts have gotten bigger and bigger every year, ticket prices are up everywhere and the market is still willing to pay for them... the nfl is beyond profitable, its ridiculous...

players should not have to take pay cuts

[better days]

Thoughts:

1) You can't legally make someone be part of a union.
2) You can't legally force a union to exist.

Once the players become individual employees, not a collective union, 32 separate businesses (the teams) can't act collectively. That's anti-trust.

And that is why there will be no NFL football until this mess is resolved.

[HHURRICANE]

but in this case the Players ARE THE PRODUCT... they're not just employees they are the product you are willing to spend money on....


Remeber when the air traffic controllers got fired and they hired all new ones? We still flew on planes. I'll watch football even if the "stars" aren't on the field.

I am sick of the players way more than the owners at this point.

[Buddo]

thats why we have revenue sharing, it makes teams like dallas share profits with smaller market teams which in turn keep 32 teams instead of 20, which in turn increases profits more...

btw no small market team is losing revenue, could you please show some data where a nfl team lost revenue???:wtf:

Read the 3 links to the articles I posted. Revenue sharing makes some difference, but it isn't going to be anywhere near enough.
What is keeping some of the smaller market teams afloat, is Supplemental Revenue Sharing.
The issue isn't simply about revenue, it's about costs against revenue.
Basically, what's happening, is that teams like the Cowgirls, Pats, Redskins, are increasing their revenue streams. The increases they make, are added to the total revenue figure of the league. They are making those increases though, through areas that do not get accounted for by any revenue sharing model (Suites etc.). This pushes the cap figure up to everyone, but doesn't help anyone pay for the addditional cost of doing so, except the teams who have increased the revenue streams.
This leads to margins becoming increasingly squeezed, and it's why the Pack, in their financial statement, were talking about player costs having gone up the most, of any of their costs.

[Buddo]

Thoughts:

1) You can't legally make someone be part of a union.
2) You can't legally force a union to exist.

Once the players become individual employees, not a collective union, 32 separate businesses (the teams) can't act collectively. That's anti-trust.

I'm afraid it isn't as simple as that. There are areas where sports teams are recognised to need to be able to negotiate collectively, and that even exists in statements of the most recent ruling, the NFLPA is hoping to use against the NFL.

There is also language, apparently, in the last CBA, that allows for the Union to decertify, but not until 6 months have passed from the expiry of the CBA.
While you may not be able to force a Union into existence, it would appear that you cna prevent it from going out of existence, when it is still under the aegis of an agreement not to do so.
All of the above will eventually be ruled upon, some of it quite quickly, but entering in to litigation, is not necessarily the best move for the players, where there are definitely different interpretations of rulings/law, that could apply.