Official CBA Thread

[lonewolf371]

Re: Official CBA Thread

The only reason I remain optimistic is because both sides have too much to lose.

They may make MUCH more money than us "normies" but at the end of they day, the players still have lifestyles and bills to pay that are based on a salary they will not be getting.

If you are used to being able to go out and spend 5k a night and not think twice, would you want to give that up? For every player that doesn't have a mortgage, my guess is that at least 5 others do.


My concern is how long will it take (aside from the obvious concern that it won't happen at all). If they make this an 11th hour agreement and teams are told they have 3 weeks until the season starts, where does that leave us?

It might not be terrible for teams that are relatively established and have very little to do, but think about the affect of a late agreement would have on a team like the Broncos (or really any team with a new coach).


Ok, we have a new agreement, now go sign your second overall pick along with the rest of them, sign your free agents and install a new defense in 3 weeks...GO!

The amount of money involved is why the deal isn't getting done. Each side is asking for way too much money in the opinion of the other side.

No sympathy for either side. The fans are the ones getting screwed while the Owners debate for the Majority share

The NFLPA made a very reasonable offer with the 50/50 share. The players have already agreed to take a cut and now the owners want more? Wow, man I don't know if something is gonna get worked out. Either way its gonna leave a sour taste in my mouth about the league after this. The Greed is overwhelming

It sounds like you favor the players. I know I do. The owners' actions seem almost criminal to me.

[wwharton]

Re: Official CBA Thread

No sympathy for either side. The fans are the ones getting screwed while the Owners debate for the Majority share

The NFLPA made a very reasonable offer with the 50/50 share. The players have already agreed to take a cut and now the owners want more? Wow, man I don't know if something is gonna get worked out. Either way its gonna leave a sour taste in my mouth about the league after this. The Greed is overwhelming

My opinion is that the owners are in the wrong here (you Panthers fans have a real piece of work down there, don't ya?) but your facts are a bit off. The players 50/50 share is based on the total... the current agreement gives the owners 1 billion off the top, then a 60/40 split to the players. The owners want 50/50 after the 1 billion off the top (and may be looking for more off the top), but the players 50/50 on the total isn't really them agreeing to a pay cut. At the end of the day, the numbers probably would end up about the same as it currently is. Considering it's the owners that aren't happy with the current agreement, it makes sense that they wouldn't go for that.

Also, whether I think the owners are being ridiculous or not, they are still the owners. It seems most look at this as two sides on even ground but it's owners vs employees. The very function of unions is to stop owners for going crazy but they do still own the franchises and have a right to adjust pay scales.

[Burns11]

Re: Official CBA Thread

I don't know the economics of NFL ownership, so I can't say the owners are demanding too much or not. I will say that I am more likely to side with ownership in the face of 50/50 splits, given the financial burdens they face.

[dsallupinyaarea]

Re: Official CBA Thread

My opinion is that the owners are in the wrong here (you Panthers fans have a real piece of work down there, don't ya?) but your facts are a bit off. The players 50/50 share is based on the total... the current agreement gives the owners 1 billion off the top, then a 60/40 split to the players. The owners want 50/50 after the 1 billion off the top (and may be looking for more off the top), but the players 50/50 on the total isn't really them agreeing to a pay cut. At the end of the day, the numbers probably would end up about the same as it currently is. Considering it's the owners that aren't happy with the current agreement, it makes sense that they wouldn't go for that.

Also, whether I think the owners are being ridiculous or not, they are still the owners. It seems most look at this as two sides on even ground but it's owners vs employees. The very function of unions is to stop owners for going crazy but they do still own the franchises and have a right to adjust pay scales.

This.

Compared to the other sports the NFL has an absurd amount of control over it's players. The owner's are just using that control to get what they want. And they eventually will. Make no mistake, the players will eventually cave because ownership has all the power in this relationship.

[SPTO]

Re: Official CBA Thread

My view on this is pretty simple. This is going to be a watershed moment for the NFLPA. Every other PA has had a defining moment where they stand up for what they believe in and get quite a bit from the owners. Heck, even the NHLPA which "lost" in the last CBA actually have come out as winners because the owners still spend like drunken sailors.

The big name NFL players have a lot of clout and are pretty much on an even field with the owners but the majority of the players are held down and marginalized to the point that it's very much like baseball back in the bad old days before Marvin Miller came along. It's interesting to note that DeMaurice Smith has been seeking council with Miller behind the scenes. The NFLPA is notoriously weak compared to the other unions and it seems they're going to take this right to the hilt.

The owners think they have all the cards but in reality the players can just de-certify which they did in the early '90s. That would cause some havoc as the league wouldn't have anyone really to negotiate with and the rules would have to revert back to the way they were in the '90s if I understand the rollback without an agreement properly.

[N51_rob]

Re: Official CBA Thread

It's all on the players. If they seriously were savinf money and investing what they were saving smartly, they should be able to make it through these negotations. The problem is that many didn't properly prepare for this and haven't planned for an extended lock-out. Antonio Cromartie I'm talking to you. It will be similar to the last work stopage. When the players were on strike the QB's started the QB Club and most of the top QB's Montana and such crossed the picket lines and the players lost all leverage. Only difference is that now QB's make silly money and should be solvent thought an entire lost season.

It is those midlevel guys who are gonna take it on the chin in a prolonged lockout. Arian Foster made around $350,000 this year. If he was smart he should be able to handle a lost season, if he was smart with the money. If the midlevel guys in the players union can hold on through a prolonged lockout the union gets stronger. Despite getting $1 billion from the networks, if there is a lost season the NFL, Owners and advertisers are gonna have to go out of thier way to make it up to fans when the players come back.

I don't think serious talk will begin until July, but the longer the players can maintain with the stronger they will be. Jerry Richardson, who has stated that he wants to "crush the union" knows that if they can get the midlevel guys to fold the union will have to take a crap deal. Giving the owners the extra billion, then taking 50% or less of $7 Billion, (vise the 60% of $8 Billion they get now.) keeping the franchise tag, and at least a rookie sloting system, if not a full blown wage scale.

Honestly I would love if the NFL had to open thier books. Granted it would never happen but if it did....

[N51_rob]

Re: Official CBA Thread

More PR Spin from Goodell and the Owners.

http://www.neworleanssaints.com/news-and-events/article-1/Op-Ed-Column-by-Commissioner-Goodell/e39297db-a206-4227-bd31-7a0cf11d6b84

One of the best NFL seasons in history is now over. We salute NFL players for their extraordinary talent and we deeply appreciate the tremendous support of the fans.


The hard work to secure the next NFL season must now accelerate in earnest. We are just weeks from the expiration of our collective bargaining agreement. There has been enough rhetoric, litigation and other efforts beyond the negotiating table. It is time for serious negotiations.

The current agreement expires on March 4, and I cannot emphasize enough the importance of reaching agreement by then. If we as a league — the teams and players’ union — fail to fulfill our shared responsibility to the fans and game, everyone will be worse off — players, teams and fans — starting in March.

This is an opportunity to create a better future for the NFL, to improve the game for our fans, and to expand the economic benefits for the players and teams.


Staying with the status quo is not an option. The world has changed for everyone, including the NFL and our fans. We must get better in everything we do.

The union has repeatedly said that it hasn’t asked for anything more and literally wants to continue playing under the existing agreement. That clearly indicates the deal has moved too far in favor of one side. Even the union’s president knows this — as he said on national radio on January 27: “I think what really happened is in 2006 we got such a great deal. I mean, the players got a good deal and the owners felt they got it handed to them.”

We need an agreement that both sides can live with and obtain what they need, not simply what they want.

Today’s collective bargain agreement does not work as it should from the standpoint of the teams. If needed adjustments are made, the NFL will be better for everyone. The first step is making sure a new collective bargaining agreement is more balanced and supports innovation and growth.

The NFL clubs want to move forward, improve the system, and secure the future of the game for the benefit of players, fans and teams.

The status quo means no rookie wage scale and the continuation of outrageous sums paid to many unproven rookies. In 2009, for example, NFL clubs contracted $1.2 billion to 256 drafted rookies with $585 million guaranteed before they had stepped on an NFL field. Instead, we will shift significant parts of that money to proven veterans and retired players.

The status quo means 16 regular-season and four preseason games — even though fans have rejected and dismissed four preseason games at every opportunity. We need to deliver more value to our fans by giving them more of what they want at responsible prices. This can be achieved if we work together and focus on more ways to make the game safer and reduce unnecessary contact during the season and in the off-season.

The status quo means failing to recognize the many costs of financing, building, maintaining and operating stadiums. We need new stadiums in Los Angeles, Minneapolis, San Francisco, Oakland and San Diego; and the ability for more league investment in new technology to improve service to fans in stadiums and at home.

The status quo means players continuing to keep 60 percent of available revenue, in good years or bad, no matter how the national economy or the economics of the league have changed. From 2001 to 2009, player compensation doubled and the teams committed a total of $34 billion to player costs. The NFL is healthy in many respects, but we do not have a healthy business model that can sustain growth.


Companies with far more revenue than the NFL have gone bankrupt because they mismanaged their costs and failed to address their problems before they became a crisis. The NFL has a track record over many decades of making good decisions that have led to unprecedented popularity. Negotiating a fair agreement will result in billions in pay and benefits to current players, improved benefits for retired players, and a sustainable business model for our teams.

The current deal does not secure the best possible future for the game, players, clubs and fans. The next few weeks must be used to negotiate with intensity and purpose so we can reach a fair agreement by March 4. If both sides compromise and give a little, everyone will get a lot, especially the fans.

- Roger Goodell

The status quo means no rookie wage scale and the continuation of outrageous sums paid to many unproven rookies. In 2009, for example, NFL clubs contracted $1.2 billion to 256 drafted rookies with $585 million guaranteed before they had stepped on an NFL field. Instead, we will shift significant parts of that money to proven veterans and retired players.

What EXACTLY does "significant parts" mean? That is way to general of a term when you say rookie wage scale (for which I am for actually.)

[Cubfan]

Re: Official CBA Thread

What is it going to take for the owners and players to sit down and start talking? Stop fighting in the media and sit down. This whole thing is ridiculous.

[Hooe]

Re: Official CBA Thread

What is it going to take for the owners and players to sit down and start talking? Stop fighting in the media and sit down. This whole thing is ridiculous.

There's a line of thinking that the owners simply don't want to talk. They reportedly walked away from a "bar-setting" offer by the players, that being a 50-50 split. The idea behind the offer was a starting point for negotiations, but looks like the shield wasn't having any of it.

[Hooe]

Re: Official CBA Thread

Forgive the rant that follows.

Today’s collective bargain agreement does not work as it should from the standpoint of the teams. If needed adjustments are made, the NFL will be better for everyone. The first step is making sure a new collective bargaining agreement is more balanced and supports innovation and growth.

And why doesn't it work, Mr. Goodell? Because the league bringing in record revenues isn't enough? Oh right, we don't know that for sure because the league won't open up its finance books. How in the heck can the players have a good-faith negotiation with you all if you all can't even tell them the specific financial situation of the league? That seems like the first thing that everyone would like to know.

The status quo means failing to recognize the many costs of financing, building, maintaining and operating stadiums. We need new stadiums in Los Angeles, Minneapolis, San Francisco, Oakland and San Diego; and the ability for more league investment in new technology to improve service to fans in stadiums and at home.

I question as to why the NFL needs to fund a new stadium in a city where no NFL team exists, that being Los Angeles. Plus, these stadiums will all likely be at least half-funded by taxpayer money anyway, as was the case with Cowboys Stadium in Arlington. (which makes that a political issues so I probably shouldn't say any more than that) On top of that, in this down economy that is affecting the league so badly, is it really a prudent financial investment to build new stadiums?

The status quo means players continuing to keep 60 percent of available revenue, in good years or bad, no matter how the national economy or the economics of the league have changed. From 2001 to 2009, player compensation doubled and the teams committed a total of $34 billion to player costs. The NFL is healthy in many respects, but we do not have a healthy business model that can sustain growth.

60% of available revenue does not account for the $1 Billion that the owners take off the top of all total revenue. The players don't get a cut of that first billion, they never see it. The actual money split is closer to, if not exactly, 50-50.

The status quo means 16 regular-season and four preseason games — even though fans have rejected and dismissed four preseason games at every opportunity. We need to deliver more value to our fans by giving them more of what they want at responsible prices. This can be achieved if we work together and focus on more ways to make the game safer and reduce unnecessary contact during the season and in the off-season.

Fans rejected the 16 game regular season so hard that the NFL was the most watched sport in America this year by a staggeringly-obvious margin. Not only that, but this has been the case by-and-large for the past decade.

The union has repeatedly said that it hasn’t asked for anything more and literally wants to continue playing under the existing agreement. That clearly indicates the deal has moved too far in favor of one side. Even the union’s president knows this — as he said on national radio on January 27: “I think what really happened is in 2006 we got such a great deal. I mean, the players got a good deal and the owners felt they got it handed to them.”

You know why else the players like this deal? Because it has worked. The NFL is more popular today than it has ever been, and yes, even the owners have benefitted from it.

Don't screw this up, owners.

[slickdtc]

Re: Official CBA Thread

It's like the NFL does not want the NFLPA to feel like they've won anything. He says they're happy with the status quo but basically the owners are not. I think that's more greed on the owner's part then anything. They're still making good money (well, we don't know, because they won't let us see!), but they see the players happy with the current situation, and they want to make just a bit more so they can say they've won this CBA.

The owners are really starting to sicken me. Yeah, there's players that piss me off, especially the ones who knew this lockout was coming and didn't do anything to prepare for it and will cry when they need to make money again, but I'm behind the players mostly. For as much as they get paid, they put their current and future lives on the line for our entertainment. The owner's enable it, and benefit from it, but they are not the league. The players are the league more then ever and it seems they just want a fair deal, not a deal that is clearly in their favor.

[wwharton]

Re: Official CBA Thread

It's like the NFL does not want the NFLPA to feel like they've won anything. He says they're happy with the status quo but basically the owners are not.

This is basically what any lock out is about. It's the difference between a lock out and a strike, and neither is really about both sides coming to a common ground for the good of a CBA. The reason the owners opted out of the CBA is because they aren't happy with the current arrangement. They're threatening a lock out if the players won't accept their terms. Every discussion about this starts after these things are understood (not saying you specifically didn't understand that but I think that's a key point on how anyone looks at the owners or the players in this dispute).

[N51_rob]

Re: Official CBA Thread

Ready, set, solution:

-Owners get $1.5 billion off the top
-Players take 54% of the remaining $7.5 billion.
-Any new revenue streams follow similar distribution
-Owners and Players chip in that 6% for post career health care
-Rookie Wage Scale
-Increase in Salary Cap Floor
-Removal or Reworking of Franchise Tag
-6 years required for UFA status
-New clauses in all contracts that allow team to recoup Guranteed Dollars in the event of felony criminal CONVICTION (not charges). Includes Salary Cap relief.
-16 Game season
-New LA Stadium is the host of all Super Bowls going forward following 2014 Super Bowl in New York
-Outside mediation for Disciplinary Appeals.

Isn't this basically what both sides are after? How hard is that?

[lonewolf371]

Re: Official CBA Thread

Ready, set, solution:

-Owners get $1.5 billion off the top
-Players take 54% of the remaining $7.5 billion.
-Any new revenue streams follow similar distribution
-Owners and Players chip in that 6% for post career health care
-Rookie Wage Scale
-Increase in Salary Cap Floor
-Removal or Reworking of Franchise Tag
-6 years required for UFA status
-New clauses in all contracts that allow team to recoup Guranteed Dollars in the event of felony criminal CONVICTION (not charges). Includes Salary Cap relief.
-16 Game season
-New LA Stadium is the host of all Super Bowls going forward following 2014 Super Bowl in New York
-Outside mediation for Disciplinary Appeals.

Isn't this basically what both sides are after? How hard is that?

Players get jobbed in that deal. Another $500 million off the top for the owners and then a lower cut for the players over the remaining pieces.

It's a 5, 6 year deal, right? Over the course of the deal, the cut off the top alone is another $2.5 billion to the owners over the players.

[jth1331]

Re: Official CBA Thread

This is all on both sides becoming greedy, but I feel the owners are trying to royally screw the players.
I mean, an extra billion off the top to the owners, PLUS a pay cut for the players?
Not to mention wanting to add things the players don't want, like an 18 game schedule.

To me I think a "fair deal" would be the owners getting 1 billion, then the remaining 8 billion be split 53.75% for the players, 46.25% for the owners.
Owners would be getting 4.7 billion, the players 4.3 billion.