PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Think the owners are being the stubborn ones? Think again


Status
Not open for further replies.

Rob0729

PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
Joined
Nov 14, 2006
Messages
49,596
Reaction score
28,270
Here is the last proposal by the league to the NFLPA (via PFT):

1
. We more than split the economic difference between us, increasing our proposed cap for 2011 significantly and accepting the Union’s proposed cap number for 2014 ($161 million per club).
2. An entry level compensation system based on the Union’s “rookie cap” proposal, rather than the wage scale proposed by the clubs. Under the NFL proposal, players drafted in rounds 2-7 would be paid the same or more than they are paid today. Savings from the first round would be reallocated to veteran players and benefits.
3. A guarantee of up to $1 million of a player’s salary for the contract year after his injury – the first time that the clubs have offered a standard multi-year injury guarantee.
4. Immediate implementation of changes to promote player health and safety by
a. Reducing the off-season program by five weeks, reducing OTAs from 14 to 10, and limiting on-field practice time and contact;
b. Limiting full-contact practices in the preseason and regular season; and
c. Increasing number of days off for players.
5. Commit that any change to an 18-game season will be made only by agreement and that the 2011 and 2012 seasons will be played under the current 16-game format.
6. Owner funding of $82 million in 2011-12 to support additional benefits to former players, which would increase retirement benefits for more than 2000 former players by nearly 60 percent.
7. Offer current players the opportunity to remain in the player medical plan for life.
8. Third party arbitration for appeals in the drug and steroid programs.
9. Improvements in the Mackey plan, disability plan, and degree completion bonus program.
10. A per-club cash minimum spend of 90 percent of the salary cap over three seasons.

I think that came from Jeff Pash's press conference.

NFL’s summary of its final proposal to the players | ProFootballTalk
 
Last edited:
i HATE UNIONS UGHGHHGH
 
BTW, if these concession are true, the NFLPA may have miscalculated with their decertification move. If the NFL can prove in court that this offer was a good faith effort to negotiate with the players, the courts could force the players to accept this proposal as is.
 
If that is the real deal offered to the players then they are morons to not accept it. Without football 25-40% of them will end up flipping hamburgs or washing other peoples' vehicles.
 
Yes, the owners are being the stubborn ones. They could have gotten an extension just by agreeing to audited reviews of their finances.
 
the union chose to go after the 1 thing they knew they wouldn't get.

they are in fact the stubborn ones.
 
They are both stubborn
 
the union chose to go after the 1 thing they knew they wouldn't get.

they are in fact the stubborn ones.

Demanding players take a pay/income cut without justifying it is what brought this on. That's on the owners.


Having said that, the 3rd party arbitration item is something I've been calling for. It's good to see that one out there.
 
Last edited:
They are both stubborn

Agreed. Just because the owners made movement in the end doesn't make them not stubborn. Asking for an extra billion dollars a year is a huge starting point, it's no wonder they had a lot of wiggle room.

It's frustrating to see. On one hand there wouldn't be a league without the owners, but the other hand fans don't pay to see the owners, they pay to see the players. I understand the players not wanting to get screwed here, but let's be real, this is a dream gig for them. It's not like people are asking them to take this massive pay cut. They were getting a solid deal and just got greedy.

In the end, it's not about the owners or players, it's about the fans. We're the customers, and we're getting the complete shaft. Both sides are making money off the deal, but we're the ones who have to suffer.

I'm growing real tired of CBA drama in sports.
 
For those bagging on the players, check out this article and take a look at some of the shenanigans MLB owners were up to.

NFL owners' claims aren't yet an open book

A couple of items:

In May, divorce court records showed that two sons of Dodgers owner Frank McCourt were on the payroll for a combined $600,000, though one was reportedly enrolled at Stanford business school and the other worked for Goldman Sachs in New York.

Records also showed the team was charging itself $14 million in rent on land it already owned;

The NFL owners tried to screw the players with the broadcasting contracts. Why should the players blindly trust that NFL owners aren't pulling the same sorts of shenanigans that MLB owners are?
 
Last edited:
the owners are the ones who had this planned for 2 years, so this media spin of thier so called offer is a sham... the players are playing this so right, the leauge is at a all time high, the owners are the ones crying poverty open your books snyder, kraft and jones... lets see who is losing money... the players will win this in court , there will be football this year, but the offseason will be delayd.. nuf said...
 
Demanding players take a pay/income cut without justifying it is what brought this on.

Agreed. Especially since the millions of workers getting pay/benefit cuts over the last couple of years have all been given details expense reports from their employers over the last decade.

Oh wait...none of them were given that information.

Nevermind.
 
Yes, the owners are being the stubborn ones. They could have gotten an extension just by agreeing to audited reviews of their finances.

Give me a break. Collective bargaining happens everywhere and never are these types of demands placed on businesses.
 
Last edited:
Agreed. Especially since the millions of workers getting pay/benefit cuts over the last couple of years have all been given details expense reports from their employers over the last decade.

Oh wait...none of them were given that information.

Nevermind.

Excellent point. The 4 sports leagues are in precisely the same situation as every other business model in the country. And it's not as if there's revenue sharing or anti-trust exemptions involved here that change everything, or something radically different like that.


Oh, wait...
 
Last edited:
Well.....the players made a move to prevent the lockout.

Guess it's the owners move now.....

With all the problems in the world, both are acting like spoiled babies
 
For those bagging on the players, check out this article and take a look at some of the shenanigans MLB owners were up to.

NFL owners' claims aren't yet an open book

A couple of items:





The NFL owners tried to screw the players with the broadcasting contracts. Why should the players blindly trust that NFL owners aren't pulling the same sorts of shenanigans that MLB owners are?

Isn't every negotiation ever among the NFL and NFLPA based on revenues and not profits?
What purpose would the financials serve?
It would seem like a fishing expedition by the NFLPA, apparently to find something they can use to their advantage.
I don't know how anyone could expect the NFL to be willing to show their books to the union, unless the salary cap were to be based on profits.
Its a slippery slope to reveal your financial records to your adversary who clearly will attempt to use them against you.
 
Demanding players take a pay/income cut without justifying it is what brought this on. That's on the owners.


Having said that, the 3rd party arbitration item is something I've been calling for. It's good to see that one out there.

Aren't they justifiying it with revenues and the expenses that are included in the calculation? What purpose would it serve the union to know how much Belichicks secretary makes or what the Patriots office supply budget is?
I get the concept that owners asking for salary concessions because they are losing money, but thats not realy whats happening here becuase profitability is nowhere in the equation between players and owners, as I understand it.
 
Isn't every negotiation ever among the NFL and NFLPA based on revenues and not profits?
What purpose would the financials serve?
It would seem like a fishing expedition by the NFLPA, apparently to find something they can use to their advantage.
I don't know how anyone could expect the NFL to be willing to show their books to the union, unless the salary cap were to be based on profits.
Its a slippery slope to reveal your financial records to your adversary who clearly will attempt to use them against you.

The NFL is claiming that the earlier system was untenable because higher expenses were eating into owner profits while player revenues were skyrocketing. The players want to see the proof of that, and they want to see it on a team-by-team basis, while the league was only offering to show league-wide revenue financials. Those are obviously significantly different things.

Metaphors made a claim that was wrong:

Agreed. Especially since the millions of workers getting pay/benefit cuts over the last couple of years have all been given details expense reports from their employers over the last decade.

Oh wait...none of them were given that information.

Nevermind.

The NBA gave such information to the NBA players.

The NFL has legitimate reasons for wanting to keep that info secret, and the players have legitimate reasons for wanting access to it. In the end, the owners were willing to have this matter go to court in order to avoid providing the information. Now they'll ride the tiger and hope they can get away unscathed. I expect that they'll get crushed in the courts, but I could be wrong.
 
Aren't they justifiying it with revenues and the expenses that are included in the calculation? What purpose would it serve the union to know how much Belichicks secretary makes or what the Patriots office supply budget is?
I get the concept that owners asking for salary concessions because they are losing money, but thats not realy whats happening here becuase profitability is nowhere in the equation between players and owners, as I understand it.

No, and that's precisely the point of the union.
 
Last edited:
No, and that's precisely the point of the union.
I don't understand that.
I am under the impression that the CBA (at least for many years) has been an agreement of what REVENUES (less certain expenses) are used to calculate the cap. Those are all documented and shared.
Why would the profits of the teams, i.e. how they spend their 40% have anything to do with the negotiations?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


MORSE: Patriots Draft Needs and Draft Related Info
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/19: News and Notes
TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf’s Pre-Draft Press Conference 4/18/24
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/18: News and Notes
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/17: News and Notes
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/16: News and Notes
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/15: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-14, Mock Draft 3.0, Gilmore, Law Rally For Bill 
Potential Patriot: Boston Globe’s Price Talks to Georgia WR McConkey
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/12: News and Notes
Back
Top