I want mo' money

[crowell33]

Maybe two thirds of the teams are lame teams with lame owners who don't belong in the league.

As they say, the cream rises to the top. If you don't have the money to compete, find another hobby.

Wow. Your for a 10 team NFL ? Five teams in each conference fighting to get to the Superbowl? Interesting.

 

[bucky]

I am valuable. People love me.

See, the word "you" wasn't meant to be taken literally. It was in reference to all the NFL players and what their lives would be like if the NFL just ceased to exist.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I have decided I want a raise this year. My Bosses firm is privately held. None of the financial information is public record, .......and.... according to my Boss.....and get this crap,.....he had to pay millions of dollars to establish the business, market the business, seek financial help from partners like television, hire and provide for all other other employees and he expects me to believe I can't look at his books so I can determine how much money that idiot should pay me.

...
Signed,
I am the Man

The guy that mows my lawn had the absolute kilyonies to ask to see my financials so he knew how much to raise the price of cutting my lawn. What the hell!

I didn't read all of your rant, but....um...the Union isn't asking for more money, the owners are. The Union is trying to determine how much it is fair for them to give up, off their current agreement, in the future. The owners wanted a billion more off the top without offering proof of the circumstances that compelled them to make this request. The Union wants them to demonstrate those circumstances. Sounds reasonable to me.

 

[The Boston Patriot]

This will result in a MLB version of the NFL, where ( goodness no ), the New York teams have the highest payroll every season and two thirds of the league is out of the playoffs on opening day.

I would rather have it this way than the way it is now. MLB still has the draft.

 

[upstater1]

See, the word "you" wasn't meant to be taken literally. It was in reference to all the NFL players and what their lives would be like if the NFL just ceased to exist.

You honestly think for a second Marc Cuban and Donald Trump wouldn't be all over them in a second with cash on hand?

 

[bucky]

You honestly think for a second Marc Cuban and Donald Trump wouldn't be all over them in a second with cash on hand?

To do what? I understand Brady might have some celebrity value. But what are they going to pay Merriweather or Connolly for?

 

[olschool]

Wow. Your for a 10 team NFL ? Five teams in each conference fighting to get to the Superbowl? Interesting.

Sure. If you had Sunday ticket, would you watch a 3-11 Bills team, play a 3-11 Bengals team in December ? I don't think that their diehard fans would even watch it.

The Patriots almost went to St.Louis. If it wasn't for Kraft, and his billions, we would be Giants fans, like back in the fifties.

Good owners make a difference. Let the best teams survive, and it'll be a better game.

The league could lose Buffalo, Houston, Arizona, Cincinatti, Tennesee, Jacksonville, Seattle, Detroit, Minnesota, Oakland, Cleveland and Carolina, and it wouldn't faze me in the least.

 

[DW Toys]

I didn't read all of your rant, but....um...the Union isn't asking for more money, the owners are. The Union is trying to determine how much it is fair for them to give up, off their current agreement, in the future. The owners wanted a billion more off the top without offering proof of the circumstances that compelled them to make this request. The Union wants them to demonstrate those circumstances. Sounds reasonable to me.

Look the little Big Shot with the hat had no plan to negotiate or do anything other than Decertify.
The league offered to have independent accounting firms that each side agreed on purvey the books while keeping proprietary information like if said owner might use his revenue to supplement other businesses, and keep that under an NDA. This assures the NFLPA just the actual incoming receipts and not personal ownership business. I could care less if Bob Kraft pays millions of dollars to his relatives for employment but why should he be told by the little guy in the hat how to run his business. It's not about all of the owners books , it is about assets received and football expense removed. Can the players judge if Kraft takes a Salary of $3M and Jerry Jones $5M and Bidwell takes $1m? What the NFLPA is saying is we will judge what your actual "down" revenues are during the last CBA to determine if we have a fair deal. As Kraft says he doesn't want anyone to tell him how to run his business (Bob you should only take $1m so it's fair!). So in order to do what the NFLPA wants to get them their fair deal even though it seems none of them were underpaid by the last CBA and you are right, the don't want more money, they want to make sure the owners are regulated.........in a private company. But in the end their percentage of the pie raises as revenue does so without question they want more money.

This is not about every team owner in the NFL. It is the fact that some have had financial down times during the last CBA. The league wants an adjustment but the NFLPA wants to justify it. As of yesterday the league said fine, lets hire independent auditors agreed by both sides and pick and choose within reason what we want to reveal whereas it does not cross over each individual owners business procedures. THE NFLPA TURNED THAT DOWN. If there can be an across the board determination of what those required terms would be as a blanket format, this is all that should have been countered yesterday and the NFLPA choose not to.....Why? Because they know if they go to Doty they can get everything they want like CAP rules, no franchise tags or tender rules and basically they get to run the businesses of the owners.....because the NFLPA refused to negotiate. The NFLPA is rewarded by a full court win that brings the League back to a secondary court and the chase is on. The little dude in the hat makes a name for himself in politics and is offered a judgeship or something like that by our President. Is that not a fair statement?

I don't like the owners but I now can't stand the players because of that S.O.B. who wants us to continue to "dig" our sport. Do you think that the players care for us one bit? Say yes and you would be wrong then.


Remember this tag line for the fight:
The players do not care about the fans, the owners have to.
DW Toys

 

[townes]

Look the little Big Shot with the hat had no plan to negotiate or do anything other than Decertify.
The league offered to have independent accounting firms that each side agreed on purvey the books while keeping proprietary information like if said owner might use his revenue to supplement other businesses, and keep that under an NDA. This assures the NFLPA just the actual incoming receipts and not personal ownership business. I could care less if Bob Kraft pays millions of dollars to his relatives for employment but why should he be told by the little guy in the hat how to run his business. It's not about all of the owners books , it is about assets received and football expense removed. Can the players judge if Kraft takes a Salary of $3M and Jerry Jones $5M and Bidwell takes $1m? What the NFLPA is saying is we will judge what your actual downed revenues are to determine if we have a fair deal. As Kraft says he doesn't want anyone to tell him how to run his business (Bob you should only take $1m so it's fair!). So in order to do what the NFLPA wants to get them their fair deal even though it seems none of them were underpaid by the last CBA and you are right, the don't want more money, they want to make sure the owners are regulated.........in a private company. But in the end their percentage of the pie raises as revenue does so without question they want more money.

This is not about every team owner in the NFL. It is the fact that some have had financial down times during the last CBA. The league wants an adjustment but the NFLPA wants to justify it. As of yesterday the league said fine, lets hire independent auditors agreed by both sides and pick and choose within reason what we want to reveal whereas it does not cross over each individual owners business procedures. THE NFLPA TURNED THAT DOWN. If there can be an across the board determination of what those required terms would be as a blanket format, this is all that should have been countered yesterday and the NFLPA choose not to.....Why? Because they know if they go to Doty they can get everything they want like CAP rules, no franchise tags or tender rules and basically they get to run the businesses of the owners.....because the NFLPA refused to negotiate. The NFLPA is rewarded by a full court win that brings the League back to a secondary court and the chase is on. The little dude in the hat makes a name for himself in politics and is offered a judgeship or something like that by our President. Is that not a fair statement?

I don't like the owners but I now can't stand the players because of that S.O.B. who wants us to continue to "dig" our sport. Do you think that the players care for us one bit? Say yes and you would be wrong then.


Remember this tag line for the fight:
The players do not care about the fans, the owners have to.
DW Toys

And fans like you don't care about the players, so it's a good thing they look out for themselves.

When owners are using increased expenses as the justification for the players to give back a big sum of money in a new deal then how they use their cut is the critical point in their own argument. If they are being honest and the money has gone to improving their NFL product then they have a good case, however if they are using it as you describe then they have no case and the players have no reason to agree to the deal.

 

[bucky]

And fans like you don't care about the players, so it's a good thing they look out for themselves.

When owners are using increased expenses as the justification for the players to give back a big sum of money in a new deal then how they use their cut is the critical point in their own argument. If they are being honest and the money has gone to improving their NFL product then they have a good case, however if they are using it as you describe then they have no case and the players have no reason to agree to the deal.

Here's the thing. The owners are the ones who are responsible for growing the revenues - with things like the NFL network, TV contracts, games in London, Chinese web sites, 18 game schedule, etc. The owners have done an incredibly good job at it - to the point where the NFL generates the most $$$ of any sports league in the world while playing the least number of games. Thins about that. The NFL is made up of some pretty darn good business people. Now, the players are claiming they don't trust the owners because they are not willing to completely open up the books and show them all their dirty little secrets.

 

[townes]

Here's the thing. The owners are the ones who are responsible for growing the revenues - with things like the NFL network, TV contracts, games in London, Chinese web sites, 18 game schedule, etc. The owners have done an incredibly good job at it - to the point where the NFL generates the most $$$ of any sports league in the world while playing the least number of games. Thins about that. The NFL is made up of some pretty darn good business people. Now, the players are claiming they don't trust the owners because they are not willing to completely open up the books and show them all their dirty little secrets.

I agree that the league has done a great job of growing but i include the players and coaches for providing a product we all love, and i support the owners in any need they have to use revenues to continue improving the game, however i think that owners have the responsibility to support their claim that they need big money back from the players and there is only one way to do that.

As for trust the Direct TV deal demonstrates fully that the owners aren't trustworthy.

 

[upstater1]

To do what? I understand Brady might have some celebrity value. But what are they going to pay Merriweather or Connolly for?

They'll pay all of them. If the NFL cap is $150 million, they could do a third of that and run 10 franchises. Could they make $50 million in revs to pay off the players? I'm sure.

The USFL, after all, was paying players 50% MORE than the NFL was paying back in the 1980s.

Let's back out tickets and concessions which would net about $3 million a game. Say 10 teams and 12 games before 3 games in the playoffs. That's 63 games. That's about $190 million.

How much would NBC shell out for the total package? Say 3 games each weekend day, 2 each on MSNBC. I bet they could easily ask for $300 million. Cuban and Trump wouldn't need to take any profit home if they could sustain this model for a few years and become a legit league. Their franchises would inflate in value, become at least as popular as say an NHL franchise in just a few years.

 

[BradyFTW!]

This analogy doesn't hold up for about a half dozen reasons. If you were negotiating on behalf of a union that was the reason why your boss had an antitrust exemption, for starters, you might have a point.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Here's the thing. The owners are the ones who are responsible for growing the revenues - with things like the NFL network, TV contracts, games in London, Chinese web sites, 18 game schedule, etc. The owners have done an incredibly good job at it - to the point where the NFL generates the most $$$ of any sports league in the world while playing the least number of games. Thins about that. The NFL is made up of some pretty darn good business people. Now, the players are claiming they don't trust the owners because they are not willing to completely open up the books and show them all their dirty little secrets.

Wait, are you saying that the players aren't largely responsible for the growth of the NFL's popularity?

 

[Deus Irae]

Here's the thing. The owners are the ones who are responsible for growing the revenues - with things like the NFL network, TV contracts, games in London, Chinese web sites, 18 game schedule, etc. The owners have done an incredibly good job at it - to the point where the NFL generates the most $$$ of any sports league in the world while playing the least number of games. Thins about that. The NFL is made up of some pretty darn good business people. Now, the players are claiming they don't trust the owners because they are not willing to completely open up the books and show them all their dirty little secrets.

These would be the same owners who worked out broadcast contracts that screwed the players and protected themselves in the event of a work stoppage, right? The same group that has had Mike Brown giving himself a "GM bonus"?

Can't imagine why the players wouldn't feel trusting of such gents. :bricks:

 

[convertedpatsfan]

The players aren't asking for more money the owners are.

It's amazing how many people overlook this simple little fact.

 

[upstater1]

In the end, the two sides were separated by so little money that a deal should have been made. I don't know why the players rejected the NFL's $340 million offer, I don't know why the NFL rejected the player's $140 million offer, but it seems to me, you both chip in $100 million more, and you have a deal.

Now, it could be that the NFL's offer, since it came so late, was take it or leave it.

But hell, the two sides are separated by very little.

I do hope the players can think about this over the next few days to realize that what separates the two sides is easily negotiable and within reach.

 

[jsull87]

It's all BS.

The players should be free agents every year , just like everyone else. If they sign a long term or short term, or even no contract, it should be between them and their employer. Draftee, veteran, it shouldn't matter. All the other employees of the NFL and all of the teams, are treated just like the rest of us, who work at will, for whatever we can get, and whatever our employers agree to pay us.

The NFL is as much entertainment for the masses as anything out of Hollywood.

If Robert DeNiro can get paid ten million a movie, good for him. If Tom Brady can get paid two million a game , good for him.

The issue isn't the amount of money, it's about the freedom to work for the best deal that you can get, wherever you can get it.

I hope Judge Doty tears the whole system apart.

You realise players dont want to be free agents every year they want the security of a long term deal... also you realise that everyone are not free agents. One lawyer can't jmp ship to another law firm if in his contract that he signed it says he can't...thats the point of contracts. Anywho why am i bothering... vent away btw yeah freedom to get the best deal... so that includes the owners and the players right? both sides? hence why ou should be negotiating rather than sueing

 

[sdaniels7114]

Agreed 100%. If the players don't like what they are getting, let them go into the marketplace. Let them go to the Canadian Football league or the Arena Football league or anywhere else in the marketplace that they prefer to work, oh yeah and don't let the door hit them in the rump on the way out.

And the owners can go out into the marketplace with the second best football talent the world has to offer and try to sell it to the fans. Look at what happened to Vince McMahon(the XFL) when he tried that.

 

[patsfan-1982]

The players aren't asking for more money the owners are.

the owners cant ask for more of what is alredy theres