Never realized Adalius had such a big mouth

[Zeus]

Please don't misunderstand me. I think that if 2 regular season games are added, each player's salary should be divided by 16 and each salary should be increased by 2 times that amount. I spent the last 30 of my 34 year working career in management and before moving to a management position I was a union official, so I have had experience on both sides of the aisle, so to speak. Goodel's assertion that the players already get paid for a 20 game season is misleading, disingenuous and insulting. Then again, I wouldn't have expected anything less from him.

The problem is the overall revenue will not increase ratably. There will be little or no extra ticket revenue. There will be increased televsion revenue from the networks to the extent that advertisers are willing to pay for more regular season games. This increase will be offset in part by reduced local revenue from preseason games (payable directly to the teams rather than being shared).

There's no way that a 12.5% increase in the number of regular season games (18 over 16) translates into a 12.5% increase in league-wide revenues. The players may insist that they are entitled to a 12.5% increase in salary, but where is that money going to come from?

We can argue over whether lengthening the regular season is a good idea, but it seems to me that the economics of it suggest that it's never going to happen. I'm not taking sides, but the numbers don't likely add up.

 

[Synovia]

The problem is the overall revenue will not increase ratably. There will be little or no extra ticket revenue. .

Little or no extra ticket revenue? For real? You can't even give away preseason tickets. People are refusing to buy season tickets because preseason is attached.

 

[fnordcircle]

Yes they do. Just not in the NFL. The CFL, AFL, Etc, are all viable alternatives.

I love how you change the rules of the scenario to fit your argument regardless of whether or not it is true.

NFL Players who are under contract cannot just go play somewhere else. You know this.

What is being debated is whether or not players with existing contracts are being treated fairly when those contracts, which had a salary based on 16 regular season games a year are suddenly asked to play an additional 2 full games a year in place of 2 preseason games they would not have played the entire game or at full speed.

Stop being intellectually dishonest just to serve your position.

 

[Pats726]

The problem is the overall revenue will not increase ratably. There will be little or no extra ticket revenue. There will be increased televsion revenue from the networks to the extent that advertisers are willing to pay for more regular season games. This increase will be offset in part by reduced local revenue from preseason games (payable directly to the teams rather than being shared).

There's no way that a 12.5% increase in the number of regular season games (18 over 16) translates into a 12.5% increase in league-wide revenues. The players may insist that they are entitled to a 12.5% increase in salary, but where is that money going to come from?

We can argue over whether lengthening the regular season is a good idea, but it seems to me that the economics of it suggest that it's never going to happen. I'm not taking sides, but the numbers don't likely add up.

What percentage ROUGHLY would it be?? 10?? less?? I think Goodell may indeed know that, so that was NOT his argument for the change of games..16-4 to 18-2...He said more about the "quality of game" improving, nothing about more revenue. I understand where the players are on this and agree with them. But RG thinking that improving the quality of 2 games...from preseason to reg games missies the point of what preseason is about. According to what he said..ALL NFL games should be played as if they meant something.

 

[Jackson 2]

The problem is the overall revenue will not increase ratably. There will be little or no extra ticket revenue. There will be increased televsion revenue from the networks to the extent that advertisers are willing to pay for more regular season games. This increase will be offset in part by reduced local revenue from preseason games (payable directly to the teams rather than being shared).

There's no way that a 12.5% increase in the number of regular season games (18 over 16) translates into a 12.5% increase in league-wide revenues. The players may insist that they are entitled to a 12.5% increase in salary, but where is that money going to come from?

We can argue over whether lengthening the regular season is a good idea, but it seems to me that the economics of it suggest that it's never going to happen. I'm not taking sides, but the numbers don't likely add up.

Then things should be left as they are.

 

[Pats726]

Then things should be left as they are.

I thnk many think the same..the problem is that Roger does not.

 

[klinefan]

Back to the original poster's point, AT does have a big mouth. Wish he put that much effort into playing instead of complaining about a hypothetical.

As to whether they deserve more money or not...does league wide revenue go up? If it does, they shoujld get a share of it...but if it doesn't then why shoujld they? They only signed on to 16 regular season games? We aren't talking union stiffs risking their necks for $8 an hour, they make millions. As long as their share of the total take is the same, they shoujldn't complain. AT would probably be flipping burgers if not for the league, stop gripping so much. At least do it in private, it's ugly to see.

I love the bleeding hearts worrying for poor AT. Do you think he'd share his millions with you if you were out of work?

 

[BradyFTW!]

Back to the original poster's point, AT does have a big mouth. Wish he put that much effort into playing instead of complaining about a hypothetical.

As to whether they deserve more money or not...does league wide revenue go up? If it does, they shoujld get a share of it...but if it doesn't then why shoujld they? They only signed on to 16 regular season games? We aren't talking union stiffs risking their necks for $8 an hour, they make millions. As long as their share of the total take is the same, they shoujldn't complain. AT would probably be flipping burgers if not for the league, stop gripping so much. At least do it in private, it's ugly to see.

I love the bleeding hearts worrying for poor AT. Do you think he'd share his millions with you if you were out of work?

Because clearly Adalius' problem is that he doesn't put enough *effort* into playing.

 

[klinefan]

Because clearly Adalius' problem is that he doesn't put enough *effort* into playing.

Well apparently not, seeing how he gets blown off the line playing OLB. Definitely not 10M of effort or whatever his salary is. Not enough effort to excuse whining over lack of money for an expanded season.

I thought I was on your ignore list.

 

[crowell33]

Well apparently not, seeing how he gets blown off the line playing OLB. Definitely not 10M of effort or whatever his salary is. Not enough effort to excuse whining over lack of money for an expanded season.

I thought I was on your ignore list.

A 32 Year Old underperforming linebacker, who missed half the season with a broken arm, who will surely be cut in 10 months when his contact number reaches approximately $10 million per, should be very, very, quiet.

 

[BradyFTW!]

A 32 Year Old underperforming linebacker, who missed half the season with a broken arm, who will surely be cut in 10 months when his contact number reaches approximately $10 million per, should be very, very, quiet.

Do you have any idea what the cap hit would be for cutting Thomas? Hint: it's $13.2 million. If you think that he's in any danger whatsoever of being cut, then maybe you ought to go back to football 101. Not sure where you got the underperforming part, either. He's had some injuries, sure, but he's by far the Pats' best and most versatile LB.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Well apparently not, seeing how he gets blown off the line playing OLB. Definitely not 10M of effort or whatever his salary is. Not enough effort to excuse whining over lack of money for an expanded season.

I thought I was on your ignore list.

Blown off the line? Once again, pretty clear that you don't even watch football. You were on my ignore list, but then I took you off of it. The arguments that you're trying to make are so baseless and all-around weak that it's actually kind of funny.

 

[crowell33]

Do you have any idea what the cap hit would be for cutting Thomas? Hint: it's $13.2 million. If you think that he's in any danger whatsoever of being cut, then maybe you ought to go back to football 101. Not sure where you got the underperforming part, either. He's had some injuries, sure, but he's by far the Pats' best and most versatile LB.

Pay Attention. Will BE CUT IN 10 Months. Not Now. Before next season. Football 101 ( since you mentioned it ) is the Pats will not have a linebacker who will be 33 years old before next season, on the 2010 roster. They traded Vrabes and his $4 million dollar cap number and you think they will KEEP Thomas with his $10 million cap number for the 2010 season? Sorry. No.

 

[crowell33]

Do you have any idea what the cap hit would be for cutting Thomas? Hint: it's $13.2 million. If you think that he's in any danger whatsoever of being cut, then maybe you ought to go back to football 101. Not sure where you got the underperforming part, either. He's had some injuries, sure, but he's by far the Pats' best and most versatile LB.

$13.2 million cap hit? If he is cut before the 2010 season? Where do you get these numbers? According to Miguel, Thomas received a $12 million dollar signing bonus in 2007 and spread over a 5 year deal. If he is cut, the last two years of bonus accelerate to the cap ( 2.4 + 2.4 = $4.8 ) His cap number for 2010 is $9.4 million for a net savings of $4.6 million if he is cut before next season. How do you get a cap HIT of $13.2 million? Please explain.

 

[klinefan]

Blown off the line? Once again, pretty clear that you don't even watch football. You were on my ignore list, but then I took you off of it. The arguments that you're trying to make are so baseless and all-around weak that it's actually kind of funny.

I have seen him look pretty bad at OLB when running plays go to his side. But I don't notice him on every play.

I still think he should be a little more discrete in voicing displeasure. Like not voicing it at all. He needs to realize the incredible good fortune he's had (literally). He's not exactly a steelworker having to work for more hours for the same pay. If he doesn't like it, tell it to his union.

 

[apple strudel]

I still think he should be a little more discrete in voicing displeasure. Like not voicing it at all.

Um, yeah. LOL, and who does that benefit? Come on.

 

[condon84]

I completely side with AD here. The league adding two more regular season games would increase revenue that much more even though you are cutting two preseason games. No one really watches preseason games and even though some tickets may get sold, television advertisements are not premium like they are during regular season. And TV advertisement is where the real money is.

The union and the owners have a partnership and share the pie, if the pie gets bigger, why shouldn't the players get a proportionally bigger piece of it? Especially since they are at a greater risk of injury and maybe cutting their livelihood shorter.. Like it or not, AD has a point and it wouldn't be good business if the players just said "Yeah let's add two more games!" and not get compensated fairly.

 

[Patsrock]

$13.2 million cap hit? If he is cut before the 2010 season? Where do you get these numbers? According to Miguel, Thomas received a $12 million dollar signing bonus in 2007 and spread over a 5 year deal. If he is cut, the last two years of bonus accelerate to the cap ( 2.4 + 2.4 = $4.8 ) His cap number for 2010 is $9.4 million for a net savings of $4.6 million if he is cut before next season. How do you get a cap HIT of $13.2 million? Please explain.

His cap hit is 13.2 if cut before 2009 a net charge of $7.26 million. His cap hit before 2010 would be 8.8(remaining bonuses signing (4.8 and Roster bonus of 4.0). So a savings of 600,000.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

$13.2 million cap hit? If he is cut before the 2010 season? Where do you get these numbers? According to Miguel, Thomas received a $12 million dollar signing bonus in 2007 and spread over a 5 year deal. If he is cut, the last two years of bonus accelerate to the cap ( 2.4 + 2.4 = $4.8 +2.0 + 2.0 = $8.8) His cap number for 2010 is $9.4 million for a net savings of $4.6 million if he is cut before next season. How do you get a cap HIT of $13.2 million? Please explain.

You missed on where he got that $8M option bonus in 2008 spread over the remaining 4. And Vrabel turns 34 this August. AD will turn 33 next August. If the cap goes away his 2010 cap hit will not be a concern. If it doesn't, they can restructure. Had nowhere to go with Vrabel given his age, that he was already in the final year of his deal, and he was apparently not interested in taking an actual pay cut... Cutting Vrabel saved $3.2M. Cutting AD would save $600K - can't replace him for that.

 

[crowell33]

You missed on where he got that $8M option bonus in 2008 spread over the remaining 4. And Vrabel turns 34 this August. AD will turn 33 next August. If the cap goes away his 2010 cap hit will not be a concern. If it doesn't, they can restructure. Had nowhere to go with Vrabel given his age, that he was already in the final year of his deal, and he was apparently not interested in taking an actual pay cut... Cutting Vrabel saved $3.2M. Cutting AD would save $600K - can't replace him for that.

Thanks MoLewis. I had no idea he had received an $8 million dollar option bonus in addition to the $12 million dollar signing bonus. $20 million dollars in bonus money. Wow. I'm hoping he makes ALL Pro this season for that kind of coin.