Players have too much control

[Vindicate]

The owners still have the control.. always have. Always will.

Especially with a ****ty player's union.

 

[TomPatriot]

i don't "blame" them per se but this whole model is unsustainable as is imo.

That’s a fair assessment.

 

[Ivan]

have any black people tried to band together to get a team and been kept out? where are you getting that there is fear of this nature?

NFL
owners are a select club of billionaires, they make it difficult for minority owners to fully own teams:

The NFL requirements make it difficult for Black owners because the league limits the number of investors, investment groups or hedge funds in an ownership group, with the interest of keeping owner numbers to a minimum.

 

[Real fan 02]

Especially with a ****ty player's union.

Absolutely agree the strongest players union In sports is the NBAPA..

 

[XLIX]

Usually I'd all in on the side of player movement, BUT not in this case. Now none of us would have liked to have graduated college and been forced to go with the company, or in my case, school system, that dictated the choice of where. But here's the thing. The player, IS choosing. They WANT to play in the NFL. THAT's the choice. If you want to play in the NFL you tacitly agree to the rules of player dispersement of that organization. Just like if you were hired by google and the job they wanted you to do was in a place you didn't want to go, you have the choice taking the job or not.

You have compared the NFL to google. Earlier in this thread, someone compared them to IBM. Problem is there is a huge difference.

Google is a company.
IBM is a company.
The NFL is 32 distinct, individual companies. That is a fact which the US Supreme Court has already ruled on and, as such, the court has limited the NFL's antitrust law exemption.

Given how much the courts have changed the college landscape over the past few years, I wouldn't be surprised if someone eventually brings the pro leagues into a courtroom as well.

 

[HSanders]

NFL
owners are a select club of billionaires, they make it difficult for minority owners to fully own teams:

The NFL requirements make it difficult for Black owners because the league limits the number of investors, investment groups or hedge funds in an ownership group, with the interest of keeping owner numbers to a minimum.

i'm not getting how that's worse for minorities though? are you saying that there are no minorities wealthy enough to have limited ownership groups?

 

[HSanders]

Especially with a ****ty player's union.

also the players aren't fiscally disciplined enough to strike.

 

[lancerman]

also the players aren't fiscally disciplined enough to strike.

That's not the proble.

The problem is that the majority of the league, like 70% or so, are guys who will wash out of the league within 3 years, maybe 5. They have one priority. That priority is to make as much money and get as many benefits as possible before leaving the league.

Fans only really pay attention to top end talent that lasts, those guys get paid anyways. So fans care more about priorities that matter more to them. Yet they are the minority in the NFLPA. Like the guys that will be gone in 3 years don't give a **** about sacraficing some disciplinary control to owners for more money.

 

[Ivan]

i'm not getting how that's worse for minorities though? are you saying that there are no minorities wealthy enough to have limited ownership groups?

No,I’m saying that it’s really ironic that the have a Rooney Rule for coaching hires, but don’t have a black owner, and have rules making it difficult to have a majority black ownership group.

 

[TheRainMaker]

You have compared the NFL to google. Earlier in this thread, someone compared them to IBM. Problem is there is a huge difference.

Google is a company.
IBM is a company.
The NFL is 32 distinct, individual companies. That is a fact which the US Supreme Court has already ruled on and, as such, the court has limited the NFL's antitrust law exemption.

Given how much the courts have changed the college landscape over the past few years, I wouldn't be surprised if someone eventually brings the pro leagues into a courtroom as well.

I agree. There will be a player that will go Ed O'Bannon on the NFL some day and they would win.

 

[Jim Beankie]

This is a disturbing trend considering the last few times this happened was 20 years ago and 18 years before that. Sh*t's gonna get real ugly in the 2040s at this rate.

 

[patfanken]

You have compared the NFL to google. Earlier in this thread, someone compared them to IBM. Problem is there is a huge difference.
U
Google is a company.
IBM is a company.
The NFL is 32 distinct, individual companies. That is a fact which the US Supreme Court has already ruled on and, as such, the court has limited the NFL's antitrust law exemption.

Given how much the courts have changed the college landscape over the past few years, I wouldn't be surprised if someone eventually brings the pro leagues into a courtroom as well.

Could be. But I thought the courts have already ruled that those 32 "individual companies " can act as a single entity as it pertains to collective bargaining. Giving the NFL the right to act as a monopoly albeit in a very narrow view.

 

[fester]

If you take a job with IBM say and they decide to send you to Idaho, what rights do you have? Go to Idaho or take a job with a different company
In this case the options are NFL, USFL or arena football league.
Need to break NFL anti trust exemption if Deion does not like it.
I do not feel bad for Deion's kid who got paid 10 million last year in NIL while still in college
Boo hoo…. He has to live in a city with a cold winter season while being paid many millions of dollars for a couple of years
Terrible mistreatment

Assuming he is a legit top 10 pick he has the leverage to take less money to end up where he wants. I would rather have that be transparent than implicit on blowing up on some interviews etc

 

[Vindicate]

also the players aren't fiscally disciplined enough to strike.

That's because it's terribly ran. A strong union implements worker education. What you're discussing is a symptom of a bad union, it isn't the issue.

 

[XLIX]

Could be. But I thought the courts have already ruled that those 32 "individual companies " can act as a single entity as it pertains to collective bargaining. Giving the NFL the right to act as a monopoly albeit in a very narrow view.

Yes they have, and this touches on something I said several posts ago.... the NFL hypocritically wants to have it both ways. They want to say they are 32 totally separate entities when it suits them, and they want to say they are 32 partners when it suits them.

As I also said in a previous post, I think changing the CBA in a court of law would be a longshot - but not impossible. Courts can, have and will get rid of blatantly unfair language in any contract.

 

[Sect140]

No one is forcing an NFL team to draft him.

He isn’t trying to circumvent the CBA. He is utilizing the specific language to his advantage. Sanders is saying that if my son doesn’t get drafted to team he wants to play for, he will sit out for a year and re-enter the draft. That is following the CBA to the letter. It is not circumventing it in any way. Every player has that option. It is just that few players have the financial resources or parental support to go that route.

Then good sit out the year, then a year later he is drafted by another team he doesn’t want to play for he can go play in the UFL. Actually he may do that after the first draft.

 

[Sect140]

Yes. They are independent contractors and shouldn't be subjected to being forced into going to a Franchise that they don't want to go to. The average career is like 4 years. You pretty much have one shot to make it. We've seen many careers ruined by going to bad situations.

Put yourself in their shoes. What if you were forced to being employed by a company you didn't want to go to or put you in a position you feel you wouldn't do well?

If they were going to pay me millions of dollars to play a game. Sign me up!

 

[lancerman]

Then good sit out the year, then a year later he is drafted by another team he doesn’t want to play for he can go play in the UFL. Actually he may do that after the first draft.

The leverage is that teams know they are risking a draft pick if a player is willing to sit out rather than play for them.

Let's say Sanders is hypothetically a first round graded QB in 2025. A QB needy team willing to use a first round pick on him now has to worry that the pick goes to waste if he sits out. The way the league works is that a player can sit out for a year after getting drafted, the team has their rights for a year, then they are eligible for the draft the following year. You can legitimately have a team get absolutely nothing for a high first round pick. He has less leverage the next year, but all he needs to do is scare enough teams off in 2025 until a team he gave the green light to drafted him.

 

[Sect140]

The leverage is that teams know they are risking a draft pick if a player is willing to sit out rather than play for them.

Let's say Sanders is hypothetically a first round graded QB in 2025. A QB needy team willing to use a first round pick on him now has to worry that the pick goes to waste if he sits out. The way the league works is that a player can sit out for a year after getting drafted, the team has their rights for a year, then they are eligible for the draft the following year. You can legitimately have a team get absolutely nothing for a high first round pick. He has less leverage the next year, but all he needs to do is scare enough teams off in 2025 until a team he gave the green light to drafted him.

Great point. I’m thinking this is all for nothing anyways because unless Colorado completely turns it around then his son may not even be a top of the of the first round pick.

 

[1960Pats]

No one is forcing an NFL team to draft him.

He isn’t trying to circumvent the CBA. He is utilizing the specific language to his advantage. Sanders is saying that if my son doesn’t get drafted to team he wants to play for, he will sit out for a year and re-enter the draft. That is following the CBA to the letter. It is not circumventing it in any way. Every player has that option. It is just that few players have the financial resources or parental support to go that route.

What happens if Sanders sits out the year and is then re-drafted the next year by a team not of his choice?