Anyone read this article on Yahoo this morning?
Thoughts...
Yahoo! Sports - Sports News, Scores, Rumors, Fantasy Games, and more
slug=ms-laborquestions090810
Printable View
Anyone read this article on Yahoo this morning?
Thoughts...
Yahoo! Sports - Sports News, Scores, Rumors, Fantasy Games, and more
slug=ms-laborquestions090810
poop....sorry... please see below
Roger Goodell was in the midst of a leisurely training camp tour last month when the NFL commissioner began experiencing severe labor pains.
Goodell, as part of his weeklong bus trip to seven NFL camps with Hall of Fame coach and broadcasting icon John Madden, initiated locker-room meetings with players at each stop, and the level of interrogation he faced became increasingly charged as players expressed anxiety and anger over a potential lockout next spring.
At one point in the commissioner’s visit with the Cleveland Browns, linebacker Scott Fujita(notes), a member of the NFL Players Association’s executive committee, asked: “What do the owners want? What’s it going to take to get a deal done?”
“I can’t answer that,” Goodell replied.
“You’re the NFL commissioner,” Fujita shot back. “You’re here as the mouthpiece for the owners, and you can’t even tell us what they want? The CBA [collective bargaining agreement] is up in March. Don’t you think you need to start giving us some answers?”
By the end of his visit with the Browns, players were referring to the league’s chief executive as “Roger the Dodger.” It got worse for Goodell during the final visit of his tour, this stop coming at the Indianapolis Colts’ training camp. According to two sources familiar with the meeting, some Colts players admonished Goodell with swear words, to the point where star quarterback Peyton Manning(notes) was embarrassed by their behavior. Veteran center Jeff Saturday(notes), another executive committee member, cut the meeting short to keep the situation from escalating further.
Welcome to the strange world of the 21st-century NFL, a wildly profitable business in uncertain economic times whose proprietors and employees can’t just get along. With the two sides seemingly headed for a rancorous and incongruous labor showdown next spring, America’s most prosperous and popular sporting enterprise could be walking a fine line between hard-fought progress and shameful self-immolation.
Two years ago, when the owners voted unanimously to opt out of the current collective bargaining agreement following the 2010 season, it set the stage for a confrontation that could well result in the league’s first work stoppage since 1987. As the deadline for striking a new deal nears – things will likely come to a head on or around March 1 of next year – each camp is preparing for battle on numerous fronts. There has been legal wrangling, political maneuvering, spin-doctoring and economic leveraging by both sides … and much of it has been lost on a blissfully oblivious fan base.
Internal NFLPA studies have shown that only 33 to 40 percent of hardcore NFL fans have the impending labor drama on their radar screens. For everyone else, the prospect of football interrupted – and the potential havoc it could wreak upon everything from video games to fantasy drafts – may come as an unwelcome shock.
As we head into a season that could end with an abrupt dose of harsh reality, here’s a fan’s guide to the labor landscape based on exhaustive research and conversations with owners, NFLPA officials, players, agents and other league insiders.
THIS IS JUST PART OF THE ARTICLE ON YAHOO
Setting up a new CBA seems like it would be easy. Keep the hard cap, keep it a percentage of revenues, set a rookie scale, and improve the healthcare/retirement plan for the guys who make less than $1M over their football career (about 80% of the league).
Oh, and I know the owners really want 18 games. It's a terrible idea.
Both sides will have to give and take. I have very little concern over two groups who earn more in one season than I'll make in one lifetime. Both sides need to suck it up and get it done or go the way of the Dodo.
so much turmoil over 16 games or 18 games...is it really that hard? 17 games and 3 preseason...boom...happy medium
There are things on both side that are going to have to happen, but remember, the people who get squeezed the most in all of this are the fans.
If the players get what they want, and the number one issue is the salary cap, then that is going to drive up ticket, concession, merchandising and TV costs because that money to pay those guys has to come from somewhere. Yeah, I know everyone thinks that rich people just have endless amounts of money that can be taken from them, but that is not reality.
Salary caps need to stay in place. Additionally, they need to put something in place to get rookie contracts under control. I think the compromise here is that high pick rookies will be paid on a percentage of the highest paid players at that position, sort of like the franchise tag works. I also think you will see that the picks in the lesser rounds will get more money than they have been getting. Either through signing bonuses or contracts.
I think that is a sensible agreement. I don't believe the lockout will go past the start of spring training though. All of these guys realize that no football means no revenue. Either by salary or ticket sales.
I'll play if it means I get health insurance and a guaranteed 6-figure contract! :lol:
I think that there will be football next season. Maybe not 16 games. But when the paychecks are not comeing in to the players and the owners are not makeing all there money. Both sides will get motivated to FINALY give something to the other side.
According to NFL.com, they're hoping to have something ironed out in November, but we'll see.
The average NFL player isn't making that much. And he is taking a huge phisical risk to his body, therefore life.
The players union isn't about the well-being of Drew Brees. It's about the well being of the avergae guy who hones his skill for a lifetime, and injury shortens that.
Guys like Drew Brees standing up for them is is very respectable.
16 games, or 18?
Well, are you cool with working six days a week, instead of five, for the same pay? And are you willing to risk your ability to walk for it?
I am going to side with the players every single time. As I know players who aren't millionaires. Does anyone, anywhere on earth, know an owner that isn't a billionaire?
I am no fool. I see right where the greed is.
I have a huge problem with this line by football players. I have friends that are Firefighters guys who also put there well being on the line when others would run away. They don't make half of what the players in the nfl make. The Lowest pay for a guy in his rookie year is over 200k You go tell the police and firefighters that playing a game of football is more dangrous then what they do. I understand the wanting of insurance and all that good stuff but they also want MORE MONEY. They want to take and give NOTHING.
As for the owners they should have given players health insuracne a LONG time ago. I agree. And yes the owners are just as greedy as the players. BOTH sides are being greedy and that's the problem. I hope things get worked out. But if they dont I won't feel sorry for one player or owner when I here how tough things are going for them. BOTH sides made there beds now they have to lay in them.
Just out of curiosity, how much money does the firefighting industry profit per year?
I agree that there is too much money going into The NFL. But, since we keep sending it there, instead of to our military, law enforcement and other emergency services, then someone is going to be keeping that money.
The only people to blame for the massive amounts of money that are going to The NFL is the fans. We actually made their bed, so-to-speak.
Now, you say that the owners are being just as greedy as the players.....
How many owners are leaving the league without ever seeing $1 million, and with a lifelong disability?
And to say "Just as greedy", when talking about guys who generally make ten times as much as the NFL's highest paid player, I think "just as greedy" may be a slight understatement.
One more thing....
It is more than just "playing a game". It is dedicating your life to that game, to become one of the best in the world at it.
It is playing a very dangerous game. The fact that someone else does a more dangerous job, will never change that playing football against the best in the world is extremely dangerous.
It is playing a game that has an average life expectancy that is over twenty years shorter than the national average.
We agree that there is far too much money going to The NFL.
But that is capitalism at work. The market has spoken.
Now the union, capitalism at work again, wants to stand for fair treatment, based on the income of the industry, for the people that are creating the consumer-base for those profits.
Not that I have sympathy for the Ray Lewis', Payton Mannings, or Tom Brady's of The NFL. But, with the amoutnt of money that the league is bringing in, I do not despise the amount that players are making.
And keep in mind that it was the owners who opted out of the CBA. And it is the owners who are threatening a lockout.
The players have not been making any demands... yet.
The average football player plays three years for about $1,000,000. Let's say $1,000,000 exact. 15% off the top goes to the player's agent. That leaved $850,000. Their federal taxation rate is 35%, and the average state taxation rate is 9%. The total after that is $476,000. Which totals $158,666 per year. Factor in cost of living, rookie hazing, and all of the rest, and they're making basically nothing their first contract.
And we're not factoring in long-term effects. Players who get dementia at age 40. Whose hearts explode from over-conditioning. Who have repetitive joint disorders and concussion syndromes.
No profession compares. There are 2,000 football players in the league. There are more rocket scientists walking the streets. These are guys who cannot be replaced due to their physical and mental capabilities. Lawyers, doctors, firemen, teachers - all worthy professions but they don't compare. And each and every player is a bad hit away from never being able to work again.
So when players are seeking not to work 12% more for no pay, seeking a better pension, and seeking some real health insurance, it's hard to say that they're in the wrong.
Not to mention that they *owners* opted out of the CBA and forced this whole issue. If there's a stoppage in 2011, they are 100% to blame.
What you say about the game being dangrous is true it is. SO WHAT. They CHOSE to play it.
There are alot of things you leave out.
1 FREE EDUCATION. MOST nfl players got to go to school for FREE or at least at a HIGH discount. That should provide them the abilty to set up life AFTER football. If they chose to blow through school that is there fault and no one eles. The players have a pretty nice life they just want more.
2. What other industruy do the employess gets a higher % of the money then the ownership?. For example I work for a major chain store. Ownership for that chain makes FAR more then what I as a employee does and it's not even close. The employee who like the players provides most of the service makes very little compared to those in ownership and managment. And because they CHOSE to play a game that should be diffrant? Ijust don't buy it. I don't no the excat number I just no that the players get more the 50% of the money that the NFL brings in. You make it sound like its just the owners Rolling in Money keeping the players down. It's not. It's BOTH sides.
The owners did opt out. But It's also the players REFUSEING to give an inch on there demands like the owners that is the players. If the players would be willing to give something back then it would be much easier. Likewise with the owners. It's going to take BOTH sides fianly giveing in and giveing something to the otherside to work things out. Not just 1.
The owners are 100% to blame and there's no getting around it. They won't give an inch because their pride takes a hit when the players get what they want and the owners don't when the owners feel like they OWN the players. These owners all need to figure out that it's not about them or even the players. It's about those people in the STANDS that support them, most to their graves.
1. A "free" education is what players get in *college* in exchange for the colleges getting hundreds of millions of dollars. It has absolutely nothing to do with the pros.
2. In every industry of any size the cost labor exceeds ownership profits. No individual player makes as much as the owner, but employee salaries as a whole necessarily exceed profits. The larger the organization, the more true this statement becomes.
Players agreed to certain concessions. Now, after *ownership* opted out, they're negotaiting to get healthcare and pensions.
And when you say players are refusing to give into demands. What demands, exactly, are you talking about? If it's longer hours for less pay, what employee will agree to that? If you want to pretend this a fair contractual agreement, what person in his right mind will agree to that? If it's not those, what is it? Because owners have been very quiet about what they're actually seeking.
Add to that that this is an industry where the product is the employee's own skills.
A lockout would be entirely on the owners. And that is what is being discussed here.
But, if that happens, then it will be the owners who feel the immediate sting of a massive loss of customers.
So the players should get heatcare and pensions AND More money? What excatly would the owners be gaining? Why would they agree to that? That's the problem in the whole deal.
Why not the onwers get there extra 2 games to take in more money and the players get there healthcare and pensions provided by the owners? Both sides gain.
the owners there 2 games of money.
The players there healthcare and pensionsions.
Both sides walk away with something. But see it's not the health care/pensions that is the problem. Its the greed on the players side saying give us this but we are not going to take any less.And it's the greed on the owners part that they don't want to give one dime less then they have to.
As for the free education that does have somethign to do with it. People make it sound like theses guys can't do anything after they play. If they used there education they should be able to do something after they play. Or heres a novel idea don't buy the 100,000 cars and all that nice stuff the players like to get and live i don't no like a normal person. The players have good lifes. They make almost 3 times what the normal american gets every year and yes maybe that's only 3 years on the average but again they should do fine afterwards to. But yet they still want more. I call that greed.
That's the same in any industry. But Ownership gets a higher % of the money. Example
EA sports a major game makers made over 4 Billion in profits last year. There toatal payroll is less then 1 billion. Were did the money go. Into the owerners managers pockets. The diffrance pay in the industry does not start at over 200,000$ a year. You get John doe who makes 30,000$ a year. That's the point. players don't no how good they have it. I bet you if you made the players work for 30,000 for a year they would sign the deal the owners want the very next day. The players have it good. The owners have it good. Both sides want more. Thats what I call greed.
I say they should make it 18 hame season, get a rookie cap in place 1pick 50% of what they went for last year and down from there.
Then increase the tam cap 25% to get more money to vetran players.
Why are you assuming the players haven't offered concessions? How do you know?
And again, the only reason there's even a situation is because owners opted out. How does the owners opting out mean the players are greedy?
As for the 18 games. I don't know if you have a job. If you do, assume that your employer asked you to work 12% more hours for no pay. Oh, and you work in dangerous job, and if you get hurt you're fired. Would you do it?
Again, how little or much NFL players got out of college is irrelevant. The NFL didn't pay for any of the players' educations. You don't need a college education or degree to be a NFL player. The players who did graduate worked for the colleges in exchange for their scholarships. The NFL has nothing to do with it.
And as I showed you earlier, the average NFL player isn't buying $100,000 cars. They aren't making millions. Why do you think they are?
John Doe can easily be replaced by John Moe.
Payton Manning cannot be replaced by John Moe.
Noone wants to pay to see John Moe play football, nor do anything else. They pay to see Payton Manning.
That is, most definitely, not the same in any industry.
I bet if you made slaves of any people, that they would start obeying their masters.
What kind of point is that?
Just because you can point to some corporate greed that has ownership taking all the profits doesn't, by a far cry, make that right.
They need the employees in order to make those profits happen. They have to have the whole team working together.
But, once the teamwork results in massive profits, the owners no longer want to be a part of the team. They want all the rewards.
Only by unity do the employees have any voice, aside from begging the masters, on the "team".
And the entire history of our planet has shown that, left to the masters to decide unchallenged, masters will have slavery.
All you need to do as an NFL owner is have alot of money to buy the team, and hire a GM and/or team president.
I am not on the bandwagon of helping the rich to get richer. And the average NFL player is not even on the "rich radar" with these owners.
Free market? Fine. As long as you are willing to accept that unions are a part of the free market.
But again, it is the owners who cancelled the existing agreement. And it is the owners who are threatening to disrupt regular season play.
Have a look at this:
NFL.com news: Players union collecting signatures for decertification vote
Ok one last time And I think we can agree to disagree.
I am sure that if the players were willing to give something back we would not be were we are now. The owners are not stupid they would make something work. Likewise if the owners would budge then the players would. It's BOTH sides. Yes the owners opted out but you have to keep in mind the economy has been on the decline for years. It's simply not the same market. Can you say if you made a deal the market changed you would not opt out.
The avarge player does not make millions i no but they make about 300,000 a year at least. I would have to work 10 years to get to that. If they only do play 3 years thats 900,000 and I am going off the 2007 salarys. I am sure they have gone up. I most likely will not see 900,000 in my lifetime. So why can't the players get there own health insuarce? Millions of other americans do it. Why are they so specal?
Like i stated sports are the only industry where the ownership/managment does not get the higher % of the income. Gamestop the company i work for reports over 3 billion almost every year with a payroll of about 750,000. Ownership makes all the money. The players have it good. The fact that they are wanting any more is greed IMO.
I don't care to much about the owners and belive it or not I side with the players most of the time. I have just grown tired of hearing people makeing 10 times more then I complain about there job market. They have it so good. Make them work for 30,000 a year and then offer what the owners want i bet they would take that deal in a hartbeat.
OK, that doesn't make sense. The owners opt out of the CBA. That means the first move is theirs. So far, they haven't conceded anything. All they've done is demand that players work 12% more for less pay. They opted out because they're greedy. That's the only reason. Every owner except for Wayne Weaver is making tens of millions of dallars a year.
And your economy argument isn't accurate. The NFL is making more money than any time than ever in its history.
Again, they don't make that much. See my earlier post on the economics of being a football player.
And they don't get their own insurance because companies won't cover them. You know, because of the massive injury risks associated with being a NFL player.
Finally, they're so special because they work harder and have more specialized skills than 99.99% of the population. You can't do what they do. Neither can I. Neither can 99.99% of people.
OK, that isn't true. Every company of any size spend more on labor than they get in profits. That's the fact of modern corproate life.
With all respect, you don't remotely have the skills of even the worst football player. Does it bother you when other skilled professionals negotiate contracts? Lawyers, surgeons, programmers, and engineers negotiate contacts in which they make 10x what you or I do. If that doesn't bother you, why not? What's the difference?
Huh? You can get a bunch of guys off the street to play for $30,000 if you want. But you can't get NFL quality players for that. No one will risk life and limb, condition, work, train, and play at a NFL level for that money.
You have to decide what you want, the NFL or the XFL. The difference is the quality of player.
Unfortunately, how much players are paid, the economic state of the NFL, insurance practices, and how much of average corporate income is given to labor aren't matters of opinion. They're black and white facts.
If I want you to take a pay cut and work longer, and you don't agree to do that, are you greedy? Should you capitulate just to get a deal done? Because that's exactly the situation here.
I can easliy turn this around to people want all the benfits at the owners expense and want more money on top of that? and they are not being greedy?
No one answed this when I asked before whats wrong with this deal
The owners get there 2 extra games.
the player get the benfits they are asking for.
Both sides gain something. both sides give something.
The players won't go for that because they will whine that its 2 more games. See it's not really about the benfits like they are makeing it out to be in the media its about the MONEY. The benfits are just there sob story to get people behind them.
I know they don't have benfits they should Again I think the owners are just as if not more greedy then the players. I just no it's both sides. Millions of people dont get benfits are work. If they don't like it they find somewere eles to work that matches there skill level. These people are not makeing near the money the LOWEST paid nfl player makes a year. Yes theres more danger but they chose to play. Not to mention there takeing out 2 preseason games so it's not like this is 2 games that come out of no were.
And keep this in mind. The same people that want there benfits and play a dangrous game complain when the NFL moved the umpire for his safety because it affects the way the game is played. Theres greed on both sides that's just how it is. That's my opinion.
That argument only makes sense if the players had opted out. They haven't sought extra money. They were content to play under a system that was profitable to both owners and players (the prior CBA). Fighting pay cuts and longer hours isn't remotely greedy, especially at a time in which the NFL is making more money than ever before.
The players would take that deal in a second. It hasn't been offered by ownership.
Nope. The players will play more games, but they won't work more for less money in a league in which career-ending injuries are a common occurrence.
OK, I mean this nicely, but you need to work harder on writing your posts. You're not making sense here.
Most people don't have the skills of NFL players. As a Gamestop employee, you're probably good at playing video games and customer service. But you can be replaced easily. NFL players can't.
Believe it or not, it isn't easy to play in the NFL. It requires conditioning and skill that almost no one else can do. The experiences and pay of Gamestop employees or of most any other professions don't matter.
No, they didn't. Peyton Manning complaining isn't the same as 2000 players complaining. And as I said before, this isn't about the Mannings of the world. This is about the 80% of players who have 3-year careers before being shuffled out of the league.
Ok they take out 2 preseason games and make them regular season games and that's more games? Do you alway change facts to suite your opinion? They will play more plays but not more games. Changeing the facts won't change that.
Yes i am well aware that it's hard to play in the NFL they get paid almost 10xs the avarge person and thats the lowest with the lowest salary being 285,000 per year. And again that was the 2007 number it's gone up. Isn't that enough? Yet they want benfits and to be paid for the 2 games that people like you seem to think are added out of no were. They don't get benfits. While i agree they should why cant they go and put money away for if something bad does happen. Millions of other people have to take care of themselfs. I no I no how much risk there is. I will again bring up the police and firemen whos job is EVERYDAY they don't get an offseason. And yes the U.S. Goverment brings in more money then nfl owners They blow it. But the police and firemen who have a job with higher risk seem to manage on less. And most are happy to do it. The players could do the same they just won't
Come on. Guys don't play preseason games with 1/10th of the passion they play regular season games. Not to mention that starters play, what, a quarter, maybe two?
Why don't we go to a 14-game season and play 6 preseason games? Same thing, right?
1. That isn't ten times the average salary (about $40K).
2. You're forgetting higher tax brackets (state and federal) and agent fees. As my father always said, it doesn't matter what you make. It matters what you keep.
Are you aware of the benefit packages for police officers and firefighters? If NFL players get the same, they'd be more than happy.
And NFL players will play more games. They'll play 365 games a year if you want. But they won't play without being paid for it. Or without asurances that they won't be put out on the street if they get hurt.
And again, service industry jobs aren't the same, either mentally or physically, as NFL jobs.
Huh? I have no idea what you're trying to say here. If you're saying that being a fireman or police officer is as dangerous or as risky as being a NFL player, you're incredibly wrong.
Ok I am done argueing this.
for the record I am more on the side of the players. The owners did opt out I don't think thats a big deal this would have happend they made it happen sooner rather then later. The point is Millions of people don't have what they and they want more. That in my opinion is greed. I just feel that there is greed on both sides.
Good exchange! :D