Page 6 of 15 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 147

Thread: Players Union decertifies

  1. #1
    Member Since
    Sep 2009
    Location
    hollywood
    Posts
    404
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default Players Union decertifies


    0 Not allowed!
    Per Chris Mortensen, ESPN NFL insider.

    Players union has filed decertification papers in Minneapolis court.

    Peaceful renegotiation of new CBA is now a thing of the past. The courts will decide, and there may be no football this year.

  2. #51
    Member Since
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    2,868
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 44
    Given: 18

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Saw this quote from Drew Brees: "And don't let the NFL influence you with manipulation and false information. Don't drink the kool aid!"

    I've been backing the players (mostly b/c of all the support for the owners on here), but I'm really just mad at both sides for not getting something done. The owners and players are both going to paint it like the other is at fault. There's two sides to the story, and then there is the truth.
    Diehard Fan Living in Packer Territory

    Co-Founder: 2 Mugs Fantasy Football -- a site about and football!

  3. #52
    Member Since
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    205
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Hayvern View Post
    You are right TS. They went to the table all along expecting to decertify. They want the books opened up wide and so they can see everything about how the owners are spending the money. Since when does ANY employee group get such things.
    I think the only reason they get it is because the owners opened pandora's box by breaking the existing CBA because they said they were losing money.

    If the owner's didn't want to have to open the books, then they shouldn't have publicly cried poverty. Frankly, if I were an owner, I'd be embarrassed that I can't live within my means and have to ask my employees to take paycut. On the other hand, most of these guys make more in a season than I make in 10-20 years, so its hard to be too sympathetic. Again, all the players or the owners want is to get the most the can, while they can. The idea that either of them would compromise for the good of the fans or the game is so laughable it is pathetic.

    If there is one thing I have learned in the past couple of years is that you can't trust ANYONE who is rich (talking the top 2% here to which all of the owners and a good chunk of the players belong). Once you have the power of money, it corrupts and all you care about is getting more.

  4. #53
    Member Since
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    13,953
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 77
    Given: 27

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Look at the GB Packers as an example. They are a publicly owned franchise so their records are public. That franchise made $20.1 million in 2009. It isn't like the owners are going broke, they made $20 million. At the same time, that's less than Tom Brady and Peyton. It us also likely less than what Aaron Rodgers will make on his new deal.
    Why should the employees make more than the owner? And if we recognize the fact that the Packers make MUCH more than most franchises(including the chiefs) due to merchandise sales and being sold out for every game. Then all of the sudden you realize that these billionaires are taking on all of the risk for a very small return on their money.

    Look at the bills, jags, panthers, rams, etc instead of the Packers are you quickly realize many owners probably aren't making tons of money and are possibly losing it. Especially when you consider owners like Clark Hunt are kicking in $150mm of their own money to renovate stadiums.


  5. #54
    Member Since
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura, Ca.
    Posts
    2,605
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 6
    Given: 1

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by wilqb16 View Post
    If the owner's didn't want to have to open the books, then they shouldn't have publicly cried poverty. Frankly, if I were an owner, I'd be embarrassed that I can't live within my means and have to ask my employees to take paycut. ...
    Your post makes it sound like that owners are just taking all of the proceeds. You make it sound like the owners have no expenses, no concerns and that all the money that is coming in is going directly to their pockets.

    Why don't the players learn to live within their means? Why do they need a pay increase? Why are the NFL players any different than the rest of us who have been asked to take paycuts to keep working?


    Are you man enough? Eric Berry? Apparently Not!

  6. #55
    Member Since
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    2,868
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 44
    Given: 18

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Coach View Post
    Look at the GB Packers as an example. They are a publicly owned franchise so their records are public. That franchise made $20.1 million in 2009. It isn't like the owners are going broke, they made $20 million. At the same time, that's less than Tom Brady and Peyton. It us also likely less than what Aaron Rodgers will make on his new deal.
    Why should the employees make more than the owner?
    And if we recognize the fact that the Packers make MUCH more than most franchises(including the chiefs) due to merchandise sales and being sold out for every game. Then all of the sudden you realize that these billionaires are taking on all of the risk for a very small return on their money.

    Look at the bills, jags, panthers, rams, etc instead of the Packers are you quickly realize many owners probably aren't making tons of money and are possibly losing it. Especially when you consider owners like Clark Hunt are kicking in $150mm of their own money to renovate stadiums.
    You're ignoring supply and demand. If an owner doesn't want to pay a player $20M, he by all means does not have to. He just loses out on that player, and someone else out there will pay him that.

    These players also bring a lot to the table for the NFL in terms of other revenue generating opportunities (merchandise primarily), so it's tough to say how much money a guy like Manning actually "costs" an organization compared to a lifelong special teamer who won't do anything to bring in money.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hayvern View Post
    Your post makes it sound like that owners are just taking all of the proceeds. You make it sound like the owners have no expenses, no concerns and that all the money that is coming in is going directly to their pockets.

    Why don't the players learn to live within their means? Why do they need a pay increase? Why are the NFL players any different than the rest of us who have been asked to take paycuts to keep working?
    I'm going to try to answer this question:

    If an average worker is told to take a paycut, or lose his/her job, he/she can go find another job if they feel they are worth more money. The company might feel a small blow if that person leaves, but also remember that they save money from that person's salary that they are no longer paying, and most jobs you can find a suitable replacement.

    Is the same true for the NFL? Not at all. If the NFL doesn't have it's players, it won't touch the $9B in revenues that it made in 2010. Can they find "replacement workers?" Sure. They did that in 1987. Will it have anywhere near the popularity that it currently does? Not a chance. Some players may cross the lines, but probably only those that really need the money. What if the UFL and NFL swapped players...Which would you watch?

    The players are being viewed in a bad light mostly because the owners starting point was ridiculous. Though they did come down on many bargaining items, in the end it was the money that was the main issue. As it stood, the owners:

    1.) Gave low projections for how much money they would make in future years.
    2.) Wanted 100% of any money over the "estimates" that were made.

    I own a lemonade stand and you are my employee. I tell you that our stand will probably make $9 next year, fully knowing that this is a very generous estimate and that $10-11 or more is more likely. I say that money up to the $9 we make will be split 50/50, and anything over $9, I get 100% of. You're the best lemonade stand operator out there and the majority of people wouldn't buy lemonade from our business if it was some "scab" working. You tell me that's BS and quit. Now where do I stand? I have a lemonade stand that can barely sell lemonade, because people weren't coming there to buy lemonade, they were coming there to buy it from you.
    Last edited by Ryfo18; 03-14-2011 at 04:51 PM.
    Diehard Fan Living in Packer Territory

    Co-Founder: 2 Mugs Fantasy Football -- a site about and football!

  7. #56
    Member Since
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    2,780
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 97
    Given: 2

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryfo18 View Post
    You're ignoring supply and demand. If an owner doesn't want to pay a player $20M, he by all means does not have to. He just loses out on that player, and someone else out there will pay him that.

    These players also bring a lot to the table for the NFL in terms of other revenue generating opportunities (merchandise primarily), so it's tough to say how much money a guy like Manning actually "costs" an organization compared to a lifelong special teamer who won't do anything to bring in money.



    I'm going to try to answer this question:

    If an average worker is told to take a paycut, or lose his/her job, he/she can go find another job if they feel they are worth more money. The company might feel a small blow if that person leaves, but also remember that they save money from that person's salary that they are no longer paying, and most jobs you can find a suitable replacement.

    Is the same true for the NFL? Not at all. If the NFL doesn't have it's players, it won't touch the $9B in revenues that it made in 2010. Can they find "replacement workers?" Sure. They did that in 1987. Will it have anywhere near the popularity that it currently does? Not a chance. Some players may cross the lines, but probably only those that really need the money. What if the UFL and NFL swapped players...Which would you watch?

    The players are being viewed in a bad light mostly because the owners starting point was ridiculous. Though they did come down on many bargaining items, in the end it was the money that was the main issue. As it stood, the owners:

    1.) Gave low projections for how much money they would make in future years.
    2.) Wanted 100% of any money over the "estimates" that were made.

    I own a lemonade stand and you are my employee. I tell you that our stand will probably make $9 next year, fully knowing that this is a very generous estimate and that $10-11 or more is more likely. I say that money up to the $9 we make will be split 50/50, and anything over $9, I get 100% of. You're the best lemonade stand operator out there and the majority of people wouldn't buy lemonade from our business if it was some "scab" working. You tell me that's BS and quit. Now where do I stand? I have a lemonade stand that can barely sell lemonade, because people weren't coming there to buy lemonade, they were coming there to buy it from you.

    So based on your response. What is the best answer for the future of the NFL and the fans. Giving more money to the players, which in the long run will hit the pockets of the fans, in either higher prices, or a decrease in quality as the owners start cutting cost and taking cheaper means for the little things.

    Or having the owners give a little more to the players but also maintaining their books for being the the ones who made the NFL the great product we see on the field. There is more to a game that the players. I can tell you that the Monday night game this year at home, was by the far the best game I have been to in years and it had nothing to do with the players.

    To answer you question, yes the players will eventually cross and take the pay cuts. Most of the players live pay check to pay check and even for the good majoirity of the players who live in their means, still find hard time, Like Tiki Barber.. Who have to come out of retirement at the age of 35 because of other issues.

    I fear, that the players are asking the NFL to become the NBA and you will eventually see the Rich Big Market teams become the big boys of the league like you see with baseball, and the NBA. There are already teams struggling with salary to keep their team competitive. You will start seeing teams fall off the chart for years, only to make one big push spending money to get competitive for one or two years before they strip the team down to basic players.

    The owners (ants) already stored their supply for the winter. Lets see if the players (grasshoppers) did the same.

    In the end, the players don't have the leverage they seem to think they do. Yeah, the league won't exist without them, but I think the owners can live with their means if the NFL is destroyed. Can a majority of the players? Not just the highly contracted players.

  8. #57
    Member Since
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    2,868
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 44
    Given: 18

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Seek View Post
    So based on your response. What is the best answer for the future of the NFL and the fans. Giving more money to the players, which in the long run will hit the pockets of the fans, in either higher prices, or a decrease in quality as the owners start cutting cost and taking cheaper means for the little things.
    It's not giving "more money" to the players in the sense that the money they make is based off of total revenue. It does hit the pockets of the fans, but as I've said before...Player costs in no way determine ticket prices. It's demand for the product. I hear people complaining about the crazy ticket prices, but in the end, they are still getting sold, right? Have the owners come out said if they get more of the revenues they'll pass on the savings to the fans?

    It's not on the owners or players to fix the rising costs of the NFL. It's simple supply/demand. Sure you can create a "false demand" that drives ticket prices down, but in that scenario the owners AND players stand to lose money. There are other options like creating more franchises to increase the "supply", which would help decrease costs. Or if the fans get fed up with the costs, stop watching to help drive the demand down. In the end though, we as fans will continue to get screwed as the NFL gets more popular.
    Last edited by Ryfo18; 03-14-2011 at 05:57 PM.
    Diehard Fan Living in Packer Territory

    Co-Founder: 2 Mugs Fantasy Football -- a site about and football!

  9. #58
    Member Since
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    9,374
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 335
    Given: 72

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryfo18 View Post
    Saw this quote from Drew Brees: "And don't let the NFL influence you with manipulation and false information. Don't drink the kool aid!"

    I've been backing the players (mostly b/c of all the support for the owners on here), but I'm really just mad at both sides for not getting something done. The owners and players are both going to paint it like the other is at fault. There's two sides to the story, and then there is the truth.

    I can understand that.

    The reason i am growing more and more pro owners is the players talking in the media. I have heard more players whine about the evil nfl owners and it drives me nuts. They whine about the owners wanting to take more off the top and say they wont accept any less then what they get until the owners open the books. But then they want more benfits and all that jazz for the former players. Where do they think that money would come from? I say the owners give them the benfits the players give the owners at least some of the money off the top they are asking for. Nothing in life is free.

  10. #59
    Member Since
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Lewisville, TX (Dallas)
    Posts
    1,192
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 30
    Given: 22

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by wilqb16 View Post
    I disagree.

    Let's say that the owners did break the NFLPA and hired scabs. If the players had no where to go, do you think they would just get jobs at Taco Bell? No, in time they would leave the union and return to play with NFL. If you recall, when the NFL hired scabs during the last strike, a number of players crossed the picket lines to play.

    No way to stop this. But then what happens, teams start fighting for better players and paying more and more money. Without a CBA, there is no cap. Do you really think the owners would stick together when Tom Brady wants to come back? How do you keep the Patriots from allowing him back?

    Problem is that the NFL needs a CBA as much as the players do...
    First of all the owners are not trying to break the union by having a lockout the union decertified as soon as talks broke off Friday so individual players could sue the league and take the whole thing to litigation instead of mediation.

    Well they can all kiss my

  11. #60
    Member Since
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Lewisville, TX (Dallas)
    Posts
    1,192
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 30
    Given: 22

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    The union tells us it is about the money but the owners agreed to set the cap at the unions propsed cap and still the players want the books open what difference do the books make if the owners agree to pay what the union asked for? What privately owned company will open the books for the employees to look at? Not too many I know.

    1.***** We more than split the economic difference between us, increasing our proposed cap for 2011 significantly and accepting the Unionís proposed cap number for 2014 ($161 million per club).

Page 6 of 15 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. NFL Files Suit Against Players Union
    By Hayvern in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 03-19-2011, 12:16 AM
  2. NFL owners could opt out of CBA with union as early as Tuesday
    By Guru in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-17-2008, 04:32 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •