Skip to content

Special Master won’t bar NFL from taking TV money

J. Pash

NFL Special Master Stephen Burbank ruled on Tuesday that the NFL can have access to 2011 TV revenue, to the consternation of the NFLPA.

The so-called “lockout insurance” case was raised by the union, who argued that guaranteeing ongoing payment in the event of a work stoppage violated the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

The league quickly announced the decision as a victory on Twitter.  With that said, they stressed in a media session last month that they will ultimately have to pay back the television contract money with interest if games are missed.

NFL chief negotiator Jeff Pash compared the money to a home equity line of credit.

While the NFLPA is sure to appeal the ruling, it’s a line of credit that the league now can expect to receive, if games ultimately are canceled.

Permalink 30 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories, Union
30 Responses to “Special Master won’t bar NFL from taking TV money”
  1. thedudesnotin says: Feb 1, 2011 5:31 PM

    Just what fans to want to read: more media on how the NFL and the NFLPA go into a bathroom stall to see who can pee the furthest.

    This really is beginning to look like dejavu all over again with how the NHL labour dispute went down a few years ago.

    Time for the grown ups to take over and get down to the heart of the matter and settle this once and for all.

  2. emossome84 says: Feb 1, 2011 5:37 PM

    That guy sounds important, with the title Special Master and all.

  3. heyooooh says: Feb 1, 2011 5:37 PM

    This was a dumb case for the NFLPA to pursue. While there is a temporary benefit to the owners, they won’t have the revenue stream for the repayment to the networks if the season is cancelled. It’s in everyone’s interest to have a full season.

  4. drgfri says: Feb 1, 2011 5:51 PM

    How an I get a title like “Special Master?” The guy sounds like he belongs in a Rex Ryan youtube video…..

  5. ampatsisahypocrite says: Feb 1, 2011 5:52 PM

    Typical — the NFL gets paid even when they don’t deliver their product.

    But what do you expect from a league headed by a commissioner who releases the private details of a player investigation to the media, right before the playoffs? Ben Roethlisberger should sue Goodell for this outrage.

    King owned up to his mistake — let’s hear it from Goodell now. You’re in violation of your own conduct policy, Commissioner.

  6. thedudesnotin says: Feb 1, 2011 5:59 PM

    @ampatsisahypocrite:

    I guess you might want to question your countries constitution then.

    Roger Goodell isn’t allowed free speech? Besides, wasn’t it SI and Peter King who decided to release the article this week?

  7. 305phinphan says: Feb 1, 2011 6:00 PM

    MICHAEL VICK IS A DOG KILLER & REX RYAN IS A LARD.

  8. dccowboy says: Feb 1, 2011 6:02 PM

    Bad news for the Union. Now the players will believe that the owners will have money that they don’t if the negotiations go into the regular season. It means the players will cave a lot sooner than that.

  9. football2011 says: Feb 1, 2011 6:17 PM

    The owners will bust the NFLPA for sure now unless they get a deal more to their liking.

  10. Burritto says: Feb 1, 2011 6:19 PM

    Oh, Brutal Master!

    Heh.

  11. commandercornpone says: Feb 1, 2011 6:22 PM

    cancel what? lockout yes. so yes the owners and league can have games so the tv networks cant say they got “nothing” for their $. the current union just wont have any members playing in it.

    time to decertify. then if they reunionize, hire a real leader, not a dumbass lawya.

    the union just started enduring the biggest pucker factor possible. maybe the union could start a rival league…

  12. pftard says: Feb 1, 2011 6:22 PM

    Of course not…, why would anybody on the Payroll recommend an end to this sea of money?

    The real pressure to get a CBA done is on the Owners. If they take those broadcasing dollars and don’t provide the same, quality NFL product on the field…., they’ll never have the leverage to broker another strong deal again.

    Quit the bickering and get it done.

  13. scytherius says: Feb 1, 2011 6:27 PM

    Ya know what? Strike. Screw the owners. unless they are broken they are going to do this to us again and again and again.

  14. skoobyfl says: Feb 1, 2011 6:29 PM

    All hail Ming.

  15. ampatsisahypocrite says: Feb 1, 2011 7:03 PM

    thedudesnotin says:
    Feb 1, 2011 5:59 PM
    @ampatsisahypocrite:

    I guess you might want to question your countries constitution then.

    Roger Goodell isn’t allowed free speech? Besides, wasn’t it SI and Peter King who decided to release the article this week?
    —————————————————–

    Oh please. That’s like saying the sherriff was fine releasing details of a murder investigation because, hey, this country guarantees him free speech. Gimme a break.

    Spare me the constitutional red herring. Bottom line: Goodell had no business releasing details of a closed-door investigation (remember how he used that line to kill any questions about Spygate?). That is entirely unfair to the player in question, and shows he has some grudge or something.

    Not only that, he does it right before the playoffs. Are you kidding me?

    I don’t understand what’s so… hard to understand about this outrage. This has nothing to do with “free speech” and everything to do with irresponsible behavior and violation of ethics. Just for starters. Goodell crossed the line here, and needs to be called out for it.

  16. ampatsisahypocrite says: Feb 1, 2011 7:08 PM

    And just so we’re clear, bud — Goodell told the media time and again the league does not divulge details of its investigations during the Spygate case. Seems though he has a different standard when it comes to Roethlisberger and the Steelers. Then it’s “open-mouth policy” all the way!

    I never — and I mean NEVER — want to hear any garbage about how the league favors the Steelers. This is an outrage and a double-standard at its lowest. But hey, when you’re buddies with Robert Kraft like Goodell is, I guess double standards are A-OK.

  17. ampatsisahypocrite says: Feb 1, 2011 7:11 PM

    P.S. Peter King isn’t the issue… Goodell having no business releasing this info in the first place is. King released the info this week, but Goodell originally gave it to him (conveniently) right before the playoffs. King was just the messenger, the real party at fault here is Goodell.

  18. jamie54 says: Feb 1, 2011 7:12 PM

    Mawae admitted the 2006 CBA benefited the players too much which is why it was known that at the first opportunity the owners would band together to opt out. It’s not hard to figure out. Just get together and hash out the details for crying out loud. Ratings are at their highest point ever = more revenue from advertisers, marketers, internet sales, whatever else is out there, it should not be difficult to understand the longer you wait you more chances there are to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

  19. msadpoet says: Feb 1, 2011 7:17 PM

    If there is a work stoppage the NFL will lose me as a fan for the rest of my life. They need fans, people can live without the NFL.

  20. msadpoet says: Feb 1, 2011 7:21 PM

    The NFL reminds me of trophy wife who is full of entitlement and treats others like crap. Then they get old, spoiled, fat and are replaced with a younger model. Its like all involved don’t see whats going to happen when the fans turn their backs and the entertainment that the NFL offers no longer matters.

  21. radrntn says: Feb 1, 2011 8:06 PM

    so the tv contract is about 4.85 billion for the owners w/ no football. So the owners all net about 100 million each w/o football in 2011.

    Then when they do settle w/ the players , they will factor in this repayment in the revenue share with players going forward, so they all net more money then they could have ever made by not playing in 2011 then by playing football in 2011. Like I said more then two years ago on PFT, with plent of ignnorant remarks i might add, no ball in 2011.

  22. hobartbaker says: Feb 1, 2011 8:08 PM

    Wow, “Special Master”. Is he licensed to kill?

  23. 8man says: Feb 1, 2011 8:15 PM

    And that should about do it for the union. Buh-bye! Thanks for playing.

    If they do get this thing worked out, and they will because this ruling is a dick punch to the union, there is less money out there than ever before for tickets.

  24. commandercornpone says: Feb 1, 2011 8:40 PM

    they’ll get players. the union will have their oakley-ewing moment.

    the current economy does not provide for the broke to put up with the rich players’ whining.

  25. goldsteel says: Feb 1, 2011 9:04 PM

    President Kevin Mawae reset the bargaining positions with his remark about the 2006 deal being so good for the players.

    The networks have their own lawyers. We’ll see how much free money they want to give to the NFL. Nothing for the union to worry about. It’s dismaying listening to these smart guys out smart themselves. It’s only money. Fire Goodell.
    ——————————————————

    skoobyfl says: Feb 1, 2011 6:29 PM

    All Hail Ming!

    HAHAHAHAHAHA! Thanks for the humorous satire.

  26. mackenzie83 says: Feb 1, 2011 9:52 PM

    Come on everybody. I everyone did not care about this situation why comment on it at all? The owners and players PR departments know the fans will be crying foul here like we are including me. So if we do want to give them a strong message why not ignore all these articles and not comment on it? But i will say this. Both groups need to go on “Are you smarter than a 5th grader” because they are acting like children here.

  27. stixzidinia says: Feb 1, 2011 9:56 PM

    Hmmm……the NFL “Special Master” ruled that the NFL can have the money. Anybody surprised by that ruling? That’s like Congress voting themselves raises every other week.

    I think the Special Master was that guy that owned the Gimp in Pulp Fiction.

  28. stixzidinia says: Feb 1, 2011 9:58 PM

    I guess you might want to question your countries constitution then.

    Roger Goodell isn’t allowed free speech? Besides, wasn’t it SI and Peter King who decided to release the article this week?

    ——————————-

    In that case the players should be able to talk as much trash as they want before a game without the Commish sticking his nose into it and telling them to stop. They should also be able to publicly criticize officials. Free speech cuts both ways……as does professionalism.

  29. ampatsisahypocrite says: Feb 2, 2011 12:28 AM

    stixzidinia says:

    Feb 1, 2011 9:58 PM
    thedudesnotin says:
    I guess you might want to question your countries constitution then.

    Roger Goodell isn’t allowed free speech? Besides, wasn’t it SI and Peter King who decided to release the article this week?

    ——————————-

    In that case the players should be able to talk as much trash as they want before a game without the Commish sticking his nose into it and telling them to stop. They should also be able to publicly criticize officials. Free speech cuts both ways……as does professionalism.
    ——————————————————————-

    Got that, dudesnotin dude? See, the players and coaches get fined if they criticize a ref publicly, or say something bad about the league. No First Amendment Rights stuff, they’re not allowed by rule. Too bad about their free speech.

    That’s why Goodell needs to be roasted for this outrage. A fine or suspension would be in order. Frankly I think he should be fired outright. Betrayal of trust is serious.

  30. thedudesnotin says: Feb 2, 2011 2:09 PM

    You’ve made your point. I don’t agree with it, probably because I am not wearing black and gold glasses, but that’s okay. If you or some of your fellow yellow towel fans think Goodell is out to get the Steelers then I can’t argue with you. Again, I don’t agree, but, I can’t argue your right to say so or think so.

    Sure professionalism goes both ways. Does that mean on Sunday night if the Steelers lose, we won’t be hearing about how we lost to Goodell, and the NFL wanted us to lose, yadda yadda, or will we hear professionalism and say, we got beat by the better team?

    Remember I said IF. I know the Steelers are a good football team. They may win and then, I want to hear accolades on how good a team the Packers were to beat, not on how we showed the league office and all the Steeler haters….etc..etc….

    Just saying. All year it’s been extremely out of the ordinary for Steeler fans as a whole to be going on the defensive. You guy are better then that. You have let Goodell get the better of you, but I really wonder if you stood back, and took off the black and gold glasses, will you remember this possible championship as the year Roger Goodell won it with his unprofessionalism that got under your teams collective skin or the year you guys won outright for being a good football team. Not great, just good.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!