Skip to content

League should be blamed for breakdown in labor talks

Super Bowl Football AP

The opening segment to today’s PFT Live focused on Wednesday’s collapse of the labor talks.  And Wednesday’s collapse of the labor talks looks to be the responsibility of the NFL, not the union.

Unless the union offered to take 50 cents on the dollar of every dollar and said that it was a bottom-line position with no room to move, the league should have acknowledged that 50 cents on the dollar of every dollar is a reasonable opening position, and the league should have digested the offer and responded.

So when the owners convene a conference call at 3:30 p.m. ET, we hope that men like Robert Kraft stand up and say to the negotiators, “Why didn’t you respond to the offer?”

Opening positions in any negotiation are meaningless.  The action begins once the stakes planted in the ground begin to move.  The NFL, by all appearances, short circuited this process by refusing to establish the floor once the union set the ceiling.

So establish the floor, NFL.  Otherwise, all this talk about wanting to do a deal is meaningless and hollow and phony.  The NFL is behaving like it doesn’t want to do a deal, and for the first time we’re detecting a sense that the fans are starting to realize that a lot of the talk from the league is just that — talk — and that the league won’t take action until every ounce of leverage has been applied to the men who put their bodies on the line every Sunday, either via a lockout or the threat of one.

John Madden said it best last week.  The players, owners, and Commissioner are the current custodians of the game.  And the game is too good to screw it up.

Based on Wednesday’s events, they’re going to screw it up.  And for now the league bears the bulk of the blame, in our view.

Permalink 63 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: PFT Live, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories, Union
63 Responses to “League should be blamed for breakdown in labor talks”
  1. biggerballz says: Feb 10, 2011 3:46 PM

    the owners aren’t dumb, they have dug their heels in and now will get the lockout and miss games until players fold. They will fold because 75% of these guys haven’t saved a dime. End of the day they will take less than 40 cents on the dollar.

  2. abshire22 says: Feb 10, 2011 3:46 PM

    Unless the union offered to take 50 cents on the dollar of every dollar and said that it was a bottom-line position with no room to move, the league should have acknowledged that 50 cents on the dollar of every dollar is a reasonable opening position, and the league should have digested the offer and responded.

    So we don’t know how the offer was presented and we will STILL jump to the conclusion that the league is at fault. This serves no purpose but to poison the atmosphere and make a deal more difficult to reach. Please take into account how considerable a voice PFT now has and do not abuse it with assumptions and/or guesses.
    Kind of like nailing Aaron Rodgers for not talking to a cancer patient without first gathering all the facts.

  3. ironhawk says: Feb 10, 2011 3:48 PM

    Hah, I’ve used this strategy before. When you hold all the cards, and the other side makes an insulting offer, if you just get up and leave they’ll often end up giving you a way better deal out of desperation to get you back to the table.

  4. 3octaveFart says: Feb 10, 2011 3:49 PM

    Right.
    They’re just the ones who stood up and walked out.
    It’s all the player’s fault.

  5. leucas66 says: Feb 10, 2011 3:50 PM

    Fans don’t care about either one’s positions — they just want to get something done and see the NFL in the fall.

    Both sides are wasting a lot of time trying to get the public on their sides. In the end, it doesn’t matter. They should be negotiating with each other and stop thinking public intervention/opinion will sway the process.

  6. FoozieGrooler says: Feb 10, 2011 3:53 PM

    Whattya know?
    A truthful, non-misleading headline.

  7. favrelous says: Feb 10, 2011 3:54 PM

    I don’t think madden said it very well.

  8. madtolive5 says: Feb 10, 2011 3:57 PM

    The Owners are looking to create a new revenue streams. Of course they would like more money per dollar, but are really looking to use the jump to a 60/40 split in their favor to invest more money into them selfs. They will move to an 18 game schedule, build stadiums with shopping centers and create teams over seas.

    Look for them to hold out and hold out until they break the players union and use the extra income to reinvest in the NFL.

    Personally I think these things would ruin the game….

  9. cappa662 says: Feb 10, 2011 3:58 PM

    Owners are hella greedy. You can’t expect the players to take 40%. That’s insulting.

  10. dryheaveone says: Feb 10, 2011 4:01 PM

    that’s the bottomline. The owners know if they dig in their heels the players will eventually cave. Their attitude is: “If games are lost, so be it” We know the players will come crawling back sooner or later”…..what else are they gonna do?…..go work at Wal-Mart?

  11. mick730 says: Feb 10, 2011 4:05 PM

    The default position of the operators of this site is very clear; it’s the same as that of organized labor no matter what the position or the facts, or in this case, the lack of known facts.

    Part of the current CBA was a provision that either party, the owners or the NFLPA, could opt out if they discovered the CBA as structured, was not feasible.

    Given the deterioration in the income statement over the last three years of the Green Bay Packers it is not unreasonable to assume that the rest of the league is in the same boat, if not in a worse trend line. The Packers are one of the youngest teams in the league, yet their payroll costs have exploded at the exact same time their net profit has fallen off a cliff. It isn’t hard to figure out why and even labor ideologues like DeMaurice Smith and the two lawyers who run PLT.com can do so.

    The “offer” given up by the NFLPA yesterday was the same deal that the owners find so untenable. Given that, there was no reason for the owner’s negotiators to hang around. I would have done the same. The players and their paid mouthpieces in the union will not get reasonable until enough of their membership starts crying about the lack of signing bonuses, free agent contracts and the like. It won’t take long and the owners know it.,

  12. packattack1967 says: Feb 10, 2011 4:06 PM

    This is garbage. The owners should not commit ANY percentage. The guys that put their bodies on the line will get paid. Period. There are way way too many busts in the history of this league that collected huge pay checks. Let the market dictate compensation just like every where else in a capitalist society. Let’s not let socialism creep into this game any further than it already has.

  13. cmich2006 says: Feb 10, 2011 4:08 PM

    the owners need to realize the fans will be sympathetic to the players as long as they don’t strike…the public face of the owners(because of media and their personalities) are Jones and Snyder and neither of them are thought of fondly. They are looked at as greedy billionaires and that is how ownership in general will be viewed. “They are already absurdly wealthy and want to squeeze another dime out of their teams.

  14. eustus says: Feb 10, 2011 4:09 PM

    The Golden Age of the NFL is over.

    This Commissioner, and by extension the owners who employ him, don’t give a rats ass about players, fans, or the state of the game. It is about maximizing profits.

    Seatgate. The labour negotiations. An 18 game season. And all that is just the last 3 months. All of it designed to maximise profit – even if at the expense of the health of the game.

    Time to start watching College ball and forget about the pros. This league isn’t worth the emotional investment, let alone the cash investment for tickets, concessions, and merchandise.

  15. umbskinsfan says: Feb 10, 2011 4:12 PM

    the more money we come across, the more problems we see

  16. firethewalrus says: Feb 10, 2011 4:14 PM

    Goodell just keeps making himself look worse and worse. The stance on player safety and concussions was marginalized by the push for an 18-game schedule. The player conduct policy and its precedents for punishment was turned on its head with his Favre ruling. He claims he desperately wants a labor deal in place asap, but everything the league does seems to throw water on that. He is entirely untrustworthy and the past 12 months have made him look like nothing but a snake oil salesman. (I am convinced that Goodell is setting himself up to one day have a gig in politics. He already posses the ideal characteristics and attributes to make him the perfect, sleazy politician.)
     
    When Goodell took over the role of commissioner, he clearly wanted to put his own stamp on the league and take the NFL to new heights. He has, in terms of television ratings and revenue generated. But the NFL’s most important priority should be the fans, and that is just not a part of Goodell’s MO. The impending lockout is ludicrous. The league is printing money, hand over fist. Goodell’s stubbornness should not be a factor in the equation. He is there to represent the Owners and bridge the gap between management and players. Why is he currently driving a stake between the two?

  17. tinytim4115 says: Feb 10, 2011 4:16 PM

    i forget who made the quote, but i liked it and i feel like it applies here:

    “A good compromise means nobody walks away happy”

  18. pjofar77 says: Feb 10, 2011 4:17 PM

    Thank you. The players have already conceded to reducing rookie salaries and a willingness to talk about other issues. Very, very rich owners won’t even talk. As fans, we can do nothing, but it is sad that the league is being held hostage by 32 rich, white men are too insecure too even share with their “partners,” the players, how much money they are making off the game the players play.

  19. tmc4real says: Feb 10, 2011 4:18 PM

    I find it kind of funny that the players want 50% of all revenue. I bet that someone that works at McDonald’s would love for the workers to get 50% of all revenue. I bet the workers of any industry would love 50%.

    They do not have to carry any expenses. They do not have to carry their own insurance. They are not sweating retirement packages. No worries about uniforms, trainers, coaches, staffs, stadiums, travel, or anything.

    The owners buy the teams a millions of dollars. Every owner has sank millions of dollars into his team. If the players take half off the top and the owners are not compensated, why own a team? I spent 15+ years with a company doing budgets and if our profit was not 18%, they were pissed. You can bet these owners want a significant return on their investment. And, without them spending the money to build the team (or buying a built one), the players would working at UPS. Both sides need to think long and hard about this. A minimum salary for a college graduate is a lot less than the minimum salary for an NFL rookie.

    I sure wish when I came out of college I could have entered a union that demanded 50% of all revenue to be divided for players salaries. I wonder how many people supporting the players also supported those at AIG with the huge bonuses.

  20. motorcitykitties says: Feb 10, 2011 4:20 PM

    We’re talking about billiaonaires VS players living check to check in their ‘living in the now’ lifestyles. Wait until those Bently car payments start piling up. The players better be careful with this one. If they think they are going to get 50/50 money out of this CBA then there will be no 2011 season, lock that in. I’m sure the billionaire owners will be just fine to wait it out however long it takes… the players… not so much.

  21. rosloe62 says: Feb 10, 2011 4:21 PM

    Rich owners fighting with rich players for who deserves more riches! ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

  22. dkhhuey says: Feb 10, 2011 4:22 PM

    I really hate siding with the owners in all of this but quite frankly, the do own the team. They put up their cash, they created the NFL product, and they took all the risks. Frankly, the only thing they owe these players is a salary!!! They don’t owe them any TV revenue, they don’t owe them any merchandise revenue, and the don’t owe them any stadium revenue. The owners know that these star players are just a commodity that can be replaced almost immediately with each passing year. They player have been pushing and pushing with these outrageous demand and it appears that the owners are going to wipe the slate clean and rebuild using newer, lower paid employees and under better contracts that favor them.

  23. chc4 says: Feb 10, 2011 4:24 PM

    pjofar77 — you are a whack job. Are you aware how much money the players currently make? Some offensive freakin’ guards are getting $15m in GUARANTEED money every offseason. Erik Coleman, back safety for the Falcons, made over $2mill last season. Don’t pretend the players aren’t getting theirs.

  24. mvp43 says: Feb 10, 2011 4:24 PM

    Why not? The owners take all the risk…….40% to show up and do your job, not a bad deal. Now, if the players want to buy teams, finance stadiums, strike marketing deals etc……..then that’s a different story. They now assume more of the risk which should equate to higher % of revenue.

    It is a vicious circle because they do need each other. Billion dollar stadiums with no games being played in doesn’t make a lot of sense to me, but, bottom line, they’re still employees……….save your money, don’t squander it and buy your own team!

  25. purplescar says: Feb 10, 2011 4:30 PM

    “Opening positions in any negotiation are meaningless.”

    Opening positions? I sure hope they’re past opening positions.

  26. angrycorgi says: Feb 10, 2011 4:31 PM

    “the league should have acknowledged that 50 cents on the dollar of every dollar is a reasonable opening position, and the league should have digested the offer and responded”

    No change at all is a reasonable opening position? Why not just send mimes to negotiate if you aren’t willing to open with ANY compromise of any kind. I think the owners have probably about had it with the NFLPA (not necessarily the players, but rather their reps) and their foolishness. I don’t blame them for shaking their heads and walking out. The owners + fans represent 100% of the investment in the league and 100% of the fiscal risk. The players invest nothing financially. If the league shuts down for a year, the league can try and rent their stadiums out for events to break even and the players can go flip burgers. Then let’s come back and see if we can’t get a better opening offer than “we ain’t budgin'”.

  27. tantrim says: Feb 10, 2011 4:32 PM

    I am getting to the point where I don’t care it is way too expensive to attend games and as the cost keep going up they may never fill the stands again. The owners and players are so greedy that most people are tuning out the whole thing.

  28. bigb1 says: Feb 10, 2011 4:33 PM

    I don’t care how many cents on the dollar they get. I’m more interested in how much they want for a hot dog at the stadium.

  29. Rhode Island Patriots Fan says: Feb 10, 2011 4:34 PM

    I disagree with the statement that, “Opening positions in any negotiation are meaningless.” On the contrary, these can be evidence of good faith, and otherwise set the tone for moving toward a compromise solution. Clearly, negotiators for the NFL owners did not feel this was a serious start. If a seller wants to sell his home valued at $750,000, and a buyer makes an initial offer of $350,000, then the seller would likely tell the buyer to come back when he or she is serious, and walk away.

  30. angrycorgi says: Feb 10, 2011 4:35 PM

    “So we don’t know how the offer was presented and we will STILL jump to the conclusion that the league is at fault. This serves no purpose but to poison the atmosphere and make a deal more difficult to reach. Please take into account how considerable a voice PFT now has and do not abuse it with assumptions and/or guesses.
    Kind of like nailing Aaron Rodgers for not talking to a cancer patient without first gathering all the facts.”

    You must understand, this is how mike rolls…no personal consequences for being wrong. If he’s publicly thrashed for being wrong he’ll issue a tiny “so sorry” statement, then turn back to bludgeoning the NFL with 8 posts a day after they have apologized for screwing up.

    In case you haven’t noticed, mike is exceedingly anti-owner and feels no requirement for logical reasoning to support his opinions.

  31. play4blood says: Feb 10, 2011 4:37 PM

    As long as owners charge full price for tickets to preseason games, and the idiot Goodell continues to mention the “20 game season” revenue model, the owners/league have zero credibility.

  32. foobarfoofoo says: Feb 10, 2011 4:39 PM

    These owners will fall flat on their faces just like Jerry did with the Super Bowl, and they rightfully deserve so.

  33. geefan1 says: Feb 10, 2011 4:42 PM

    So the players coming coming to the table with an unreasonable request that they know won’t be met is an acceptable negotiating tactic, but the owners pretending to walk out of the car dealership to get a better price for their new car isn’t a reasonable negotiating tactic?

  34. titsburgfeelers says: Feb 10, 2011 4:42 PM

    I think we as fans can do something. If we prepare a boycott and hold out on going to games buying overpriced apperell and even stop waching games on tv we can put the owners in the perverbial corner. After all they are arguing over Our hard erned money.

  35. lasher1650 says: Feb 10, 2011 4:48 PM

    The owners have the players over a barrel. Owners are billionaires who made/make their fortunes doing something other than owning an NFL football team. Most of these owners are still involved in these and other businesses, so income flow is a non-issue

    Players have (in almost every case) a sole source of income – destroying their bodies and minds for our enjoyment. With this taken away owners will slowly bleed the players and the union will collapse.

    While 2012 likely will be an 18 game season, 2011 may very well be a 14 game season (with no bye week).

  36. jamaltimore says: Feb 10, 2011 4:49 PM

    Who cares who’s fault it is. The beauty is that this discussion makes the NFL and the players look bad because the focus is on them off the field.

    No one likes them for anything other than what happens on sunday’s and monday nights! Anything more about the idiot union who’s getting 21 year old busts 90 million dollars without stepping on the field and kicking there former players to the street. Then there are the idiot owners who are just looking to exploit every dollar they can from the fans and the players.

    I love me some sports but I watch it for the plays and certainly not to be brought back into labor negotiations

  37. jc1958coo says: Feb 10, 2011 4:53 PM

    the owners say 42 % of every thing! but they won’t open the books! what is every thing if you can’t see! there all nuts they don’t know how good they have it! O.J. enough said

  38. eriktheliberal says: Feb 10, 2011 4:54 PM

    Mike,

    I have been on the union’s side in this controversy since the owner’s opted out of the collective bargaining agreement in 2008. A small, but growing cadre of NFL owners are acting as selfish businessmen, not as trustees of the public trust. Since the NFL is granted exemption from our nation’s anti-trust laws, the NFL itself (and its teams) owes something more to the average person that a typical corporation would.

    Don’t get me wrong: The owners have a right to make money, as we all function in a free market system. But when owners unilaterally cancel a collectively-bargained labor deal, claim that they aren’t making enough money under that deal and then don’t back up their claims with quantitative data, it makes the average person question their sincerity and their motives.

    What scares me more than this big give-back that the owners are expecting their apparent desire to reduce the extent of revenue sharing. Revenue sharing has quite literally made the NFL the greatest professional sports league in the world. Competitive parity – the fact that the only thing separating any two NFL franchises is the level of talent and the quality of coaching – is what made an already great sport and exponentially better. Without substantial revenue sharing, this league will end up in the toilet within 15 years. A critical mass of NFL owners either want to (or are being convinced to want to) reduce revenue sharing and dismantle other safeguards of competitive parity (such as the salary cap) in a quest to enlarge their already substantial personal fortunes at the expense of every football-loving American.

    NFL owners make me sick – if they can’t grow up and act like adults and deal in good faith with the players, Congress must step in and either directly regulate the sport or strip the league of its anti-trust exemption. I am sick and tired of irresponsible and short-sighted wealth ruing this great country of ours.

  39. eustus says: Feb 10, 2011 4:54 PM

    Anyone who thinks the players are easily replacable needs to watch a UFL or a CFL game. There’s a reason why these players are worth the money they are worth – the only thing worse than no football is BAD football.

    Good football – the team that executes the best wins.

    Bad football – the team that makes the fewest mistakes wins.

  40. jdwhiskeyboy says: Feb 10, 2011 5:03 PM

    Why can’t they just sit around the table discussing the problem like adults and not walk away like freaking 12 year olds when they don’t hear something they like? It seems insane to me. I don’t support either side, and i don’t understand why they can’t see this stupid hardline approach won’t get anywhere. The only person who seems to be talking with some kind of moderation is Kraft, but both sides are are as bad as each other.

  41. angrycorgi says: Feb 10, 2011 5:06 PM

    I love how mike pretends that the owners/players haven’t EVER had discussions about a new CBA. He acts like the players walking in and saying “we want the same deal we have now” is the first time they’ve said this, when we ALL know this has gone back and forth FOREVER. Stop acting like the owners are being unreasonable. We all read the Mawae quote: “I think what really happened is in 2006, we got such a great deal…” We ALL know the players bent the owners over the barrel for 4 years. I think the players need to learn how to compromise, and they clearly have not. This is a story about greed. So much greed from the players that they treat their right to play in the NFL as God-given and not a privledge.

  42. vikesfansteve says: Feb 10, 2011 5:13 PM

    I don’t see how an owner could justify giving a player 50% of the revenue when they don’t pay the expenses like food, travel, facilities, stadium costs, labor costs. The replacement players of 87 playing to sold out stadiums proved that fans route for the uniform not the players. Hiring this dude Smith was one of the dumbest things the NFLPA has ever done. Also they should be fighting for retired players benefits. I wouldn’t be surprised if the NFL canceled an entire season like the NHL did or when MLB canceled the World Series. All for Greed. Always wanting more. Like 10 million dollars a year to score 7 TD’s isn’t enough. 50 % of the revenue. Come on, unrealistic request.

  43. geetee52 says: Feb 10, 2011 5:15 PM

    I have to laugh when I hear people use the term risk in talking about the NFL owners. Each NFL team gets over $100 million PER YEAR from TV contracts. That is enough money to pay ALL their operating expenses before a single pad is put on or ticket is sold. Then they get to gouge the taxpayers for elaborate stadiums without sharing a dime of any profits from concessions, parking, etc. They make millions more on overpriced jerseys, snuggies, and God knows what else. Oh…and by the way it happens to be the only game in town AND they conveniently make rules to disallow any more ownership by fan groups (like the Green Bay model…which to many lawyers sounds like antitrust which is a whole other story). They have built in hedges against inflation because advertising rates take care of that for them on the next TV contract. The owners are set up to still pocket the TV money even if there IS a lockout. Is there even a remote possibility that a team will be worth less than it was 10, 5, or even 3 years ago? Team equity only trends in one direction…UP. Ask a real business person that doesn’t have a single dime of guaranteed revenue about risk. That term should never be used when talking about owning an NFL team.

  44. dkhhuey says: Feb 10, 2011 5:17 PM

    The owners hold all the cards, and rightly so, because they own the product! They know full well that the fans will pay to watch whatever product they put out on the field. The owners will have no problem wiping out the entire current list of employees/players and start all over again under terms that favor them. They realize that the first year a few season ticket holders will walk and the fans will grumble but in the end, they know their drone fans will fill the seats, consume stadium products, and buy their merchandise. If the players don’t cave and give in on many fronts, there will be a lockout, contracts will be voided, and the league will restock with the thousands of former football players/athletes that are not currently employed playing football. They will most certainly be interested in playing in the NFL for a great deal less than the current players.

  45. rushbacker says: Feb 10, 2011 5:17 PM

    Fans don’t care about either one’s positions — they just want to get something done and see the NFL in the fall.
    ____________

    Yep. From this fan’s perspective, I have very little interest in assigning blame– as far as I’m concerned, there will be more than enough to go around and let all of ‘em take a nice fat slice if they screw this up.

    I do know that neither side will be getting any more of my money if that happens. I used to be a big NHL fan, and I haven’t spent one cent on merchandise or tickets since their lockout. NFL and NFLPA, listen up– if there is any kind of work stoppage, regardless of who initiates it, you’re ALL going to lose money. Get smart. Figure out an acceptable distribution of your billions now, before you end up with a lot less to divide up.

  46. angrycorgi says: Feb 10, 2011 5:18 PM

    I think we as fans can do something. If we prepare a boycott and hold out on going to games buying overpriced apperell and even stop waching games on tv we can put the owners in the perverbial corner. After all they are arguing over Our hard erned money.

    ———

    Interesting. The owners are actually arguing over their investment which was their hard-earned money that they spent to buy the teams. The players make ZERO investment. The current players can’t even give a little to help out the retired players with their medical bills (they keep demanding MORE money from ownership to handle that) despite raking in billions. How again are the players the good guys? The good guys are the players who played years ago. Most of the current players are punks that don’t even care about the past players and don’t care about the average fan either.

  47. daback9 says: Feb 10, 2011 5:31 PM

    Anyone want to invest in a UFL franchise??? Looks like the NFL is about to kill that golden goose! The time is right and let’s face it, we’ve got some history to rely on how build a pro football league. Any takers???

  48. closisgood says: Feb 10, 2011 5:36 PM

    White people always effin things up.
    ESPECIALLY the ones who’s name ends in ‘berg, ‘stein, ‘feld or gold/diamond/silver.

  49. gpete1962 says: Feb 10, 2011 5:48 PM

    angrycorgi says: Feb 10, 2011 5:18 PM

    I think we as fans can do something. If we prepare a boycott and hold out on going to games buying overpriced apperell and even stop waching games on tv we can put the owners in the perverbial corner. After all they are arguing over Our hard erned money.

    ———

    Interesting. The owners are actually arguing over their investment which was their hard-earned money that they spent to buy the teams. The players make ZERO investment. The current players can’t even give a little to help out the retired players with their medical bills (they keep demanding MORE money from ownership to handle that) despite raking in billions. How again are the players the good guys? The good guys are the players who played years ago. Most of the current players are punks that don’t even care about the past players and don’t care about the average fan either.
    ____________________________________
    I agree with you 100%

    Lets not forget about the season ticket holders who got shafted with high priced PSLs.

    The only ones you can feel sorry for are the Fans and the concession workers at the stadiums.

    Screw the owners and the players !!!

  50. toe4 says: Feb 10, 2011 5:54 PM

    JUST GET’R DONE

  51. gilgafresh says: Feb 10, 2011 5:55 PM

    “The NFL is behaving like it doesn’t want to do a deal, and for the first time we’re detecting a sense that the fans are starting to realize that a lot of the talk from the league is just that — talk…”

    Perhaps, but with this you’re apparently implying that the fans are shifting their support towards the players’ side. But judging by the comments and thumb directions on this page I think your own stance is clouding your perception of reality.

  52. stairwayto7 says: Feb 10, 2011 5:56 PM

    I can’t believe it is taking people this long to see that Goodell is an idiot! This man is ruining football and does not care! D.Smith is no better! I hope everyone is ready for no football until mid-late October this season and only playing 9-12 games. Anyone who thinks there will eb an agreement by March 4th, can continue to watch ESPN and their false reporting.

  53. packattack1967 says: Feb 10, 2011 6:01 PM

    @eriktheliberal

    That was classic. You say the obligatory”dont get me wrong, im in favor of people making money” then tell us how much they should make. Even suggesting (your God and savior) the federal government should be called upon to create an agreement that suits your twisted ideology.

  54. commishgoodellknowsbest says: Feb 10, 2011 6:13 PM

    They call them OWNERS for a reason. Because they bought the team with outside investors or by using there own money.

    Players do risk there bodies but who doesnt for work, they are payed very well even the bottom of the barrel players dont do bad. much more than police officers, military personnel, firefighters, people who risk it all everyday.

    To the guy above who said the players and owners are partners. This they are not.
    The player is an employee not a partner.
    The player may risk injury on the field but he is compensated for it very well.
    The owners take all the financial risk. Kind of like when a player screws up off the field and cant play football because of being suspended.
    The owners would not have to give them a dime of revenue. They are already getting a contracted payment.
    It always kills me at work when we get a bonus people will complain about how much it is. (bonus=something a boss/owner does not have to do but does it to anyway) Be greatful. The players even at 40 percent of revenue are still getting the millions in there yearly contracts. So the 40 percent as I see it is just a bonus. and trying to get as much as they can,, owners are just trying to keep as much as they can.

  55. bigbluefan1 says: Feb 10, 2011 6:46 PM

    A couple of points first is that net or gross?
    If its gross then what are you kidding me
    Teams like the Giants and Cowboys have notes to pay for the Stadium if it is net well that is a slightly different story.

    I still do not understand why any union has the right to see the books of the company they work for.

    Any of you go to work tomorrow and tell you boss you want to see the books to insure your getting your fair share you will have any early out on Friday and no where to go Monday morning

  56. randolph32 says: Feb 10, 2011 7:37 PM

    If it is the league, then if or when I get another Nielsen ‘ratings keeper’ thingy I’ll go to a friends house or bar to watch the game instead of the NFL and it’s Networks getting any money from me, F’em!

  57. natelan says: Feb 10, 2011 8:04 PM

    NFL: “Want more games, bigger slice of the pie, less health coverage for retired players, no roster expansion, no additional bye weeks and we want it all now!”

    NFLPA: “We just want the same deal as last year, nothing more, nothing less… It made you all billionaires, and us all millionaires…”

    NFL: “Fine. Screw you and screw the fans! No football for you!”

  58. dkeyser says: Feb 10, 2011 8:25 PM

    Its not that hard to get a deal done. You pick a topic, any topic, one side voices their wants on the matter, then the other side does the same. Then you meet in the middle. Its simple.. I go through the same process with my kids at dinner and guess what everybody eats and is happy for the most part

  59. eriktheliberal says: Feb 10, 2011 9:11 PM

    packattack1967,

    I am a Packers fan as well. I live in Green Bay, work in Green Bay, and pay taxes in Green Bay. You have to realize that we don’t live in a pure free market system; we live in a mixed economy. Government has a place in regulating business when its excesses threaten the general welfare of our nation.

    I believe business be up until the point where it starts abusing its customers or the public trust.

    You probably think its OK for wall street banks to receive millions of dollars in bonuses as a reward for flushing their own firms down the toilet.

    My ideology is not twisted, it’s rational.

  60. 1historian says: Feb 10, 2011 10:14 PM

    This battle is going to be fought out in the press, and the union is looking pretty good right now. Some people, including me, think of the owners as money hungry whores, and the Super Bowl seat fiasco sure makes them look the part. And Jerry “I’m here and you’re not” Jones sure isn’t helping the owners’ cause.
    Then there’s Robert Kraft of the Patriots with his “man of the people” routine, which looks and sounds great until donald trump shows up in his luxury box.

    Bottom line, though is the fact that BOTH the owners and the players don’t seem to realize that there is a golden goose in play here, and neither side seems to realize that they are in danger of killing that goose – the FANS.

  61. 1historian says: Feb 10, 2011 10:18 PM

    This oughta take care of it – put ‘em in a room and lock the door and tell them they can’t come out until they’ve settled.

    (And give them some ex-lax before you lock the door.)

    Then listen to their spin!

  62. dkhhuey says: Feb 11, 2011 12:00 AM

    To those that think the union and players are in the better position – you are smoking crack! The owners have billions and have money flowing in from other ventures – players, do not and have probably not come close to saving a dime for the future. The players will cave almost immediately.

  63. edgy says: Feb 12, 2011 12:30 PM

    tmc4real says:

    ***************

    Chicago – $100 — NEVER PAID. Buffalo, Tennessee and Kansas City – $25,000. Pittsburgh, $2,500. Many of these guys paid a lot less than you think and they’ve actually become millionaires BECAUSE of the NFL, not despite it. You guys should spend some time actually looking at how much some of these guys actually risked before you start crapping on the players for not risking anything.

Leave a Reply

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