Skip to content

Player lockout fund to be unlocked five months before games are missed

Getty Images

The NFLPA (pre-asterisk) knew a lockout was coming, so the NFLPA (pre-asterisk) took steps to ensure that money would be available to players during a lockout.  The NFLPA created the fund by setting aside dues payments and rights fees in 2009 and 2010.

So with the lockout only 18 days old and no game checks to be missed until September, the lockout fund is being unlocked as of April 15.

Jason La Canfora of NFL Network reports that notification letters and direct deposit slips have been sent to eligible players.  Players on NFL rosters for all 17 weeks of both the 2009 and 2010 seasons will be eligible for the maximum payment of $60,000.

The amount, paltry in comparison to the money that NFL players ordinarily make but still a decent chunk of change for the average person, likely won’t carry players very far — especially if they start receiving pieces of it as early as April 15.

That’s the most amazing aspect of the report.  If players start dipping into the shallow lockout fund five months before the season begins, how can the players ever make it through a full season without pay checks?

The fact that the money from the lockout fund will start flowing so early reconfirms that the goal of decertification and litigation was to end the lockout — and to end it quickly.  The owners will have tremendous leverage once player start to lose paydays, especially if their $60,000 piece of the lockout fund is long gone before then.

And it will be.

Permalink 38 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories, Union
38 Responses to “Player lockout fund to be unlocked five months before games are missed”
  1. ilovefoolsball says: Mar 29, 2011 6:26 PM

    $60,000 ain’t gonna cover Dez Bryant’s costs.

    Come on NFLPA, think of the little people with the big jewelry collections. They NEED that money. How else will they display their bling?

  2. tuckercarlsonisthevoiceofreason says: Mar 29, 2011 6:27 PM

    That’s only going to cover about 7% of what Dez Bryant owes on jewelry.

  3. mick730 says: Mar 29, 2011 6:28 PM

    So, let me get this straight; the NFLPA claims the NFL was planning to lock them out because they got this insurance loan from the TV networks, but the players and their union have been planning for the same since 2009?

    Pot meet kettle. Regardless, I wonder how far 60k will get Dez Bryant, Talib, Jolly, and the rest of the cast of miscreants and reprobates known as the NFLPA?

    Also, do Mendenhall and Adrian Peterson consider this 60k slave wages or reparations?

  4. duanethomas says: Mar 29, 2011 6:31 PM

    To bad Dez Bryant isn’t eligible, he could use that for attorney fee’s. I’m pro-player, but if the lockout decision goes against them, they will fold like picnic chairs.

  5. xsorethumbx says: Mar 29, 2011 6:32 PM

    Great news. I am going to have a sale at my jewelry store on April 15th now too.


  6. nfl52 says: Mar 29, 2011 6:32 PM

    so the players started the account in 2009? are they going to get bashed like the owners did for getting the lockout insurance?

    whats funny is what certain players will spend their 60k on. you would think they owuld put it away or pay bills, but some will buy jewelry or just blow it on stupid sh*t

  7. saberstud75 says: Mar 29, 2011 6:34 PM

    Too bad Dez Bryant won’t be eligible for the lockout payment.

    If Dez was able to get the max amount of $60,000 he could go buy another $500,000 worth of jewelry.

  8. phillyforlife says: Mar 29, 2011 6:35 PM

    But if the Union pays them I have to ask but how is the nflpa not a organized union ? If it is organized enough to do this then the players lose the counter suite by the owners allowing them to lock the players out.

  9. ravensfreak00 says: Mar 29, 2011 6:37 PM

    Players better hope that the lockout is lifted on April 6.

  10. richgannon says: Mar 29, 2011 6:39 PM

    Who let Channing Crowder play treasurer?

  11. riverhorsey says: Mar 29, 2011 6:43 PM

    If they can’t make it 3 wks without a check they’re in big trouble. 60K would barley cover a party weekend for a lot of them.

  12. warmachine2112 says: Mar 29, 2011 6:54 PM

    Phillyforlife: Good point. If the NFLPA ceased to exist as such with the decertification, then shouldn’t their assets and debts be assigned by the legal system. What would the distribution be?

    If, on the other hand, the NFLPA gives said assets to the Not-really-the-NFLPA, that would intimate that the decertification was a sham. If the League lost access to the assets reserved for this contingency, shouldn’t that set some sort of precedent. Sauce for the goose and all that.

    There was a deal to be done. There is still a deal to be done. Do it, dammit!

  13. scudbot says: Mar 29, 2011 6:55 PM

    Does this mean that the ex-NFLPA will be canceling the Alternate Draft Potluck Extravaganza Hudson River After Party Cruise?

  14. granadafan says: Mar 29, 2011 6:59 PM

    Thank God for that fund! Jewelry, exotic cars, and high priced champagne ain’t cheap!

  15. dkeyser says: Mar 29, 2011 7:01 PM

    60K huh??? Thats more than i made the last 2 years combined…I bet all the folks getting $400 a week in unemployment are happy in pigs in sh*t to find out what these guys are getting

  16. r8rsfan says: Mar 29, 2011 7:02 PM

    Buffoonery – lockout “insurance” payments 5 months before the season starts. If these players are already in need of this money what kind of shape will the be in come September?

  17. tile84 says: Mar 29, 2011 7:05 PM

    so the players are allowed to have a lock-out fund and the owners can’t use there lock-0ut fund from the the TV contracts. Can someone explain how that is possible?

  18. hail2tharedskins says: Mar 29, 2011 7:06 PM

    I agree this is an odd time to start allowing players to dip into the fund. The only reason I can see for them to make a decision to make that money available now is that players already complaining about potential lost income or that they don’t have the funds to pay for their medical insurance. If it is necessary to dip into that fund now and with maximum available to any one player being so low I can’t fathom how the players would ever stay united behind the anit-trust lawsuit if actual games were in imminent danger. This just further supports my position that if the judge denies the motion to lift the lockout the players would quickly resume negotiations and reach a deal on a new CBA.

  19. emmonsh says: Mar 29, 2011 7:17 PM

    how is this any different than the owners planning? how do they use union dues to pay this? union doesnt exist. i dont know of 1 person who supports the players anymore. i hope they lock out for 2 years. break the union and pay them $500,000 top wage.

  20. thefiesty1 says: Mar 29, 2011 7:27 PM

    See what happens when you join a union. When you strike and are locked out, you get no money or benefits from your employer. Then the head of the union promises to get you more money later while the lawyers and head of the union keep getting paid and the union will start sending you a little out of the dues you’ve been paying.

    Great deal when you can’t go to your boss and ask for a raise for all the good work you’ve done.

    Morons deserve what they get.

  21. gpete1962 says: Mar 29, 2011 7:29 PM

    You take the money as soon as you can get it……
    the smart one’s save it, the dumb one’s spend it !!!!!

  22. prmpft says: Mar 29, 2011 7:34 PM

    …man – and not a moment too soon! i’m sure most of us would be late on our mtg. payment to send a check to support the poor, downtrodden, enslaved, misunderstood, unappreciated, financially strapped, mentally distraught, entitled, deserving players…

  23. jabroni1 says: Mar 29, 2011 7:39 PM

    I hope there isn’t a drought this year. If Pac Man is eligible he can only make it sprinkle instead of rain!

  24. footballisking says: Mar 29, 2011 8:27 PM

    for those of you asking whats the diff between this and the lockout insurance that the owners had…the diff with this is the nflpa giving the players money they are not getting the money from a tv deal or a where the lockout insurance from the league was coming from tv deals

  25. jimphin says: Mar 29, 2011 8:33 PM

    Hmmmm…I don’t have numbers in front of me but, $60,000 times roughly 1700 players is ….
    100 million dollars. That’s an awful lot of many that those players have just thrown away into the lockout abyss.

    It would have been neat if all that money sitting there could have been used for the former players health and retirment.

  26. cincinnasti says: Mar 29, 2011 8:40 PM

    Does this cover practice squad guys?

  27. commandercornpone says: Mar 29, 2011 8:51 PM

    that money will be gone within a few weeks

    then the “oakley – ewing moments”…

  28. txchief says: Mar 29, 2011 8:56 PM

    Ah, the cracks are already beginning to appear. The playas will be crying soon when the payout from the former union drys up. The union morons deserve it. I hope the owners really stick it in this time and regain control of the game.

  29. txchief says: Mar 29, 2011 8:58 PM

    …and just because you’re necessary, it doesn’t mean you are important and can’t be replaced.

  30. hobartbaker says: Mar 29, 2011 11:57 PM

    Player lockout chest completely looted 4 1/2 months before games are missed. Caretakers could only find a broken diamond earring that one of the perps left behind.

  31. Deb says: Mar 30, 2011 12:14 AM

    Of course the goal of decertification and litigation was to end the lockout. I just hope it works, and the players don’t have to dip into their lockout fund.

    And I wish the guys on here who never tire of posting about Cromartie or Dez Bryant on every thread about the labor situation could grasp that there are 1700 players in the league, not just the handful who make negative headlines. God knows just because I post on PFT doesn’t mean I want to be confused with simple-minded fools who can’t separate Cromartie from the other 1699 players on the NFL payroll. They really don’t all look alike, you know. 🙄

  32. realfann says: Mar 30, 2011 1:14 AM

    The owners PR machine is sure posting a lot of stupid comments today.

    Best one being the moronic claim that the players putting aside money for a possible lockout is JUST the same as the owners illegally skimming revenue to avoid the consequences of them cancelling games.

    Not even close Einsteins.

  33. ravenfan820 says: Mar 30, 2011 7:25 AM

    How horrible…$60K….How will the player survive?

    I am going to start a fund to help these poor destitute men. Anyone who wants to contribute please send the money to the I am an idiot fund care of dumbasses unite…..

  34. vahawker says: Mar 30, 2011 9:24 AM

    Unlike the players, the owners were not setting aside their OWN funds to protect against lost revenue from missed games. They were setting up a deal that went against the terms of the CBA by not attempting to maximize league income . As I understand it, they took less money on contracts in order be guaranteed the networks would pay even if games were lost. The money would be returned from future income, but the point was that the league took LESS money, therefore decreasing potential revenue that would be split with players which was against the CBA.

    If players already need to dip into their fund, they better be praying hard for the courts to overturn the lockout or they will collape like Tony Romo in the playoffs.

  35. crashinghero says: Mar 30, 2011 9:31 AM

    HAHAHA – ravenfan820 is hilarious with his deft use of irony. Anyone upset about the amount of money the players are asking for and have received in the past needs only to look at themselves. Football makes money. There is 9 billion dollars to split. That 9 billion dollars comes from you. ravenfan820 doesn’t need to set up a fund, because he’s already a part of one. That’s the way things are.

    The owners got into an illegal trust knowingly. They also knew that the only reason their illegal trust could exist was because the players were unionized and consented to a collective bargaining agreement.

    The union is gone, the lockout is illegal. The owners’ only hope rests on the courts ruling that the decertification was sham, which would imply that workers can be forced to unionize by the government. If the courts rule that way, you should forget about football, break out your tin hats, and run for cover.

    The simple fact is that there are 9 billion dollars to divvy up here, and there will probably be more in the future. Should the players work for half a million a year, as a previous poster suggested? If all of the players made that maximum salary, it would add up to around a billion dollars, leaving 8 billion plus to the owners. What do the owners contribute to earn that amount?

    Most of the posters here seem to advocate making some of the wealthiest men in America even wealthier because Dez Bryant wore his pants too low and buys too much jewelry. How much jewelry do you think the owners buy? And why would any of that matter? If you insist on giving the NFL 9 billion dollars, that money has to go somewhere, and it sure as hell isn’t public schools.

  36. melikefootball says: Mar 30, 2011 9:54 AM

    Gee once again how sorry to we feel fot these players. Lets take a count of hands from the many many unemployed for the last year or so to get their take.

  37. laeaglefan says: Mar 30, 2011 10:31 AM

    With the price of gas these days, the players are going to have a hard time affording to fill the tank on those gas guzzling Escalades.

  38. Deb says: Mar 30, 2011 12:37 PM

    @laeaglefan …

    Gee, just imagine how much trouble the owners will have filling up their limos 🙄

Leave a Reply

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