Skip to content

Ray Edwards: “There’s no way I will play for less than what my backup got”

Arizona Cardinals v Minnesota Vikings Getty Images

Fans should be ruling for the courts to force the NFL to re-open for business.  Players are rooting for it too.

There are plenty of players, however, that would suffer if the NFL is forced to go back to work and 2010 league rules are put in place.  Vikings defensive end Ray Edwards will be one of those players, no matter what happens with his boxing career.

The Vikings placed a one-year, $2.8 million tender on Edwards before the lockout started.  If the league works out a new CBA, Edwards should be an unrestricted free agent, free to enter the market.  If the 2010 rules are back, he could be stuck in Minnesota.

“They put a first-round tender on me, but even if that holds up, there’s no way I will play for less than what my backup got in his new contract.  There’s no way I would play here,” Edwards told Mark Craig of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune.

Edwards is referring to Brian Robison, who got a $6.5 million signing bonus this offseason.  Edwards claims he “couldn’t care less” about the lockout at the moment, but that’s hard to believe when it could affect his potential for a once-in-a-lifetime contract.

What gets lost in this legal battle between the NFLPA* and NFL is that no one can fully win in the courts.  The players can gain leverage, but they may have to deal with another year of decreased spending in the league.

We still need an agreement at the end of this mess or players like Edwards get a raw deal.

Permalink 67 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Minnesota Vikings, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories
67 Responses to “Ray Edwards: “There’s no way I will play for less than what my backup got””
  1. chapnastier says: May 5, 2011 10:24 AM

    “Fans should be ruling for the courts to force the NFL to re-open for business. Players as a whole are rooting for it too.”

    Please explain that one to us? You make this claims yet you never back them up. As far as Edwards, he should get paid what he is worth and not a dime more.

  2. yem123 says: May 5, 2011 10:25 AM

    I wonder if David Garrard is saying the same thing.

  3. thephantomstranger says: May 5, 2011 10:26 AM

    That’s fine, Ray. The Vikings don’t want you either. But if you’re a restricted FA, you’d better hope someone wants to give up a first-round choice for you or you’ll be playing nowhere. And I don’t think that’s likely, especially if you lose a boxing match to a 5’9″ tomato can.

  4. pistolsmoke says: May 5, 2011 10:27 AM

    Vikings please depart with Ray Edwards. He isn’t worth the money and he’s from Purdue.

  5. scotthochsdramaticweightgain1 says: May 5, 2011 10:28 AM

    Actually, the Packers will pay Edwards $1 more to play for the VikeQueens.

  6. mick730 says: May 5, 2011 10:30 AM

    “Fans should be ruling for the courts to force the NFL to re-open for business. Players as a whole are rooting for it too.”

    Wrong again. Fans of the NFL should be hoping that the courts rule in favor of the league which will force the union to honestly negotiate a new CBA.

    And please, can you explain how a guy who will play football games 16 times in the next year, and get paid 2.8 million bucks for doing so, will be suffering?

    Suffering? For real? You’ve got to be kidding me.

  7. friendlylittletrees says: May 5, 2011 10:30 AM

    Things like this make the players look greedy.

  8. skiumahrah says: May 5, 2011 10:32 AM

    “there’s no way I will play for less than what my backup got in his new contract”

    Then don’t Ray, go get your douchy ass kicked all over the boxing ring. Later buddy its been real.

  9. pervyharvin says: May 5, 2011 10:32 AM

    You know what Ray? Hit the road,we don’t need you. You talk more boxing than football lately and we just drafted Ballard. Good luck kid.

  10. 2dalake says: May 5, 2011 10:32 AM

    As a Vikings fan, this guy ticks me off. All he does is run is mouth and complain.

  11. Logan's Lites says: May 5, 2011 10:33 AM

    Raw Deal!!!! Are you kidding, how is being paid 2.8 million dollars a raw deal? Pay me that for one year and I’m set for life!!!!

  12. mike83ri says: May 5, 2011 10:35 AM

    “Fans should be ruling for the courts to force the NFL to re-open for business.”

    Speak for yourself. Forcing the league open and subjecting them to anti-trust violations for maintaining Free Agency/Draft/Player Trade rules would lead to the eventual end of those things. I’d rather they take the time to make sure the product we love stays intact than have the product back ASAP a shell of it’s former self.

  13. berniemadoffsides says: May 5, 2011 10:35 AM

    I’m a Giants fan, so I guess I get to see elite DE’s play regularly – Osi as a pure pass rusher, Tuck as the complete package.

    That being said, Ray Edwards is average as hell. The guy has never even had a double-digit sack season, yet he thinks he deserves a monster deal? Why? Seriously, he has Jared Allen on the other side of him, had the Williams Wall clogging up the middle, and he still hasn’t done anything to warrant a big contract. He’s not terrible, he’s not great – but I think it’s fair to say he’s totally average.

    I guarantee Robison puts up at least as many sacks as Edwards does if he starts in 2011.

  14. purpleguy says: May 5, 2011 10:36 AM

    Why in hell does the media keep giving this dope a platform to shout at the flipping wind? Maybe if he shut his pie hole, didn’t try to undermine everyone else on the team, and actually performed well on Sundays, he wouldn’t have to worry about a back-up getting a larger contract. Good luck to the team that signs this self-important bag of hot air.

  15. jbaxt says: May 5, 2011 10:36 AM

    It sounds like players as a whole, as in 95% of them, would just like to get back to the way things were. The one’s that are 2-5 years from retirement; Brees, Manning, Lewis want more money before they’re over the hill thus leading to the problem.

    The squeaky wheel gets the grease, right?

  16. david7590 says: May 5, 2011 10:37 AM

    Who the hell is Ray Edwards?

  17. grinderwi says: May 5, 2011 10:39 AM

    Hope Ray is a man of his word and doesn’t play then. We will see if he puts his money where his mouth is.

  18. vikescry1 says: May 5, 2011 10:44 AM

    you know i’m a union worker our last contract was very nice, this on we didn’t take a raise for 2 years on because the economy was so bad. sometimes people (players) need to take a look at whats happening around them. i agree you should get payed for what your worth. but really all the money that’s being wasted here on legal fee’s and travel and whatever, could be going to something useful. why these guy’s can’t sit down and get a deal done is disgraceful when you think about the people that don’t have anything. or the people in trouble right now, japan our people getting hit by the storms in the south. and yet this guy’s upset that his backup is getting paid 6.5 million and he’s getting 2.8 million. but that’s his backups signing bonus what was his when he started? and whats his backups salary? i dunno but i think a lot of people have bigger problems to worry about wether or not someone is getting a couple more million than me?

  19. paulnoga says: May 5, 2011 10:44 AM

    Rosenthal, you need to get information before you talk. Your credibility is at the bottom.
    Right now, there are numerous lawsuits by players already filed in court. No matter what system (old CBA) the Owners use, they will be guilty of some form of restrictions on the Players and thus awards from the lawsuits. More Players will file lawsuits constantly. Making the owners choose a previous CBA would be suicide.
    The Players made sure they are suing the Owners on all restrictions.
    The Owners need to ensure that the prior CBA agreement they pick can not have any legal actions against them, present or future.
    Personally, I feel that the Owners should go strictly on Contracts and Contract law. No franchise /Transition Tags. Also no retirement system, no Health Care, etc, etc. Only do what the current contracts demand. lets see what the Players do without those things. they will be crying for a Union immediately.

  20. ffootballontwitter says: May 5, 2011 10:49 AM

    @chapnastier
    Seriously? You don’t think players are rooting for the courts to force the NFL to re-open for business? And you’re sad that Rosie isn’t taking a column inch or two to spoon-feed the explanation to you?

    (But I do agree about Edwards. I suspect whatever happens, there are going to be a lot of players upset when they realize who the union action really benefits.)

  21. orbearider66 says: May 5, 2011 10:51 AM

    @david7590: For that matter, who in the hell i Gregg Rosenthal to tell me what I should be rooting for. Given the past couple of months, I’m actually rooting for some sort of impartial coverage rather than the constant shilling for the players.

  22. southmo says: May 5, 2011 10:54 AM

    Rosenthal, you’re being short-sighted as many have made abundantly clear.

    The best thing for the fans, and what we all want in reality, is for this whole mess to go away. To do that, we need a deal. And to do that we need both sides back at the table, doing serious negotiations.

    If keeping the lockout helps that happen, then I’m all for the lockout, despite your assumption.

  23. farmmbig says: May 5, 2011 11:03 AM

    As a Vikings’ fan– I like Ray Edwards. He’s definitely a solid starter and deserves to be paid accordingly. His mouth often writes checks that his body can’t cash— And it’s probably a BIG reason the Vikings won’t write him the big check.

    If you want a guy that’s not afraid to predict record breaking sack totals— Then go 8 weeks straight without getting one— He’s your guy.

    But I definitely understand his frustration on the “business side” of football.

  24. jo3jo says: May 5, 2011 11:07 AM

    Edwards is precisely the kind of player who is going to get hosed by the lawsuit the players have brought. He’s no Peyton Manning who can credibly argue he should be paid more based on being a season changing player and based on the pay structure of other sports. Edwards by contrast probably should be making less. He’s not a unique talent. He’s adequate, not a star. He should look at what the adequate journeyman players in sports like baseball earn. Adequate folks don’t make 2+ million in a totally free market, where owners have to spend the bulk of their money on the Mannings of the world. Adequate guys probably don’t hit 7 digits. So if Edwards and his ilk were smart, they’d scream and hollar to get the union back together and work out a deal. Brady and him don’t share a lot in common, and yet he and other players seem content to let a lawsuit that will likely cost them money go forward.

  25. whathappenedtovox says: May 5, 2011 11:09 AM

    chapnastier says: May 5, 2011 10:24 AM

    “Fans should be ruling for the courts to force the NFL to re-open for business. Players as a whole are rooting for it too.”

    Please explain that one to us? You make this claims yet you never back them up. As far as Edwards, he should get paid what he is worth and not a dime more.
    _________________________________

    I think Rosenthal made the mistake of giving his audience’s intelligence a little too much credit, so I’ll explain what he meant. You see, if the courts lift the lockout forcing the NFL to open for business, then we have all the things that football fans love… free agency, trades, training camp, and you know… football itself.

    Is that clearer?

  26. thejuddstir says: May 5, 2011 11:23 AM

    This is the same Ray Edwards that was going to set the all-time record for sacks in a single season, LMAO………even playing along side 2 All Pros and a Williams Wall that basically shut down the run by themselves and with Jared Allen getting double/triple teamed , Edwards couldn’t do any better than an average DE. If I were Ray Edwards, I would keep my mouth shut and be happy that I’m getting paid at all. Edwards needs to take a long look in the mirror and realize he isn’t that good.

  27. orbearider66 says: May 5, 2011 11:24 AM

    @whathappenedtovox … And we still won’t have a long term CBA to keep football going in the future. We’ll just be in the same boat down the road only the owners will be way more pissed off than they are now and will take a harder stance. So, eventually, we’d be worse off than we are now.

    The bottom line is both parties need to set aside their differences, quit talking to the media and talk to each other. That will finally get a deal done. The owners need to realize that sharing the wealth is good for the long-term interests of football and the players need to realize that the money they are demanding doesn’t actually belong to them. I suspect that, if the personal assistant of any one of these football players suddenly demanded that, in addition to their salary, the assistant was entitled to another 10% of the player’s revenue, that player would be a little angry too.

  28. tdotsteel says: May 5, 2011 11:27 AM

    vikescry1 says: May 5, 2011 10:44 AM

    you know i’m a union worker our last contract was very nice, this on we didn’t take a raise for 2 years on because the economy was so bad. sometimes people (players) need to take a look at whats happening around them. i agree you should get payed for what your worth. but really all the money that’s being wasted here on legal fee’s and travel and whatever, could be going to something useful. why these guy’s can’t sit down and get a deal done is disgraceful when you think about the people that don’t have anything. or the people in trouble right now, japan our people getting hit by the storms in the south. and yet this guy’s upset that his backup is getting paid 6.5 million and he’s getting 2.8 million. but that’s his backups signing bonus what was his when he started? and whats his backups salary? i dunno but i think a lot of people have bigger problems to worry about wether or not someone is getting a couple more million than me?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    I also work for a union and regardless of what happens around me, if the owners are making record profits and ask me to take a pay cut, you better believe we are going to court.

    The players were willing to leave the current deal in place, however the owners decided to lock them out.

    The owners will not give the fans or players a penny if they are not mandated. At least the players are putting their life at risk to play the game we all love. Ask the families of Thomas Herrion, Korey Stringer, Dave Duerson, Justin Strzelczyk, Mike Webster, Terry Long, Andre Waters if all the money was worth it.

    With all the medical information that has surfaced in past year I can never side with the owners.

  29. chatham10 says: May 5, 2011 11:30 AM

    Ray, it is your decision because you are not a slave, you can do whatevery you want, I’m sure there are a lot of $2+ million dollar jobs a year out there .

  30. purp4lyfe says: May 5, 2011 11:31 AM

    Have fun on the Patriots as soon as the labor stuff is resolved….You will not be missed…but you will continue to miss QB’s…….It’s gonna be funny to watch you just miss getting to Sanchez,Henne,and Fitz……..or whoever is starting for the fins and bills!!

  31. seahawkhuskyfan says: May 5, 2011 11:35 AM

    I am sure he could become a brain surgeon. Use that free education and degree he has right? I am sure he has other job skills. Shouldn’t be a problem Ray, go find that kind of money out in the real world. Can you “dig” it?

  32. sterling7 says: May 5, 2011 11:36 AM

    Ray Edwards had one (1) good game in his entire career and that was the 2010 playoff game against the Dallas Cowboys where he had three sacks. Other than that Ray Edwards is at best extremely average. He makes stupid penalty plays but he never makes plays. Brian Robison is far better than Ray Edwards and has come into his own. Brian Robison is much quicker, smarter and aggressive than Ray Edwards. It must be nice that Ray Edwards has so many career options but he should never forget that just because he works against Bryant McKinnie in practice shouldn’t give him a swelled head. Bryant McKinnie could keep my grandmother out of the backfield on a pass rush……..but just barely!

  33. dontouchmyjunk says: May 5, 2011 11:37 AM

    Wish I could be “stuck” with a 2.8 million dollar one year salary.

  34. chapnastier says: May 5, 2011 11:40 AM

    @ whathappenedtovox

    I think he insulted our intelligence by stating that he knows whats best.

    Please see orbearider66’s response to your rant.

  35. fargovikesfan says: May 5, 2011 11:41 AM

    if Ray Edwards were half as good as he thinks he is, we might have something. Robison has put up similar numbers in the past AS A ROLE PLAYER. I doubt there’s very many Vikes fans that will be sad to see him go. Or very many teammates for that matter. According to the local sports talk guys, he’s not exactly the most well liked player in the locker room.

    And now he’s saying that he could easily be the heavyweight champion of the world in boxing, and that he’s a cross between Muhammad Ali and Mike Tyson. Put that up beside his NFL sack record that he set a couple years ago… oh wait…..

  36. mick730 says: May 5, 2011 11:47 AM

    “if the owners are making record profits and ask me to take a pay cut, you better believe we are going to court.”

    Is there a union exclusively for the ignorant? If so, you must be a founding member.

    Record profits? Really? Do you know the difference between profits and revenues? I don’t think so.

    Here’s a lesson for you Einstein: The NFL over the period of the last CBA experienced record revenues, meaning higher ticket prices and higher television dollars. In 2006, the Packers achieved a NET PROFIT of 35.8 million dollars. For the fiscal year ending March 31, 2010, the Packers achieved a NET PROFIT of $5.2 million dollars, despite during that same year, achieving RECORD REVENUES.

    Can your little union mind grasp the difference yet? The NET PROFIT for the Packers has gone over the cliff because player salaries and other player related costs are increasing at an average rate of 15% per year.

    So, before you and your union throw a whole lot of forced union dues down the toilet on lawyers going to court, you might want to take a high school accounting class.

    Is the line, “I’m in a union and dumb as hell” printed on your forehead?

  37. bcknights says: May 5, 2011 11:53 AM

    Ever get the feeling that some player shouldn’t speak?

  38. tdotsteel says: May 5, 2011 12:04 PM

    mick730 says: May 5, 2011 11:47 AM

    “if the owners are making record profits and ask me to take a pay cut, you better believe we are going to court.”

    Is there a union exclusively for the ignorant? If so, you must be a founding member.

    Record profits? Really? Do you know the difference between profits and revenues? I don’t think so.

    Here’s a lesson for you Einstein: The NFL over the period of the last CBA experienced record revenues, meaning higher ticket prices and higher television dollars. In 2006, the Packers achieved a NET PROFIT of 35.8 million dollars. For the fiscal year ending March 31, 2010, the Packers achieved a NET PROFIT of $5.2 million dollars, despite during that same year, achieving RECORD REVENUES.

    Can your little union mind grasp the difference yet? The NET PROFIT for the Packers has gone over the cliff because player salaries and other player related costs are increasing at an average rate of 15% per year.

    So, before you and your union throw a whole lot of forced union dues down the toilet on lawyers going to court, you might want to take a high school accounting class.

    Is the line, “I’m in a union and dumb as hell” printed on your forehead?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    For your information idiot I worked with a Fortune 500 Co. as an accountant for 5 yrs and know the difference between profit and revenue. I am certainly cognizant of how companies manipulate figures to show profit/loss. An income statement or balance sheet is not a true indication of a company’s economic standing. Does Enron, Worldcom, Tyco ring a bell?

    If the owners want to be truly transparent……open the books. But they have refused. They have taken a BILLION off the top, want another BILLION…………..without a shred of evidence and you want to question my stupidity.

    Chile please!

  39. carlgerbschmidt says: May 5, 2011 12:05 PM

    thephantomstranger says:
    May 5, 2011 10:26 AM
    That’s fine, Ray. The Vikings don’t want you either. But if you’re a restricted FA, you’d better hope someone wants to give up a first-round choice for you or you’ll be playing nowhere. And I don’t think that’s likely, especially if you lose a boxing match to a 5’9″ tomato can.

    _________

    According to the “Ray Edwards Sack Tracker” Ray Edwards is a valuable member of your organziation.

    Seriously, the vikes are a joke. How many Super Bowls have you won again? I’ll tell you, ZERO. And that number ain’t changing anytime soon.

  40. louderthanwords1 says: May 5, 2011 12:09 PM

    I can’t believe all of the people on here complaining about Ray wanting more money than his back up. If you went in to work and they paid someone more money than you who works less and produces less you would complain to. Is it an absurd amount these guys are getting paid and complaining about? Yes but its part of the profession. If you work at a Mcdonalds are you going to get paid the same as a CEO at a fortune 500 company? Pay is all relative to the business.

    Also to all the commentators saying they would play the game for that amount of money well guess what? No one is going to pay you that amount because you can’t do the job.

  41. clear2me says: May 5, 2011 12:11 PM

    I will never understand why these guys feel they have to go public with their pissy fits regarding their salaries or contracts. Do they really think we as football fans give a rats hind quarters about how much they are “suffering?” Check out the comments here and many don’t even think he’s worth as much as he will be making anyway. All we as fans a hoping for is a return to sanity and a return to football without all the lawyering up that is going on right now. Seeya Ray, good luck with that boxing career.

  42. thevikes85 says: May 5, 2011 12:19 PM

    Bye,bye Ray thanks for the Dallas game,the only good thing you did,apart from setting the sack record u promised,oh wait………..douche

  43. thephantomstranger says: May 5, 2011 12:27 PM

    carlgerbschmidt says:
    According to the “Ray Edwards Sack Tracker” Ray Edwards is a valuable member of your organziation.

    Seriously, the vikes are a joke. How many Super Bowls have you won again? I’ll tell you, ZERO. And that number ain’t changing anytime soon.
    _____________________

    Thanks for your usual clever contribution, Carl. How many brain cells do you have left? I’ll tell you, ZERO.

  44. mick730 says: May 5, 2011 12:30 PM

    “If the owners want to be truly transparent……open the books. But they have refused. They have taken a BILLION off the top, want another BILLION…………..without a shred of evidence and you want to question my stupidity.

    Chile please!”

    The “books” of the Green Bay franchise are “open” and always have been, as they are a publicly held company. The books are also audited and heavily scrutinized owing to the status of the Packer corporation. But seeing that you were once an accountant for a “Fortune 500 Company”, I’m sure you know that.

    Just as sure I am that you have taken the time to review those public documents before makking your half-witted rant.

    Right. And by the way, I don’t question your stupidity; of that I’m absolutely certain.

  45. fsfwannabe says: May 5, 2011 12:33 PM

    @clear2me:

    I’m unable to understand the morons who call a guy greedy for wanting to be paid in reasonable proportion to their skills but would bitch and cry if they were paid half of someone of lesser skill and value in their organization.

  46. pftuser says: May 5, 2011 12:51 PM

    The players don’t think the owners deserve more of the money.

    The owners think they do deserve more of the money.

    As a fan and season ticket holder, here is what I think:

    If I were an average NFL player like Ray Edwards, I would feel very lucky to make 2.8 million a year. In fact, with half of that I’d still feel lucky.

    If I were an average NFL owner of a $738 million (avg nfl franchise value) dollar asset, I would be happy with a 5% return on my investment. That would be 36.9 million in profit.

    Less than 1% profit is not acceptable.

    Neither is holding cities hostage for tax payer funded stadiums and other tax breaks.

    Nor is overpaying players and then crying foul about profit margins.

    Nor is charging $10 dollars for a beer, $40 for parking, when you already pay $80 for a ticket, and forcing fans to sit through 20 tv time-outs a game.

    Honestly, the NFL has been screwing me for so long now, my ass can use the break. Go ahead, skip the season. Owners and players – you are both are making me sick.

  47. xinellum says: May 5, 2011 12:54 PM

    If players are hurting, then drop the lawsuit, which will cause the owners to stop the lockout, which will require both parties to sit down and work out a CBA. Frankly, I hope the players get skrewed big time for walking out of negotiations. The owners were playing hard ball however slowly but surely, they kept backing off their position and offering the players more and more and more. When the players didn’t get everything on the second round, they bolted. I think that more and more we will start to see the players cracking around the edges and looking for an agreement. Until that time, the players will pretend to be united, the owners will hold out, the players will crack in September adn in October football will start. Unfortunately, by that time, I will be done with NFL football.

  48. ingloriousmaster says: May 5, 2011 1:03 PM

    Nice comments Ray, just what everyone wants to hear while the owners and players jockey for public opinion in regards to the lockout. Don’t you wish there were cases where every team in the league made a pact not to sign players like Ray out of principle. I’ll gladly take your 2.5 mil…dunce.

  49. zerored78 says: May 5, 2011 1:21 PM

    Are you people that dense?

    Players win = There will be football. Either under a new CBA or whatever rules the owners choose to implement with no CBA.

    Owners win = Players are forced to accept the owners’ ultimatums or there will be no football this year.

    Now if you think the owners’ stance is so important to the league that it’s worth giving up a year of football for it. Fine. But don’t pretend that you aren’t choosing to give away the upcoming season.

  50. jfluke65 says: May 5, 2011 1:23 PM

    Yeah, no one here venting on Edwards would appreciate being paid less than the guy that is their back up. I get what he’s saying.
    However, he might want to consider that the Vikings don’t see him as the starter anymore…

    As for Rosenthal; please, stop sniffing the players jocks and get a firm grasp on reality. 2.8 mil for ANY job, especially in the current economic climate, is far from a raw deal. Even if it is less than your backup.

  51. shaggytoodle says: May 5, 2011 1:25 PM

    WIth all the crying and moaning I really hope that Edwards stays in Minny. They are a perfect fit for each other.

  52. mick730 says: May 5, 2011 1:29 PM

    “If I were an average NFL owner of a $738 million (avg nfl franchise value) dollar asset, I would be happy with a 5% return on my investment. That would be 36.9 million in profit.

    Less than 1% profit is not acceptable. ”

    Thank you for a great post. As a Packer fan, a franchise without a billionaire owner with pockets so deep that it might be irrelevant as to the financial performance of the franchise, I want a CBA that allows the Packers to achieve the same level of PROFITABILITY that the franchise achieved before the most recent CBA was put into place.

    That level of profitability was 35.8 million dollars, which is pretty darn close to the 5% figure that you site. However, for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2010, the Packers achieved less than a 1% return as their net profit figure was 5.2 million dollars. Mark Murphy told the shareholders of the team two years ago that the CBA was unsustainable for the Packers. And it is just that. The Packers must fund all operations from football related revenue; signing bonuses, stadium maintenance, health care for all the players, to say nothing of player salaries and legal fees. If the financial trends continue this way, the Packers will first be unable to field a competitive team, and eventually, they will become insolvent.

    To give all of you a little perspective on the matter, if there is a 2011 season, 11 players currently on the Packers roster will EACH make more than the Packers franchise made in fiscal 2010. Not collectively, but each of the 11 will make more than the team.

    Can anybody see the trend here? How about you, Fortune 500 accountant? See any looming problems here for the Packers? If you cannot, I guess we will all know why you are no longer a accountant for a Fortune 500 company.

  53. whathappenedtovox says: May 5, 2011 1:31 PM

    @orbearider66
    The bottom line is both parties need to set aside their differences, quit talking to the media and talk to each other. That will finally get a deal done. The owners need to realize that sharing the wealth is good for the long-term interests of football and the players need to realize that the money they are demanding doesn’t actually belong to them. I suspect that, if the personal assistant of any one of these football players suddenly demanded that, in addition to their salary, the assistant was entitled to another 10% of the player’s revenue, that player would be a little angry too.
    __________________________________

    I’m not sure where the personal assistant reference is coming from, since the players aren’t “demanding” anything. As far as I’m aware, they were perfectly content with the previous CBA. But I don’t want to get into a whole thing there.

    Anyway, in Cupcake Valley on Lollipop Lane the owners and players would sit down and hammer out a deal. But that’s not going to happen. We all saw how that played out in February and March. The owners have no intent of negotiating. They can just wait the players out until they crack, and I just don’t see the players cracking anytime soon. This nonsense about”getting back to the table” is a pipe dream.

  54. albigverg says: May 5, 2011 1:39 PM

    If the vikings are planning to start him.. then they should pay him accordingly.. atleast an incentive based bonus if he hits certain numbers.. if they are not planning to start him then let him know and tell him to shut up and love the 2.8 million. None of u would like it if at your job you got paid less than someone who has less responsibility and tenure than u.. I guarantee all of u would be crying.. It doesn’t matter if u make 28 hundred or 2.8 million.

  55. tdotsteel says: May 5, 2011 1:42 PM

    mick730 says: May 5, 2011 12:30 PM

    “If the owners want to be truly transparent……open the books. But they have refused. They have taken a BILLION off the top, want another BILLION…………..without a shred of evidence and you want to question my stupidity.

    Chile please!”

    The “books” of the Green Bay franchise are “open” and always have been, as they are a publicly held company. The books are also audited and heavily scrutinized owing to the status of the Packer corporation. But seeing that you were once an accountant for a “Fortune 500 Company”, I’m sure you know that.

    Just as sure I am that you have taken the time to review those public documents before makking your half-witted rant.

    Right. And by the way, I don’t question your stupidity; of that I’m absolutely certain.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Have a good read with public documents!

    http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/30/football-valuations-10_Green-Bay-Packers_302814.html

    The players are willing to open up their brains for research………why don’t the owners open their books for scrutiny?

    “Prejudices are what fools use for reason”
    Voltaire

  56. orbearider66 says: May 5, 2011 1:47 PM

    The owners have no interest in negotiating? Really? Weren’t the owners sitting at the negotiating table waiting for a response from the players to a counter offer and an extension to the deadline when the players walked out and de-certified.

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m not necessarily pro-owner but don’t paint the players as victims here.

    Sure the players are content with the previous CBA because it was an awesome deal for the players. So, sure the owners want to change it. The 10% reference comes from the fact that the players think they have the right to tell the owners what to do with their revenue … revenue, not profit. The players think they have the right to demand more of the revenue and I don’t blame anyone … owner, employer, etc. for not wanting to do that.

    And, if you really think the players aren’t going to crack anytime soon, then you’re the one in Cupcake Valley. If players are already needing to dip into their lockout fund … when they haven’t missed a game check yet … or have a splinter group want separate representation, then they are in big trouble. Once those game checks disappear, so will player resolve.

  57. tdotsteel says: May 5, 2011 2:15 PM

    “If I were an average NFL owner of a $738 million (avg nfl franchise value) dollar asset, I would be happy with a 5% return on my investment. That would be 36.9 million in profit.

    Less than 1% profit is not acceptable. ”

    Thank you for a great post. As a Packer fan, a franchise without a billionaire owner with pockets so deep that it might be irrelevant as to the financial performance of the franchise, I want a CBA that allows the Packers to achieve the same level of PROFITABILITY that the franchise achieved before the most recent CBA was put into place.

    That level of profitability was 35.8 million dollars, which is pretty darn close to the 5% figure that you site. However, for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2010, the Packers achieved less than a 1% return as their net profit figure was 5.2 million dollars. Mark Murphy told the shareholders of the team two years ago that the CBA was unsustainable for the Packers. And it is just that. The Packers must fund all operations from football related revenue; signing bonuses, stadium maintenance, health care for all the players, to say nothing of player salaries and legal fees. If the financial trends continue this way, the Packers will first be unable to field a competitive team, and eventually, they will become insolvent.

    To give all of you a little perspective on the matter, if there is a 2011 season, 11 players currently on the Packers roster will EACH make more than the Packers franchise made in fiscal 2010. Not collectively, but each of the 11 will make more than the team.

    Can anybody see the trend here? How about you, Fortune 500 accountant? See any looming problems here for the Packers? If you cannot, I guess we will all know why you are no longer a accountant for a Fortune 500 company.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Using a publicly owned company as an example is truly disingenous by the owners. This is akin to using a non-profit organization as an example of corporate profitability.

    12 of the 32 teams made in excess 36.9 million profit you quote with the Cowboys & Redskins at >$100 million not including revenue sharing and the pro-rated portion of the additional $1 billion off the top.
    Only 5 teams reported less than the $9 million used for the GB Packers for 2009.

    http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/30/football-valuations-10_Green-Bay-Packers_302814.html

  58. whathappenedtovox says: May 5, 2011 2:21 PM

    orbearider66 says: May 5, 2011 1:47 PM

    The owners have no interest in negotiating? Really? Weren’t the owners sitting at the negotiating table waiting for a response from the players to a counter offer and an extension to the deadline when the players walked out and de-certified.
    _______________________________

    OK, I see… You’re not really familiar with the circumstances of what happened in March. I’ll explain. There was a deadline of when the players could de-certify. It was 5:00pm on March 11th. The owners, after having TWO FULL YEARS to submit a reasonable offer, chose to wait until the afternoon of March 11th. Had the players chosen to prolong the negotiations, they could no longer de-certify past that date. It was a complete non-offer.

    And maybe you’re right about the players finally cracking once they lose some game checks. You know when that would be? AT SOME POINT INTO THE SEASON, WHEN FOOTBALL WOULD BE LOST!!! So getting back to the initial point of the courts forcing the owners to open the doors, yeah, it’s in the best interests of the fans for that to happen.

  59. chatham10 says: May 5, 2011 2:22 PM

    Ray, did you ever think that you might be the backup?

  60. thefiesty1 says: May 5, 2011 2:25 PM

    Poor baby, can’t live on $2.8 million a year. Greedy jerks. Go get a REAL job and see how much you you can earn.

  61. tdotsteel says: May 5, 2011 2:56 PM

    Re: mick730 says: May 5, 2011 1:29 PM

    I am pro-player because I have played the sport, although not at the professional level and know 1st hand the toll it takes on your body.
    I have (2) ACL’s and bum shoulder due to my 6 yrs of organized football. I have one leg longer than the other and cant throw the pigskin farther than 20yds.
    I am thankful for the camraderie and life lessons learned. However I realize the sacrifices made to play the sport

    Here are some stats to peruse

    Average NFL player salary: $1.9 million
    Median NFL player salary: $770,000
    Average NFL career length: 3.5 years
    Number of players on injured reserve in 2010: 352
    Average NFL player age: 27

    The league employed approx 2000 players in 2010 with about 15% on injured reserve. Compared to any other sport this is almost 3x the norm.
    Yet of the 4 major sports it is the only one without guaranteed contracts. The average NFL player plays only 3 years. He stands to make $770,000 a year,
    bringing the average career earnings of an NFL player to $2,310,000 – a mere 12% of the MLB player and 11% of an NBA player.

    Google Dave Duerson, William Perry, Chris Henry, Terry Long, Mike Webster, Justin Strelcyzk and tell me the money is worth it.

    I am not against the owners making a profit but not at the cost of their greatest asset. Players are experiencing medical problems left and right, yet the
    owners want to increase the number of regular season games to 18. I love my steelers but it rips my heart to read some of the ex-players medical stories.
    I am appalled that the owners are taking the fans for granted and squeezing the players in the name of the almighty $$$$$$$$.

    I have no sympathy for Albert Haynesworth…….however for every Fat Albert there are 10 Mark Herzlichs. Keep that in mind when you make form your opinion.

  62. gregjennings85 says: May 5, 2011 3:05 PM

    Excellent. This kid is a stud. He outplayed the grossly overrated Jared Allen last year.

  63. tdotsteel says: May 5, 2011 3:12 PM

    Hey mick730:

    Don’t let the facts get in the way of your biased opinion

    The Green Bay Packers will never be confused with the Dallas Cowboys or Washington Redskins when it comes to shopping for free agents. But in a year in which there are no limitations on how much an NFL team can spend, the Packers signed three players to deals worth a combined $75 million in one week’s time.

    That $31.5 million of it will be paid this year shows how serious the Packers are about keeping their 2009 team together.

    On Friday, the club used its annual Fan Fest held at the Lambeau Field Atrium to announce it had signed safety Nick Collins and defensive tackle Ryan Pickett to long-term deals. The signings came six days after left tackle Chad Clifton signed a three-year, $19.4 million free-agent deal to remain with the team.

    The Packers were under no obligation to spend a minimum amount once the salary cap was suspended due to a disagreement between owners and the players union. But it appears they valued their own players more than others and decided to devote a large amount of cash to the 2010 season in hopes of putting themselves in good shape if the salary cap returns.

    http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/87525917.html

  64. orbearider66 says: May 5, 2011 3:33 PM

    You know what … I apologize. I think the contempt you show in your responses to other people is ridiculous but that doesn’t excuse how I treated you. So, I’m sorry.

  65. badcallsfootball says: May 6, 2011 12:26 AM

    berniemadoffsides says: May 5, 2011 10:35 AM

    I’m a Giants fan, so I guess I get to see elite DE’s play regularly – Osi as a pure pass rusher, Tuck as the complete package.

    That being said, Ray Edwards is average as hell.

    As a viking fan I couldn’t agree more. He was our 4th best Dlineman for the last 2 years.

    He had one monster game against the cowboys in the playoffs in 09 and suddenly people started thinking he could be elite.

    He saw singleteams every single play due to truly elite guys like Jared Allen and Kevin Williams needing constant double teams. Yet he still was never really an impact player. I would be elated if some team was dumb enough to give the vikings a 1st rounder for him.

    Wanted to see him be great, but after 3+ years at starter, playing alongside truly great players that made his job easier, he has shown us what his ceiling is. Average at best.

  66. heimerz says: May 6, 2011 12:55 AM

    No one cares if you leave Ray.

    You had the great good fortune to play on the same D-line as the Williams wall + Jared Allen and still managed to be mediocre.

    Most Viking fans think your backup (Brian Robison) is the better player anyways.

  67. brewdogg says: May 6, 2011 1:15 AM

    I grow tired of the crap about the packers 2010 financial report…. Put aside the fact that they paid out a lot up front for several contract extensions, thereby raising player salary totals beyond what they would be under a normal CBA cap, and look to the previous years….

    In 2009, the Packers reported a $20.1 million profit, despite a $4.2 million (4%) drop in ‘local revenue’ and a $6.5 (13%) million drop in ‘marketing, pro shop, and atrium revenue’. (way to go, loyal Packer fans….) In 2008, the profit was $21.4 million.

    Packers records show a $53 million increase in network, licensing, merchandising, and other national revenue from 2005 to 2010. Did the salary cap increase $53 million in the last 5 years? Hmmmm……..

    Let’s leave aside the idea of reporting profit margins for a non-profit entity….. Let me know when the “franchise preservation fund” dips below $100 million.

    Also, don’t get caught up in the “percentages”…. Let me explain….. A 10% increase $250 million in revenue is $25 million. A 20% increase on $125 million in player costs is $25 million. Therefore, the case can be made that player costs increase at twice the rate of revenue, while the actual change in non-player cost committed revenue doesn’t change at all. In the Packers case, the claim could be that revenue rose 18% and player costs 45%, when the actual change was $40 million in revenue and $50 million in player costs. (again, take into account the $160 million that are on the Packers financial books for the 2010 fiscal year, a figure that will drop dramatically in the 2011 fiscal year)

    George Attallah said it right when he said “nobody gives you 1/32 of the information you need to make a business decision.” Particularly when the information given is that of an aberration in professional sports business. The Packers still turned a profit, despite committing 65% of total revenue to player costs.

    Holding up the Packers 2010 financial report means next to nothing. If anything, it makes a case for continuing the expired CBA format.

Leave a Reply

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