Skip to content

A great snapshot of where the labor dispute currently stands

tug-of-war-002 Getty Images

The man who has covered the NFL in L.A. during the 16 years in which 100 percent of the games have been canceled has penned a summary of the labor dispute that, in his assessment, presents a 70-percent chance of devouring regular-season games.

Sam Farmer of the Los Angeles Times provides an excellently simple, bullet-point look at the lockout, and we tend to agree with his conclusion that, as of right now, the chances of seeing the season not start on time sits considerably on the wrong side of 50-50.

We also agree with Farmer’s assessment that the likely outcome entails the players giving back some ground to the owners.  “Barring some legal surprises, the players will wind up making concessions,” Farmer writes.  “They were fine with the CBA as it was, remember.  It was the owners who opted out in hopes of a better deal.  When this mess is finally sorted out, it won’t be about whether the players make concessions but how many concessions they make.”

But making concessions doesn’t necessarily mean losing money.  If the pie keeps growing, a smaller slice can still yield more total money.  And that, of course, remains the core issue in dispute.  The players insist on continuing to receive 50 cents of every dollar that passes through the cash register.  The owners insist on reducing that number.  At some point, both sides need to ask whether a refusal to find a middle ground now will result in everyone making less total dollars, under any formula to which they may agree.

Permalink 23 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Union
23 Responses to “A great snapshot of where the labor dispute currently stands”
  1. wigwam101 says: May 29, 2011 11:46 PM

    Depressing.

  2. aigraiders says: May 30, 2011 12:54 AM

    I have never seen 1 industry that is experiencing record revenue and asks its labor force to take a paycut and work longer hours. Anyone got any precedent on something like this? Unbelievable.

  3. stairwayto7 says: May 30, 2011 1:36 AM

    If there is a season week 1 will be played on Oct 30, when the World Series is started! The players will cave in around Oct 3rd..

  4. vetdana says: May 30, 2011 7:37 AM

    At some point, both sides need to ask whether a refusal to find a middle ground now will result in everyone making less total dollars, under any formula to which they may agree.

    I would agree and add, both sides have moved away from a pure business negotiation stance to, making this a personal fight with no holds barred.The fans caught in the middle are becomming more and more bitter every day. Innocent people are taking pay cuts or being layed off entirely.This looks more and more like no one is going to budge, and so will move into the regular season, and possibly result in the whole seasons loss. If this happens then thousands of people risk being layed off within the clubs themselves and also in the many businesses that rely on the NFL for their livelyhood.[tens of thousands of persons could be affected]If the season goes, so do a great number of fans !!This is a case of pure GREED destroying the League. It is a scenario that few fans would have ever believed could happen six months ago !! Time is now the enemy of the NFL, both players and owners !

  5. JustinD says: May 30, 2011 7:41 AM

    The foolish bullheadedness of the player’s stance looks to be a direct reflection of college athletics allowing players the ability to take fluff courses. Obviously they just can’t figure out that half of 10 billion is far less than 40% of 20 billion. The moron De Smith is taking advantage of a poorly educated lot to amass legal bills in the millions. It seems that Caesar still has no idea that Brutus is standing behind him still. The players are only hurting the sport, their families, and their foolish pride to accomplish absolutely nothing when the final gavel drops.

  6. mightygiants says: May 30, 2011 8:03 AM

    The “the players smaller slice of the bigger pie” is parroting the owner’s talking points. What happened to PFT’s efforts to be unbiased?

  7. willycents says: May 30, 2011 8:39 AM

    It seems to me that the owners have already made concessions from their original stance of $1B more. I seem to remember that the last offer they made cut that number significantly. The players have yet to back down from any of their demands to continue negotiating.
    Perhaps my memory is faulty, but that is what I remember. Until there are concessions from the players to continue negotiating there will be no negotiations.
    Oh, excuse me, there is no entity for the owners to negotiate with, that’s how it is. If the owners wanted to give %100 of the money to the players, total free agency, donate $1B a yar to the retired players, and guarantee each player a permanent position in heaven, there is no entity to accept the offer.

    Pro player folks, please advise us as to whom the owners can negotiate a settlement with lacking an entity to represent the players?

  8. greghensley says: May 30, 2011 9:47 AM

    I would be more on the players side if it wasn’t for the fact that they have been boasting of their fleecing of the owners ever since the last CBA was signed. Frankly they deserved to get something over on the owners for all the times the owners were screwing the players.

    All of that is in the past and pretty much meaningless. The future of the game is riding on both sides coming to an agreement they can both say is a win. De Smith has pigeonholed the players into a bad situation.

    The players aren’t being asked to take a pay cut. If the cap increases by 20 million for each team with a bottom cap number, guess what? For some teams that cap increases would be something like a 50% increase. Teams like the cards can no longer fly 40 mil under the cap. I just don’t know why so many players aren’t thinking bigger picture.

  9. sterilizecromartie says: May 30, 2011 9:51 AM

    Egos, egos, egos. I still can’t believe these greedy pricks are having trouble splitting up billions of dollars. The ONLY thing stopping them is their egos.

  10. eagleswin says: May 30, 2011 10:14 AM

    aigraiders says:
    May 30, 2011 12:54 AM
    I have never seen 1 industry that is experiencing record revenue and asks its labor force to take a paycut and work longer hours. Anyone got any precedent on something like this? Unbelievable.

    ———————–

    You still haven’t seen it. Keep trying!

  11. kniddynamite says: May 30, 2011 10:30 AM

    The owners and players have been roughly splitting the combined league revenues 50/50 since the CBA reached via settlement of White vs. the NFL in 1993. Despite all of the talk of the 2006 CBA being a huge “win” for the players, their “big-picture” share of all NFL revenues remained right around 50%.

    This time period has, not coincidentally, been a renaissance for the NFL, culminating in last year’s record profits and unprecedented popularity on TV — 28 out of the 30 highest-rated TV broadcasts of 2010 were NFL football games.

    So before we consider it a fait accompli that the players need to make concessions, can someone please explain to us — and to the players — why the 50/50 split that’s been the status quo for almost 20 years no longer works?

    The only obvious explanation has to do with the rapid increase of revenue disparity between the top and bottom earning franchises in the league, but this should be an argument for adjusting the revenue sharing agreement between the owners, and not trying to make up the difference by getting money back from players.

  12. commandercornpone says: May 30, 2011 10:39 AM

    work longer hours? seriously. take a chill pill.

  13. melikefootball says: May 30, 2011 11:11 AM

    I still don’t get the players side, They are paid well, stay at the finest hotels, choice of food, look at as Gods by their fans. They are employees of the owners who take the risk on each player. They aren’t co-owners, yet they want 50-50 deal. How many players have been paid a good contract and not play one down because they could not grasp the play book or how to play in the NFL?? Sorry, I love football but I’m for one becomming more disappointed in the players view than ever.

  14. tommytd says: May 30, 2011 11:32 AM

    Dump Goodell and tell the players to get back to work or go play in Canada.

  15. aigraiders says: May 30, 2011 12:11 PM

    melikefootball says: May 30, 2011 11:11 AM

    I still don’t get the players side, They are paid well, stay at the finest hotels, choice of food, look at as Gods by their fans. They are employees of the owners who take the risk on each player. They aren’t co-owners, yet they want 50-50 deal. How many players have been paid a good contract and not play one down because they could not grasp the play book or how to play in the NFL?? Sorry, I love football but I’m for one becomming more disappointed in the players view than ever.
    ———————-

    How much the players make is relative isn’t it? A Mexican Day Laborer working his ass off out int he field would think your current job is wayyyyy overpaid. Dont the players have the right just like the majority of us to seek as much as they can for their skillsets? Isn’t that part of the essence of the American Dream?

    Would you take a paycut if your current employer made record revenue and ask you to work 2 extra days? You’d take them to court in a heart beat and you know it.

  16. aigraiders says: May 30, 2011 12:18 PM

    kniddynamite says: May 30, 2011 10:30 AM

    ……So before we consider it a fait accompli that the players need to make concessions, can someone please explain to us — and to the players — why the 50/50 split that’s been the status quo for almost 20 years no longer works?

    ————–

    Very good post man.

  17. nflfan101 says: May 30, 2011 12:34 PM

    aigraiders says:
    May 30, 2011 12:54 AM
    I have never seen 1 industry that is experiencing record revenue and asks its labor force to take a paycut and work longer hours. Anyone got any precedent on something like this? Unbelievable.
    ———————————

    Do the so called pro player folks even pay attention to what is going on? The owners have offered to reduce the number of off season activities. It is true that the owners mentioned 18 games, but they were going to drop 2 preseason games. So there would still be 20 games.

    Also, so many people keep saying that both sides need to negotiate. Well, I have only seen the owners try to negotiate. I have not seen the players, through D. Smith, try to negotiate at all. I have only seen D. Smith call it war and refer to the “Godfather”.

    For all of the so called pro player folks, how can there be any negotiations when D. Smith will not negotiate? The truth is that there cannot be negotiations and you do not want negotiations any more that D. Smith does.

    FACT: D. Smith walked out of CBA negotiations, decertified the union, had certain players file suit, and then did not attend at least on court ordered mediation session.

    If anyone (fans, players, PFT) really wants football, then tell D. Smith to get his butt into negotiations.

  18. bsandcs says: May 30, 2011 2:28 PM

    i think PFT needs to expressly state at the bottom of every lockout out article that NOBODY is asking the players to take a pay cut. In any scenario, player salaries will continue to grow every single year. No one’s pay is being reduced in the slightest. I am surprised at the numbers of posters that continue to make this completely uninformed argument.

  19. aigraiders says: May 30, 2011 5:56 PM

    nflfan101 says: May 30, 2011 12:34 PM

    Do the so called pro player folks even pay attention to what is going on? The owners have offered to reduce the number of off season activities. It is true that the owners mentioned 18 games, but they were going to drop 2 preseason games. So there would still be 20 games.
    —————-

    Yes I do and it’s so obvious to me why there is a labor issue.

    1. The vets have never played fulltime in the preseason except for the 3rd preseason game in which they play 3 qtrs. So cutting down the preseason game and replacing it with 2 reg season games MEANS more work. Why is this not obvious to you?

    2. Pat Summerall was just on the radio saying 18 games is way too much contact for a player. Pat actually played the game and knows what’s it like. Their avg career is 3.5 yrs in the NFL and now you want them to make it even shorter?

    3. In the name of negotiations, the players say keep the status quo. Take the rookie money and put it for the veterans and retired players. The owners say hey let’s negotiate. We’ll start first by asking you to work more and take a paycut. On top of that, we’ll make sure we get PAID with guaranteed TV contracts while you dont. What kind of negotiations is that?

    It’s pretty darn obvious to me. You?

  20. steelcitywhitty says: May 30, 2011 7:16 PM

    by the way, if their is a 9Billion dollar pot and the owners get 1 billion before the split, then demand to get a second billion before the split, the players are taking a cut to the tune of 1billion dollalrs.

  21. steelcitywhitty says: May 30, 2011 7:19 PM

    JustinD where is this 20billion you are referring to?

  22. steelcitywhitty says: May 30, 2011 7:24 PM

    @melikefootball
    “How many players have been paid a good contract and not play one down because they could not grasp the play book or how to play in the NFL?? ”

    How many NFL contracts end before the final year of the actual contract length?

  23. nahcouldntbethat says: May 31, 2011 9:24 AM

    It’s hard to imagine any significant number of games being lost and the NFL maintaining it’s peak fan enthusiasm.

    Most hardcore fans won’t be affected, although some are having their first real break from following their team in many years. Breaks like that can lead to priority changes.

    The average fan though, the ones that don’t spend a lot on the NFL but follow it on TV, those guys are totally up for grabs at this point. Something else could easily become the focus of their Sunday afternoons and that would mean TV ratings and revenue down.

    I think the owners and the players are in real trouble right now. They’re assuming that what was before the lockout is going to be what will be after it is resolved. From the standpoint of record revenue and fan interest beforehand I think they’re being wildly optimistic to expect that level of prosperity to continue after.

    The NFL would be a very successful venture at two-thirds of the current revenues and interest levels. That’s not an unreasonable suggestion of where things might wind up if the two parties agree to continue depriving everybody else of the product.

Leave a Reply

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