I’d be curious to see who actually took that premium because the payout would be $384 million (60 players on a team x 32 teams x 200K) and wondering if there even was a such a premium paid.

Negotiations are all about making the other person believe what cards you are holding not what you actually hold.

The more I read about it the less I am convinced this had any real impact on the owner’s decision. He can say what he wants but having 200K for every player is nice but it probably wasn’t due until the cancellation of the entire season not the first game so players would like still need mortgage money until that cancellation.

Thus, I’d say the owners were fine with the deal as situated.

Lastly, the best thing I heard a couple of weeks ago was saying the owners are going to win because of how the money will be split (umm isn’t like 52-48 now instead of 48-52) but there will be some “issue” that will come out and provide some false view the players won. The owners knowing the truth will just sit back and count their extra money.

Actually, whatever firms underwrote the lockout insurance were BRILLIANT. They reaped huge premiums for it with really no risk. Here’s why:

1) Even if they had to pay out due to a lost season, the players antitrust lawsuit would have proceeded. The owners would have likely settled rather than facing the risk of treble damages and any settlement in favor of the players would have been liened by the lockout ins. cos. (like when medicaid liens a personal injury settlement). The ins. cos. would have been repaid the $200k per player.

The only way that the ins. cos. would have lost is if the owners won a 3-5 year outright antitrust suit and there is NOOO way the owners would have went that long without football.

Thats how the lockout insurance companies made out like bandits. True stroke of brilliance.
————————————————
I think you are on the money.

When thinking about “who” would underwrite such a policy-

“who” stands to lose more money as a whole if there is a lock-out??

The television networks- that’s who. If I was a big-wig in the media industry, I would have found a way to push this- and /or put the ground work together to form another league in efforts to protect my investment.

Follow the money.

Simply put, the owners bought the insurance with money they were supposed to be sharing with the players.

Too bad the fans didn’t think of this. We could have formed our own lockout insurance companies made out like bandits!

1) Even if they had to pay out due to a lost season, the players antitrust lawsuit would have proceeded. The owners would have likely settled rather than facing the risk of treble damages and any settlement in favor of the players would have been liened by the lockout ins. cos. (like when medicaid liens a personal injury settlement). The ins. cos. would have been repaid the $200k per player.

The only way that the ins. cos. would have lost is if the owners won a 3-5 year outright antitrust suit and there is NOOO way the owners would have went that long without football.

Thats how the lockout insurance companies made out like bandits. True stroke of brilliance.

If the owners can hoard TV money, why should the players be able to insurance against a lost season? I think it’s BS. $200,000 is nothing to these guys.

———

That’s like saying if your house burns down, why should you get to keep insurance money?

It depends on which money you’re using. The NFLPA presumably used money from which the owners got their cut to buy insurance. The Lockout insurance case is valid because the owners planned to receive money from TV companies, and gave up actual money to put those provisions in their contracts, and were not going to cut the players in on that money.

And pray tell – how would D Finger be able to finance such a mythical insurance policy – paying each of the what – 1,900 players (including taxi squads) – a $200,000 payout in the event there was not a 2011 season?

Have you done the numbers on the payout total? $380,000,000. So what kind of a premium would that require?

There we have it. The minds have been read and the future has been told.

I think it’s wrong to assume that just because the Eighth Circuit reversed the original ruling on the lockout, they would always side with the owners. In short, the lockout and the TV money issues are completely separate.

The owner’s attempt to hoard $4.3 Billion in television money that was supposed to be shared with the players looks like a slam-dunk win for the NFLPA if they opt to pursue it.