NFL wants to take financial hit from pandemic in 2020-21

Getty Images

Last night, we explained that some owners want to deal with the financial consequences of the pandemic over the next two seasons. As it turns out, it’s enough owners to make it the league’s official position in ongoing talks with players.

According to Tom Pelissero of the NFL, the NFL has proposed that each team’s costs be “slashed” in 2020 by $40 million. Any remaining revenue shortfall would then be made up by a reduction in the salary cap and benefits in 2021.

The players strongly object to this approach. The union has proposed smoothing all COVID-related losses over nine cap years, from 2022 through 2030.

It’s important to remember that the players have very real leverage on this point. Contrary to Pelissero’s assertion that the two sides have a current obligation to negotiate the impact of the financial losses on the salary cap in 2020, the players have no obligation to do anything until 2021. Because the league did not insert a force majeure clause into the CBA, the players get their full pay if the NFL stages as few as one week of  games. (If no games are played, the league would argue based on the Standard Player Contract that no game checks are owed, since the SPC does not trigger the duty to pay base salary until the first game of the season is played.)

Thus, the players can tell the league, as to the financial aspect of the pandemic, that the two sides’ rights and responsibilities are set forth in the CBA, and that the players will be prepared to negotiate the cap consequences of the pandemic next year, confident in the notion that teams won’t want the chaos that would come from a dramatic and sudden drop in the cap and the widespread obligation to re-do contracts or cut veterans that would ensue. A slow, methodical distribution of the financial losses due to the pandemic benefits everyeon. For some reason, however, the NFL suddenly wants to take the full pain of the pandemic over the next 18 months.

22 responses to “NFL wants to take financial hit from pandemic in 2020-21

  1. I agree with the owners, you don’t become a billionaire by making bad financial decisions!

  2. You say the players have leverage, but I say the owners have the advantage of being able to go longer without a paycheck than the players do. Either way, I really don’t care.

  3. Two groups whose posturing reflects their deep disassociation from the reality that is impacting the fans/general public on a daily basis. That’s a good way to lose fans – permanently.

  4. Why don’t they just pose as a small business and take a bailout “loan” from the government just like so many cronies have already done?

  5. How many million will that put the Chiefs over the cap? Lmfao. So much for that dynasty

  6. Of course players want to the financial hit back, most of them won’t even be in the league.
    Between football and baseball it’s hard to determine which league union represents it’s future players more poorly.

  7. The NFL may want to take a hit from the pandemic, but it has no idea the backlash from the Social Justice circus that’s coming up. The good news is the NBA will have a good five week lead time to prepare the NFL.

  8. Economically speaking, ripping the band aide off and taking it all in one year is the right way to do it. However with short careers and non -guanteed money for players, I understand their argument. Especially for the older NFLPA player reps. It’s a typical union thing: “screw the young guys but I want to get mine.”
    Whether it’s the Hoover plant or the NFL, it’s all the same. The salary cap will not be as high as 2020 for more than a decade, unless the faux social justice course is reversed, no matter what is decided on this cap issue. Remember, Nike lost $680 million after making Kapernick the face of their brand. Doing it over 9 years is what the owners really want.

  9. The NFL window is too short, The NFLPA is ridiculously too long. It is called negotiating. Why not accept 3 years, which is close to the length of an average NFL career? Why should a rookie 4 years from now forfeit some of his pay throughout his entire contract, to line the current players pockets?

  10. So, if no games, then the players can apply for Unemployment and Pandemic relief payments just like us…..$1,104 a week should be enough for them, correct? I mean it has to work for the rest of us, unless you are something like an EMT, who are essential. Then you can make your usual $13.75 per hour for a weekly total of $550.

  11. The players aren’t immune to the fallout from this virus despite what their union will try to negotiate. Welcome to the real world. Speaking metaphorically all of our salary caps have gone down. The players don’t get a pass.

  12. Hopefully the NFL will take a major financial broadside. They’ve gotten WAY too big for their britches .

  13. The “profit” part of the NFL, TV Broadcasts, is still what the NFL Owners are hoping to get accomplished this season. If they get free reign, I.e….Saturday’s and no competition due to NCAA Cancellation of sports, they might be right. The cancellation of the season hurts everyone. I don’t think that happens.

  14. So the players want to spread out the hit into the 2030 season. They players also want future players to take the hit too, is that right? I don’t think so. This is one of the few times I agree with the NFL.

  15. I think the league better prepare for much smaller profits for a longer period of time. The longer this goes with the pandemic the more people will realize how little people miss sports…

  16. Spread it out over 3 years MAX…. anything more than that is totally unfair to future players….

  17. I think it’s more likely they want to take the hit over two years instead of the nine years the NFLPA wants. Two years is doable. Nine years is ridiculous.

  18. They take the profit all at once. They should take the financial hit all at once. Can’t have it both ways

  19. SparkyGump says:
    July 16, 2020 at 9:50 pm
    Why don’t they just pose as a small business and take a bailout “loan” from the government just like so many cronies have already done?
    You mean like Tom ” FDR ” Brady did for his company ? His TB12 Inc got a Paycheck Protection Program for between $350,000 to $1M . Too bad he’s only made $212M in his career and his wife has only made $488M in her career so it’s easy to understand why they needed a bailout .

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.