NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

[Woodson]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

I have to tip my hat off to the AFL for their new Nab Cup structure. I don't know how the crowds are, but making the games shorter and running them back to back is a good way of creating interest for the fans without changing the games into regular games.

Funnily enough I recall the Serie A doing this back in 1999!!
Doubt anyone from the AFL brainstrust is wise enough to come up with any originality. I also recall the AFL also having a round robin groupings in the past. I think the idea of 'the wildcard' is making the high flyers at the AFL blowing chunks that they might push this concept for the finals in the next few seasons when 18 teams becomes a set structure.

 

[Brasher]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

I have to tip my hat off to the AFL for their new Nab Cup structure. I don't know how the crowds are, but making the games shorter and running them back to back is a good way of creating interest for the fans without changing the games into regular games.

Actually after sitting through the first ten minutes of it last Friday the AFL has outdone itself in making the Nothing Cup into something even more boring to watch.

 

[greennick]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

Actually after sitting through the first ten minutes of it last Friday the AFL has outdone itself in making the Nothing Cup into something even more boring to watch.

I liked it. Short and sweet. Some of the games in the old format would be so long and boring as one team didn't care (or sometimes both).

 

[bangbang]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

Actually after sitting through the first ten minutes of it last Friday the AFL has outdone itself in making the Nothing Cup into something even more boring to watch.

cant agree more,im a melb supporter but even then it was hard to watch, hardly anyone puts in teams that are competitve and the amount of turn overs are ridiculous even though its the first game but the thing that shit me the most was the absolutel absurd rule of the last person touching the ball over the line is a free to the other team, thank god its not in the 2nd round of the cup. but i guess without the nfl thank god the afl starts right after it

 

[Woodson]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

In regards to the thread topic, to coin the phrase 'the wheels are in motion'. We still may have something to hang our hopes on.

 

[Woodson]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

Sheesh, who would of thought player agents were such numb nuts?

“Let’s say you have already put $20,000 into a player, the league locks out, it’s May and your player wants to go back to working out,” an agent said. “If you say no, that player is going to say to himself, ‘You’re my agent and you’re not supporting me’ and he’ll go sign with another agent who will pay for more training and whatever else he wants.”

The situation, combined with the likelihood of a rookie salary scale in the next CBA, has been so problematic that at least two prominent agents said they did not recruit college players as clients for fear of putting out too much money for training. One agency that currently has 13 draft-eligible players said it expects to spend nearly $1 million on supporting those players if the lockout stretches into August.

To a lesser extent, the issue could be problematic for agents with veteran players. For instance, two agents said over the weekend that they have received calls from veteran players who were wondering when they would receive their offseason workout bonuses.

Both agents were dumbfounded by the fact that the players didn’t know that workout bonuses won’t be paid if there is a lockout.

“There’s a lot of stuff out there where you have to explain some really basic stuff to guys,” an agent said. “Your player is not going to want to hear it. There’s going to be a lot of pressure. A lot.”

source: Yahoo NFL

 

[nolanbuc]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

Now it appears that the union will decertify itself in an attept to block a lockout.

It looks increasingly likely that this will be settled in court, which means there may be a delay of the season regardless of a lockout.

 

[larkis]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

It was always going to be a legal fight to ensure each side has no leverage. The union is attacking the leagues alternative revenue streams and the right to lockout the players from the league whilst the league attacks the union's right to decertify.

What could change this is the league providing more information to the union based on the finances of the league. However with Green Bay making $20 million in a small market with average ticket prices and merchandise sales, consideration for smudging the books - the bigger teams could be making a whole lot more. Consider the Steelers, a team that won the superbowl in 2009 and was in the superbowl this year. They represent a core audience of the NFL, the working class. They have created numerous dynasties across generations and constantly have prime time television slots. I would think they are making around 100 million dollars a season with no plans to change it with a lockout (explaining the Rooneys position to compromise).

The best value of a NFL franchise comes from the sale of the Rams. Now I don't know how much he spent to buy the Rams, however as reported on ESPN http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5496516 , if he paid $750 million dollars for a franchise licence with a low fan base sharing the same market with the Chiefs, with an out dated lease that the City of St Louis don't live up to which could backfire on him if he breaks the lease to move the city to LA to still be worth 750 million at least? This team was the worst team in the league with a few inflated rookie and FA contracts. If someone is willing to spend 750 million on that then franchises must at least be able to generate some real revenue. If this is the case, of course owners don't want to share the books.

Back to the main point, with the league with with-holding the only information that could make creating a deal between the players and the holders, this is going to be settled in the courts.

 

[Tassie19Cairns20]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

All this talk about league vs union makes me think we're talking about Rugby.
But seriously, for all the uncertainty there is out there, I think we're looking at a pretty certain path of where this will go.
The union will absolutely decertify before the Thursday deadline. The league will then will lock out the players immediately. The union will take the league to court, and from there we will have one of two outcomes. First, the union loses their court battle, in which case they will have to cave to the league's demands. Or, they win their court case, in which case the league will probably have to cave towards the union's demands.

 

[nolanbuc]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

Larkis makes a great point about the league witholding finincial info from the players, it's hard for the union to justify giving up some of their pay to make up for teams losing money when the league won't show them the books. Seems like the owners think they are in the catbird seat and don't have to play fair.

I agree with Tassie that the union has to decertify this week, so that they can make an anti-trust lawsuit stick if the league tries a lockout. I do not think this will be settled with one court battle, however. This will be a war dragged through the courts until one side or the other has spent all of it's legal "ammunition". It could get ugly and take a long time, unfortunetely for the fans who are the ones who will get the short end of the stick regardless.

 

[larkis]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

Seems like the union is about to acquire a lot of leverage if the current court case goes their way. If the court sticks to the decision that the tv contract negotiated by the league was not in everyones best interest and blocks the league from gaining the revenue in occasion that there is no football OR allows players to get a portion of the television revenue in a lockout - it means owners that have gained a large debt over the past few seasons believing there to be a continuous stream of revenue will be in trouble with their debts. Players on the other hand tend to not obtain more debt then they can gain, instead just consume large volumes.

Long story short, some owners may be very keen to get a deal done ASAP whilst only a few can stick it out for the long haul. If the court decision goes the union way, look for the league to do a quick deal before a few franchises can not pay their interest repayments.

 

[WhyAlwaysMe]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

A 24 hours extension on the talks. Maybe it's just me being optimistic but I think this is a good sign.

 

[Changamagic]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

A 24 hours extension on the talks. Maybe it's just me being optimistic but I think this is a good sign.

Gee i hope so! fingers crossed...

 

[mattys123]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

A 24 hours extension on the talks. Maybe it's just me being optimistic but I think this is a good sign.

I doubt it, they were talking to the Redskins players rep this morning on ESPN (missed his name) but he was saying all this may do is give both groups time to actually negotiate for a further extension of the deadline.

He also stated the players had not received any "real" offer from the owners yet, which is a shocking statement to make, as it means this whole situation hasn't actually even got "started" in terms of real negotiations yet.

We will have a lockout, but that doesn't mean we won't have a season, as even though the deadline is midnight tonight (US time, eastern I'm guessing), both parties may still negotiate in the coming months, if either is willing to actually state a "situation" they will accept.

My guess is we will have something similar to the last lockout, where we miss all the pre season games, and 3-4 regular season games before an agreement is made and the season starts somewhat delayed.

 

[greennick]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

It was always going to be a legal fight to ensure each side has no leverage. The union is attacking the leagues alternative revenue streams and the right to lockout the players from the league whilst the league attacks the union's right to decertify.

What could change this is the league providing more information to the union based on the finances of the league. However with Green Bay making $20 million in a small market with average ticket prices and merchandise sales, consideration for smudging the books - the bigger teams could be making a whole lot more. Consider the Steelers, a team that won the superbowl in 2009 and was in the superbowl this year. They represent a core audience of the NFL, the working class. They have created numerous dynasties across generations and constantly have prime time television slots. I would think they are making around 100 million dollars a season with no plans to change it with a lockout (explaining the Rooneys position to compromise).

The best value of a NFL franchise comes from the sale of the Rams. Now I don't know how much he spent to buy the Rams, however as reported on ESPN http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5496516 , if he paid $750 million dollars for a franchise licence with a low fan base sharing the same market with the Chiefs, with an out dated lease that the City of St Louis don't live up to which could backfire on him if he breaks the lease to move the city to LA to still be worth 750 million at least? This team was the worst team in the league with a few inflated rookie and FA contracts. If someone is willing to spend 750 million on that then franchises must at least be able to generate some real revenue. If this is the case, of course owners don't want to share the books.

Back to the main point, with the league with with-holding the only information that could make creating a deal between the players and the holders, this is going to be settled in the courts.

As almost all the revenue is shared, so the profits each team make is not very different. You can see that from their valuations:
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/30/football-values-09_NFL-Team-Valuations_Rank.html

Any change in income is generally temporary and reverses as the NFL cycle moves on.

Specifically, as you'll see there, the Steelers don't make the $100m you estimated. That isn't the reason the Rooney's want to compromise. They want to compromise because they have plenty of money. The teams make plenty of money now, they'll be happy if everyone gets what they want, the owners gets a bit more of the revenue and the players get to play. I think they genuinely want everyone to get their fair share, as they believe there is PLENTY to go around.

 

[swannies]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

I doubt it, they were talking to the Redskins players rep this morning on ESPN (missed his name) but he was saying all this may do is give both groups time to actually negotiate for a further extension of the deadline.

From nfllabor.com

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and NFL Executive Vice President Jeff Pash spoke with the media after today’s session at the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS).
Following are transcripts from Commissioner Goodell and Pash after it was announced by the FMCS that, at its request, the NFL and NFLPA agreed to a seven-day extension of the expiration of the CBA, ending Friday evening, March 11.

The link to the page of full transcripts is here:

http://nfllabor.com/

 

[larkis]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

As almost all the revenue is shared, so the profits each team make is not very different. You can see that from their valuations:
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/30/football-values-09_NFL-Team-Valuations_Rank.html

Any change in income is generally temporary and reverses as the NFL cycle moves on.

Specifically, as you'll see there, the Steelers don't make the $100m you estimated. That isn't the reason the Rooney's want to compromise. They want to compromise because they have plenty of money. The teams make plenty of money now, they'll be happy if everyone gets what they want, the owners gets a bit more of the revenue and the players get to play. I think they genuinely want everyone to get their fair share, as they believe there is PLENTY to go around.

I thought only direct revenue was shared (or something like that). Money made from creative measures were kept by the team. Forbes also don't have access to team books. All they really make is a guess based on information you can get. Seriously how is something worth a billion dollars only worth 20 million dollars a year with that low debt level?

 

[Sven]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

Looks like the rookie pay scale is coming sooner rather than later.....

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=ApJSpCOY_AZswvA2HxrniIpDubYF?slug=jc-rookiewagescale030911

While the NFL Players Association and owners remain far apart on the most critical issue – how to split approximately $9 billion in revenues – the two sides have reached agreements on a couple of smaller issues.

According to two sources familiar with the negotiations, the league and the union have reached a basic compromise on a rookie wage scale that will replace the current rookie salary cap. The owners backed off the idea of requiring first-round picks to sign five-year deals, instead limiting the contracts to four years before a player could become a free agent. The agreement is also expected to include a stipulation limiting the amount of guaranteed money and signing bonus offered to draft picks.

In addition, the league agreed that all players drafted after the first round would be limited to three-year deals, but teams would be allowed to put restricted free agent tags after the three years. That’s essentially similar to the current process where players can be tagged as restricted free agents after a three-year deal, although the existing rule allows players drafted after the first round to sign four-year pacts.

The key change is for the players in the first round. Currently, the first 16 players taken in the first round can sign for up to six years. The next 16 players taken can sign up to five years.

The reason the union wanted shorter deals is that it allows good players to get to free agency faster.

 

[Burningleviathan]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

Union Decertifies.

This may take a while.

 

[larkis]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

Reading what was the last offer, I can't believe players rejected it?
So what that the pool is smaller, all the benefits the players gain in the short term are huge.

If this is true "Offer current players the opportunity to remain in the player medical plan for life." then they are set for life.

 

[exe ex machina]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

Another article on it here...

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/feed/2010-09/nfl-labor-talks/story/nflpa-announces-it-will-decertify

 

[exe ex machina]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

Looks like the NFL Draft may not even happen either.

The NFL players' lawsuit in a U.S. district court is seeking declaration that the NFL draft violates antitrust laws.

Von Miller is a plaintiff in the suit, and it's not crazy to think this could hurt his draft stock. The draft is just one of the many things the players' suit challenges, also including the franchise tag, the owners' forthcoming lockout, and probably restricted free agent tenders. All along, we've been under the assumption that the draft was the only thing set in stone for the 2011 offseason. Now, it's questionable whether it's going to happen.

 

[Chism]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

Not good and FFS sort it out.

 

[larkis]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

The players need to learn not to bite the hand that feeds them. At the moment I think it's just Smith and a few players with multi-million dollar contracts who want to do litigation. If the union players all had a vote on this, they would accept the agreement as the salary floor doesn't seem to change, more benefits to players and the promise of a 16 game season.

A lot of players are going to get hurt in the cross fire due to the egos on the NFLPA. The NFL's owners at least put aside their egos. Today I woke up disgusted in what I read and at the moment I just can't be bothered reading the rest of the details.

If anyone wants to learn more about what is happening, the primary spot I suggest to start reading is at http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/category/rumor-mill/ . The main writer there is a former lawyer so he can at least break it down into simpler terms.

 

[Woodson]

Re: NFL Lockout 'A Certainty'

Not perturbed really.

GOODELL is the SCROOGE!! Bottom line.

______________________________________________________________

Here's a very informative article worth reading.

Union decertification and the legal battle ahead

Peyton Manning, Drew Brees and Tom Brady (all high-caliber quarterbacks in the NFL) were among the 10 players who filed the antitrust lawsuit against the NFL in order to prevent a lockout of the 2011 season.

In Minneapolis, Minnesota, clerks at the federal courthouse received documents from Manning, Brees, Brady, and others as plaintiffs, not players.

The allegations are that NFL teams have conspired to deny the players the rights to market their services "through a patently unlawful group boycott and price-fixing arrangement or, in the alternative, a unilaterally imposed set of anticompetitive restrictions on player movement, free agency and competitive market freedom." The players cited as constraints the league's 'history of antitrust violations', which include potential lockout, the draft and the franchise and transition player designations.

Essentially, the case is stating that if there is a "lockout" imposed by the NFL, all NFL players will be uncompensated a year's worth of pay or more. For some who are entering the draft, their playing career could be brief, and the years lost unable to be "recaptured".

U.S. District Court judge Patrick Schiltz was assigned the case Friday afternoon. His colleague, David Doty (who has overseen NFL labor issues since the early 1990s and ruled numerous times in favor of the players), was not assigned. Doty helped put together the agreement between the players and owners that created free agency. Doty issued a ruling last week that backed the NFLPA in a dispute over $4 billion in television revenue that players argued was illegally collected by the owners in order to survive a work stoppage (ie. "lockout"). The NFL has been vehement in attempting to remove Doty from the case, alleging that he has an unfair bias towards the players.

While no Steelers player is named in the lawsuit, the following players added their names with Brees, Manning, and Brady:

Vincent Jackson - receiver - San Diego Chargers
Ben Leber - linebacker - Minnesota Vikings
Brian Robison - defensive end - Minnesota Vikings
Logan Mankins - guard - New England Patriots
Osui Umenyiora - defensive end - New York Giants
Mike Vrabel - linebacker - Kansas City Chiefs
Von Miller - linebacker - Texas A&M draft entrant
Jackson, Leber and Mankins are free agents. Although the Indianapolis Colts tagged Manning as a 'franchise player', he is still a free agent. The San Diego Chargers tagged Jackson, and the New England Patriots tagged Mankins in the same manner. The union, however, is disputing whether or not those tags are valid.

Drew Brees offered a Twitter feed message this morning which said, "To our fans - I give you my word that we as players are doing everything we can to negotiate with the NFL towards a fair deal. The NFL brought this fight to us - they want $1 billion back, we just want financial information to back up that request." He went on to say, "We have a responsibility to our players - past, present, and future, to advance this league forward, not take 3 steps back."

Art Rooney II of the Steelers, part of the labor committee, was present for talks on Thursday and Friday. He was joined by Jerry Richardson of the Carolina Panthers, John Mara of the New York Giants, Pat Bowlen of the Denver Broncos, Jerry Jones of the Dallas Cowboys, Clark Hunt of the Kansas City Chiefs, Dean Spanos of the San Diego Chargers, Mark Murphy of the Green Bay Packers, Joe Banner (President of the Philadelphia Eagles), General Manager Bruce Allen of the Washington Redskins and Mike Brown of the Cincinatti Bengals.

In a heated exchange between media and Twitter feeds, Jeff Pash said that the owners had the commitment to get the deal done, but that he doubted that the union shared that commitment. In response, George Atallah sent an email statement to The Associated Press reading: "Jeff Pash was part of an executive team that sold the networks a $4 billion ticket to a game they knew wouldn't be played. The only thing they've been committed to is a lockout."

DeMaurice Smith returned to the mediator's office after Pash's statement was made public and told the media, "We have been committed to this process. But for anyone to stand and turn to the American people and say they question that? Look, I understand that there's probably some things Jeff Pash just has to say, but this is the truth: We know that as early as March of 2009...the National Football League engaged in a strategy to get $4 billion of television money...even if the games weren't played."

Pash's final statements on Thursday were that, "Things can come together quickly. Things can fall apart quickly."

The latter was evident Friday afternoon.

Facts versus fiction in the football world that is leading up to the 2011-2012 NFL season

Fact: NFL owners decided they would not open their books to the NFLPA and players

The vast majority of NFL stadium building costs fall square on the backs of the citizens of that city. Because the Green Bay Packers are a fan-owned team, they are publicly-owned and their books are open to public scrutiny. However, other owners have claimed for months that their cash-flow has been leaking like a sieve and will not give verifiable information about their financial reports. Transparency has proven that the Packers have done quite well financially, which has led many to speculate that owners who have not been willing to share financials are overstating their losses, or simply making them up.

Fact: NFL owners overstated their financial risks in owning a team

Owners in the NFL have been claiming for several years that they aren't making enough money. Some owners are even going so far as to claim that they're losing money. The NFLPA agreed to reduce the salary cap of two NFL teams by $800 million over a 15 year period. The money went toward a new stadium, yet the players were given no ownership stake in the organization. They would only receive any additional revenue that might possibly be generated varying on each year's intake. The players took a lesser amount of money to pave the way for future players to earn more.

Fact: The NFL will receive all of the television contract revenue guaranteed even if not one game is played

In February (2011), the NFLPA lost against the battle against the owners over television contracts that will amass nearly $4.5 billion in guaranteed funds. Because the NFL granted television partners additional benefits in 2010 in exchange for these guaranteed payments in 2011, the owners will still receive the money. Teams will continue to receive corporate sponsorship funds and other benefits.

Fact: NFL owners want salaries of every player cut and are in favor of two more regular season games (making the season 18-games long over 16, not including post-season). They also rejected a rookie pay scale.

Essentially, players would lose around 18% of their pay while owners expect more work from them. Before they would determine the salary cap for each team, the owners would get another billion dollars off the top of profits. The NFLPA offered a proposed 'proven performance plan' which essentially would shift high payouts away from rookies and freshly-drafted players and channeled it to veterans and former players. The owners stood tough in preferring to pay veterans based on a pay scale which is rigidly based on not only the position the player plays, but also how many years that player has spent in the NFL.

Fact: Even if a lockout for the 2011 season happens, the 2012 NFL Draft will be held in April 2012

The draft would allow owners to own players and their rights, but teams would not be required to tender a contract nor would they be obligated to pay the player.

Fact: NFL owners do not want to pay for healthcare, including extended health benefits

As of today, a player must be active in the NFL for three years to receive five years of post-career healthcare. This means that a newly drafted rookie entering the league would have to remain in the league for those three years to get healthcare benefits, but if they are cut or released and not signed by another team (essentially retiring them) during that time; that player would receive no extended health benefits from the NFL. If a lockout occurs, no player will be paid healthcare expenses by team owners.



Information from The Associated Press was included within this article


source:
Continue reading on Examiner.com: NFL drops the ball at the goal-line as Steelers fans rage in the aftermath - Pittsburgh Pittsburgh Steelers | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/pittsburgh-...goal-line-as-steelers-fans-rage-the-aftermath