Dead man walking

Bertram

Cheesehead
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
532
Reaction score
1
NFL owners opt out of labor agreement
By GREG A. BEDARD
[email protected]
Posted: May 20, 2008
National Football League owners voted unanimously this morning in Atlanta to terminate the collective bargaining agreement with the players following the 2010 season.
As a result, the league's much-celebrated parity, which allows for small cities such as Green Bay and Buffalo to compete on an annual basis, might be on a death march as well.

The 2008 and '09 seasons will be unaffected by the owners' decision.

The 2010 season, if there is not a new agreement in place, will be played without a salary cap.

However, the players will feel a pinch as the service time needed to reach unrestricted free agency is increased from four to six years.

The NFL has had labor peace since the CBA was first ratified in 1993. Now, with a 32-0 vote by the owners, there is a very real possibility that 2011 could be interrupted by a lockout by the owners if the players don't want to agree on several points. The biggest place of contention is how much of the revenue goes to the players. Under the current deal, the players receive 59 percent.

"The current labor agreement does not adequately recognize the costs of generating the revenues of which the players receive the largest share; nor does the agreement recognize that those costs have increased substantially - and at an ever increasing rate. In recent years during a difficult economic climate in our country," the league said in a statement.

"As a result, under the terms of the current agreement, the clubs' incentive to invest in the game is threatened.

"There are substantial other elements of the deal that simply are not working. Our objective is to fix these problems in a new CBA, one that will provide adequate incentives to grow the game, ensure the unparalleled competitive balance that has sustained our fans' interest, and afford the players fair and increasing compensation and benefits."

NFL Players Association president Gene Upshaw has been briefing the players on the possible ramifications for months.

"We expected it," Upshaw said on SIRIUS NFL Radio. "But it means that there is football through 2010, not through 2012. And it also means that, as they say during the draft, we're on the clock. That's basically what it means."

The Packers have long been advocates of a salary cap and revenue sharing among all teams. While the Packers are in the top third in revenue at this time, they would be at a long-term disadvantage against teams from larger markets that have more abundant revenue streams if the salary cap were not in place.

I sure hope they can work out an agreement before 2010, if not we could lose many pivotal players in that season and have to rebuild our team again if an agreement happens later, if not the Green Bay Packers could die.
 

Zombieslayer

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
4,338
Reaction score
0
Location
CA
I saw this before and not too worried. There will always be limits to how much players make because they'll get to the point where teams aren't profitable. The NFL is a business, and like any business, it needs to make profits to survive.

Green Bay has a cult following. Aren't we top 5 in terms of clothing/accessories? I'm sure there's a lot of money to be made that way. Plus, aren't the tv revenues equally shared? Not sure on that one, but I think so.

And lastly, with the NFL being a business, the owners and the NFLPA will make an agreement. It will be similar to the one we have today, except with more money to the players. Owners are well aware how much they can spend and still turn a profit.
 

Pack93z

You retired too? .... Not me. I'm in my prime
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Messages
4,855
Reaction score
8
Location
Central Wisconsin
Whew... here I thought I pissed in Trom's cheerio's again. :lol:


Ooops.. there goes his man-feelings all hurt again..


On topic.. just part of the negotiation process.. we may see an uncapped year, but too much is at stake for a strike or replacement players.
 

Profizzle99

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
141
Reaction score
0
Location
Milwaukee
Also the Packers are owned publicly so we are immune to this conflict if I have my facts right. But we will be like the only team not involved so we can have a full season by ourselves I guess = a SuperBowl victory :). If this would happen though im sure we would extend everyones contracts a year so they wont be affected. Chances of anything happening are almost none because 1 year of lost football kills the NFL literally and in the end the commissioner will have to do what the managers want or the NFL looses popularity altogether. Also the fans would be pissed, just my 2 cents.
 

nathaniel

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 22, 2007
Messages
905
Reaction score
0
Location
Iowa
And lastly, with the NFL being a business, the owners and the NFLPA will make an agreement. It will be similar to the one we have today, except with more money to the players. Owners are well aware how much they can spend and still turn a profit.

I thought the whole reason the owners are opting out of this agreement is because it favors the players too much. Giving them more money isn't what the owners are going to want, is it?

I love Roger Goodell's comment about the whole thing;
"We have guaranteed three more years of NFL football."

Well, hopefully we'll make a Super Bowl run in the next 3 seasons, cause it could be our last chance if it's the end of the salary cap.
 

Greg C.

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
2,856
Reaction score
0
Location
Marquette, Michigan
I think this same situation happened a few years ago. It's too early to worry. The owners and players have three years to come to an agreement.
 

cheesey

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
3
Location
Wisconsin
I think it's alot of huffing and puffing by the owners.
Lets see who blinks first.
Destroying the NFL does neither side any good.
 

Zombieslayer

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
4,338
Reaction score
0
Location
CA
I thought the whole reason the owners are opting out of this agreement is because it favors the players too much. Giving them more money isn't what the owners are going to want, is it?

I love Roger Goodell's comment about the whole thing;
"We have guaranteed three more years of NFL football."

Well, hopefully we'll make a Super Bowl run in the next 3 seasons, cause it could be our last chance if it's the end of the salary cap.

If it's the end of salary cap - this is what happens:

Green Bay Packers offer more fans stocks.
Fans buy Green Bay Packer stocks.
The franchise is saved.

I'm not worried.
 

porky88

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
3,991
Reaction score
0
Location
Title Town
This really isn't going to matter until 2010 and even then, Green Bay will be ok for a couple of seasons afterwards.

5+ years is when you have to worry.

The NFL has a good thing going and they know it. If they throw out the salary cap it'll hurt the league tremendously. I wouldn't doubt that teams like Dallas and Washington are pushing for that though. They'd become the Yankees and Red Sox of the NFL if they were given that chance.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,356
Reaction score
4,086
Location
Milwaukee
nathaniel said:
I thought the whole reason the owners are opting out of this agreement is because it favors the players too much. Giving them more money isn't what the owners are going to want, is it?

I love Roger Goodell's comment about the whole thing;
"We have guaranteed three more years of NFL football."

Well, hopefully we'll make a Super Bowl run in the next 3 seasons, cause it could be our last chance if it's the end of the salary cap.

If it's the end of salary cap - this is what happens:

Green Bay Packers offer more fans stocks.
Fans buy Green Bay Packer stocks.
The franchise is saved.

I'm not worried.

"The fourth came late in 1997 and early in 1998. It added 105,989 new shareholders and raised more than $24 million, monies which were utilized for the Lambeau Field redevelopment project. Priced at $200 per share, fans bought 120,010 shares during the 17-week sale, which ended March 16, 1998.

With the NFL supporting the plan, the existing 1,940 shareholders overwhelmingly voted to amend the articles of the corporation on Nov. 13, 1997. The vote authorized the Packers to sell up to 1 million shares"



Say they do this again...I HIGHLY doubt they get 1 million shares sold..

Say 200,000 sold at even $300 a share..thats only $60 million..

that isn't enough for a year of salaries

And remember that is only for ONE YEAR
 

PackOne

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 24, 2006
Messages
2,013
Reaction score
4
Location
Wisconsin
I think it's alot of huffing and puffing by the owners.
Lets see who blinks first.
Destroying the NFL does neither side any good.

Wow, I just made a point with a post by cheesey.
 

trippster

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Messages
1,405
Reaction score
2
Location
Kenosha
While destroying the NFL does no one good, it doesn't mean it couldn't happen.

Worst case scenerio, the owners put their own salary cap and simply tell the union to stuff it. Either play for what we want to pay you or play elsewhere.


Sorry, I am very much an anti union person. they served their purpose way back when but now it is too much the other way. Unions don't care about the bottom line. They pretend to care that the company makes a profit but in reality it is all about the benjies. How much more can we get for our union.

Unfortunatley, management of most public companies now have a new union to be loyal to.....the stockholders.
 

warhawk

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
1,922
Reaction score
17
Location
Gulf Shores, Al
The bottom line is this will get resolved. The current agreement had swung too far in the players corner and this is the first step to get something that is fair for both parties on the table.
This was the time to act for the owners based on the agreement in place. There seems to be some who mistake this move as a power move by the owners with the most money wanting the cap removed which is just not where the owners are coming from.

No salary cap is BETTER for the players and not what the owners are ultimately after. The trend in what is being paid the top five players in the draft is affecting all the negotiations from there on out and needs to get under control.
I have to say I agree that something needs to get worked out when you have teams that could not make it without revenue sharing and rookies are signing $60 million dollar contracts.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that dog don't hunt.

Ultimately the Players are in the position of power when it comes to settling the matter without forcing a work stoppage so as long as both sides are being reasonable this should, and most likely will, get worked out.
 

Profizzle99

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
141
Reaction score
0
Location
Milwaukee
That means no 2011 madden which takes two more years untill license expires woot...ESPN 2k11? I hope this issue gets resolved though.
 

Zombieslayer

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
4,338
Reaction score
0
Location
CA
"The fourth came late in 1997 and early in 1998. It added 105,989 new shareholders and raised more than $24 million, monies which were utilized for the Lambeau Field redevelopment project. Priced at $200 per share, fans bought 120,010 shares during the 17-week sale, which ended March 16, 1998.

With the NFL supporting the plan, the existing 1,940 shareholders overwhelmingly voted to amend the articles of the corporation on Nov. 13, 1997. The vote authorized the Packers to sell up to 1 million shares"



Say they do this again...I HIGHLY doubt they get 1 million shares sold..

Say 200,000 sold at even $300 a share..thats only $60 million..

that isn't enough for a year of salaries

And remember that is only for ONE YEAR

The thing is, they'll change the corporate structure to make it work. But that said, I've already been hearing a new deal will be reached by then. Both sides are confident it will happen.

What Cheesey said is spot on. The owners and the players need each other. Neither can exist without the other. Believe me, the NFL doesn't want to be like MLB. They know that.
 

cheesey

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
3
Location
Wisconsin
cheesey said:
I think it's alot of huffing and puffing by the owners.
Lets see who blinks first.
Destroying the NFL does neither side any good.

Wow, I just made a point with a post by cheesey.
:shock: Shocking.....isn't it?
And you guys thought i was ONLY good for "comic relief"!

I also hate unions. Today, they protect the LAZY workers and make it darn near impossible to be fired. And the hard workers get frustrated, cause they work their butts off, and get the same pay as the lazy ones. My wife is going through that where she works. She takes pride in her work, and yet she gets singled out and yelled at, all the while the bums get away with murder.
 

4packgirl

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
2,413
Reaction score
0
Location
illinois
I think it's alot of huffing and puffing by the owners.
Lets see who blinks first.
Destroying the NFL does neither side any good.

i completely agree with cheesey (YIKES!!!) :shock: :shock:
 

Staff online

Members online

Latest posts

Top