If Owners Back out on CBA - Salary Cap is gone for good

[bigfog]

According to this article from Packer Report

Upshaw threatens strike, salary cap

If owners opt out of CBA, creating an uncapped 2009 season, NFLPA chief Gene Upshaw vows the salary cap will disappear forever. That would be bad news for the small-market Packers.

Such saber rattling may not mean much without a deadline looming, but any time the terms “uncapped year” and “strike” are bandied about, it conjures nightmare scenarios for the Green Bay Packers.

Speaking at the Super Bowl in Phoenix, Gene Upshaw, executive director of the NFL Players Association, said he expects NFL owners to opt out of the collective bargaining agreement in November. If that happens — and it would only take nine owners — Upshaw said the union could retaliate with a strike.

“If they want to get out of the deal, there’s nothing we can do about it,” Upshaw said. “But we’ll be prepared.”

The CBA, agreed to in March 2006 and running through 2011, gave the owners and union the opportunity to opt out on Nov. 8. If that happens, 2010 would be played without a salary cap. Upshaw issues a dire warning to small-market teams, like the Packers, should that happen.

“We’ll never have another one again,” Upshaw said. “I know I’m not going to be the one pushing for another one.”

That, of course, would be hazardous to the long-term future of the Packers, who play in the NFL’s smallest market and, therefore, have limited revenue opportunities. Thanks to the “new” Lambeau Field, the Packers have ranked in the top 10 in revenue since 2003, including a high of seventh in 2006. Given two home playoffs this season, the revenue numbers should remain high when they are announced sometime in June.

Former team chairman Bob Harlan, however, has said the Packers would likely sink down those rankings over the long term, with new stadiums opening in Indianapolis (2008), Dallas (2009) and the New York Jets and Giants (2010).

Owners, such as Buffalo’s Ralph Wilson, Denver’s Pat Bowlen and New England’s Robert Kraft, have said the current CBA is hurting the bottom line of some teams while giving the players too much, making it likely the owners will opt out.

If that’s the case, Upshaw warned: “At our meeting in March, our priorities for discussion are four options: strike, lockout, decertification or extension.”

Upshaw, while saying he’s willing to work with commissioner Roger Goodell, has said players will not reduce their take of revenue, which was increased to 60 percent in the 2006 CBA.

“The owners’ attitude has been the players have too good of a deal ... (but) I can’t convince the players that they should take less so the owners can have more,” Upshaw said. “I can’t sell that. This isn’t hockey, where the players agreed to a 25 percent pay cut. We’re not going to do anything like that. The economics of this league are good and are getting better. We’re getting 60 percent of the revenues. When it’s all said and done, we’re not giving any of it back.”

The 2006 CBA raised the salary cap to $107 million for the 2007 season. Upshaw said the 2008 cap would be about $116 million. The Packers are expected to be about $25 million under that cap entering this offseason.

http://gnb.scout.com/2/725302.html

Upshaw and the players union are digging their heels in - if the cap is gone...small market teams are toast.

This is a hardball tactic, but I sure hope it doesn't come to pass.

 

[Pack93z]

My understanding that it would be uncapped until the CBA was redone.. a Team such as the Packers need that balance to compete in the NFL. Just a scare tatic I hope.

Personally I don't think the owners overall will back out of the deal, but greed is a funny thing. Instead of opting out of the deal, just hold the signing to the minimum limit instead for your bottom line. Just because there is a cap, you don't have to spend to it... note the 07 Packers as one of many teams that didn't spend to the limit.

 

[bigfog]

I don't understand how these players and owners want to screw up a good thing. Greed is a funny thing - it must be greed that would want to make either of them screw up the hotstreak that the NFL is on right now. It's the most popular sport in the nation, it's trying to expand interests into foreign markets, players, coaches and owners are now all richer than they have ever been - I just don't get it.

 

[tromadz]

This will suck.

 

[DGB454]

Won't this pretty much put the Packers in the cellar because of their small market ? I don't see how they could compete with teams like the Giants or Cowboys. hopefully this will be resolved and things can continue on like they are.

 

[nathaniel]

Well, fellas, it was fun while it lasted. The Packers were a great team, and I'll never forget them.

(Is it too early to start overreacting? Haha!)

 

[arrowgargantuan]

wolf tickets.

something like this could ruin the sport. a level playing field is vital to the NFL period. everybody needs to sober the f*&% up and pull their collective heads out of their ***.

 

[cheesey]

Everyone wants more money. The players, the owners.......greedy (CENSORED!)

 

[johnny_blood]

This is probably just saber rattling. The deadline is far away.

Why *wouldn't* a negotiator make such threats?

 

[bozz_2006]

This is probably just saber rattling. The deadline is far away.

Why *wouldn't* a negotiator make such threats?

Upshaw: We're just gonna let 'em have their way with us. It'll be easier that way...

(doesn't quite carry the same amount of gravitas as what he really said)

 

[packerfan4ever]

maybe owners and palyers need to be not so greedy

 

[cheesey]

maybe owners and palyers need to be not so greedy

Thats a FACT.
However, i don't see them changing anytime soon.......unfortunatly.

 

[bozz_2006]

a 3rd party just needs to play into their greed, find a common interest. "If you guys cooperate, it will pay off for both parties in the end."

 

[bigfog]

If there's a strike, that'll get ugly real quick. I think the public would turn on the players and cheer for scabs.

Could you imagine it? I can see Terrell Owens on the TV, crying about how the players don't get enough respect from the owners and how they don't share the wealth and blah blah blah.

 

[tromadz]

If there's a strike, that'll get ugly real quick. I think the public would turn on the players and cheer for scabs.

Could you imagine it? I can see Terrell Owens on the TV, crying about how the players don't get enough respect from the owners and how they don't share the wealth and blah blah blah.

I'd cheer for the scabs. That's why I liked the XFL. It was guys who weren't born with all the physical gifts, but had the heart(and yes, some freaks).

I love me some Shane Falco.

 

[mkapp]

I love me some Shane Falco.

Aww ya beat me to it!

 

[eap33]

If there's a strike, that'll get ugly real quick. I think the public would turn on the players and cheer for scabs.

Could you imagine it? I can see Terrell Owens on the TV, crying about how the players don't get enough respect from the owners and how they don't share the wealth and blah blah blah.

I'd cheer for the scabs. That's why I liked the XFL. It was guys who weren't born with all the physical gifts, but had the heart(and yes, some freaks).

I love me some Shane Falco.

Hell yes. Bring on the scabs!! At least they'll play with dignity and we won't have to listen to any whiny *****es talking about their latest problems with their coach or front office or quarterback or receiver or their salary *cough* JaMarcus Russell *cough* or whatever the hell they're crying about these days. I miss good old fashioned FOOTBALL. I don't even like watching the pre/post game shows anymore. They suck all the fun out of the game. Infact... they just suck...

 

[bigfog]

Gene Upshaw's job is to protect the interests of the players and ensure that they get paid. He does a good job, but for some reason I can't help but hate the guy.

 

[PACKfanONE36]

It seems like just puffing and posturing to me.

Although Goodell is a bit of a wildcard as far as labor relations go, I sense his long background in the trenches should help him.

Upshaw seems a bit stung by the issues raised over helping older retired players in need, and probably feels the need to let his constituents see him making noise for them on a different issue.

Who knows, but I have to think wiser and calmer heads will prevail as this all gets worked out.

 

[PACKfanONE36]

PFT's blurb on this today ...

POSTED 9:48 a.m. EST, February 11, 2008

JONES EXPECTS OWNERS TO OPT OUT OF LABOR DEAL

It'll soon be time to get re-acquainted with terms like "cash over cap" and "supplemental revenue sharing."

According to Daniel Kaplan of Sports Business Journal, Cowboys owner Jerry Jones believes that enough of his 31 colleagues will vote to opt out of the current Collective Bargaining Agreement with the players union in November 2008.

In November, either party to the deal may give the other side notice of an intention to end the contract two years early. The deal currently runs through 2012; opting out would trigger expiration after the 2010 season.

But while Armageddon is still roughly three years away, the mess would initially unfold on the first day of the 2009 league year, given the accounting rules that apply in the final year before an uncapped season.

Two years ago, a new labor deal was negotiated not on the eve of an uncapped year, but on the eve of the last capped year, which uses various devices to prevent teams from getting an early start on spending limitless money on player salaries. And with the union surely smarting from the decision to pull the plug in November 2008, it's unlikely that both sides will get together and hammer out a deal before March 1 of 2009.

It's also unlikely that the union will give up the inherent leverage of an uncapped year. Why should it? The owners apparently want to roll back the financial gains made by the players in 2006, and likewise to correct some of the noneconomic terms that were essentially ignored by the Management Council at a time when the focus was on striking a deal with the players for a percentage of Total Football Revenue, and at the same time working out an arrangement among the owners for the partial sharing of currently unshared revenues as to which, among some franchises, there is a huge (and always growing) disparity. Asking the union to play a little givesy-backsy is not the way to preserve labor peace.

So we'll be dusting off some of our old articles regarding the realities of an uncapped year and the last capped year. We'll also be pondering what ultimately could be the end result of this exercise -- a spin-off league of smaller-market teams committed to sharing all revenue, and an existing league with big-market franchises who want to keep as much of what they make as possible.

 

[Zombieslayer]

Just wondering - what if the Packers had another stock sale to generate more money? Would that be enough to keep us competitive?

I have no idea what the numbers are with stocks out there but if they did, I'm sure I could find at least 10 people to buy Packer stock. I'm sure a lot of people on this board can at $25 a piece.

 

[bigfog]

Even with stock sales, it would be difficult for Green Bay to stay competitive with the Dallases and Washingtons of the world.

In a world with no salary cap, those owners are free to pay whatever it takes to bring in top talent. Heck, look at baseball - are the Royals ever competitive?

With that said, if the salary cap goes - small teams are sure to follow, and a whole lot of fans with them. At least the U of Wisconsin doesn't have to worry about a salary cap.

 

[bigfog]

Here's some concerning news from PFT'

Though some might believe that the looming decision by owners as to whether the Collective Bargaining Agreement will be scuttled two years early requires 24 of them to decide to pull the plug, a league source tells us that the plug will be pulled unless 24 of the owners decide to continue with the deal.

And that's a huge distinction.

As a practical matter, only seven votes are needed to kill the deal early. Bills owner Ralph Wilson and Bengals president Mike Brown voted against the CBA extension in 2006, and there's no reason to believe that they've changed their minds.

Meanwhile, Broncos owner Pat Bowlen and Pats owner Robert Kraft recently have articulated concerns about the CBA. So if they don't vote to extend, only five more like minds are needed.

Per the source, there's a growing feeling that, in the end, there will be more than enough votes to trigger the early expiration.

But the source also points out that some of the owners who already are taking strident positions about opting out of the CBA early really can't afford to take a work stoppage, due to their specific debt situations arising from the purchase of their franchises and/or stadium construction deals.

As we said earlier this week, the time is now for the league and the union to get to work on an extension. By next year at this time, the last capped year will be wreaking havoc on salary caps throughout the league -- and making the owners more inclined to take an uncapped year in 2010. Once that happens a work stoppage (i.e., no games for us to watch) becomes less avoidable.

 

[longtimefan]

Even with stock sales, it would be difficult for Green Bay to stay competitive with the Dallases and Washingtons of the world.

In a world with no salary cap, those owners are free to pay whatever it takes to bring in top talent. Heck, look at baseball - are the Royals ever competitive?

With that said, if the salary cap goes - small teams are sure to follow, and a whole lot of fans with them. At least the U of Wisconsin doesn't have to worry about a salary cap.

last one was $200 a share and generated around 24 million

that would only = one players salary

 

[bigfog]

Latest news from PFT.com

On Wednesday, we reported that NFLPA Executive Director Gene Upshaw would be meeting with a hand-picked group of agents to discuss the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Liz Mullen of SportsBusiness Journal reports that, at the meeting, the NFLPA officials raised the possibility of a lockout in 2011.

"There could be a work stoppage, in which case even guaranteed contract [money] would presumably not be paid," an agent who attended the meeting told Mullen.

Owners are expected to exercise their right to end the labor contract two years early, making 2010 the last season with a contract between the two sides.

A lockout out is the ownership version of a strike. Management prevents the employees from working until a new deal is hammered out. The NHL lost the entire 2004-05 season due to a lockout.

The difference, however, is that the owners in hockey were genuinely losing money. In the NFL, the question for both sides is how much money is enough?