Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
NFL Discussions
Vilma a scapegoat?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="packa7x" data-source="post: 447250" data-attributes="member: 6594"><p>I forgot to reply to you! My apologies!</p><p></p><p>It's frivolous in the sense that it's a $9billion industry and the workers aren't being treated unfairly. Unions were necessary back when people weren't allowed to take bathroom breaks on their 16 hour shift. When its main duty is to just bust balls, it becomes frivolous to me. I understand the reasons why it exists, but please understand my position. Things aren't dire for NFL players. </p><p></p><p>Owing a franchise is very lucrative. Not debating that. But why shouldn't the guy who owns the business make money on it? Because he doesn't play a children's game? I dislike that attitude towards ownership. Without owners, there would be no monetization of football. It's a fact. If it's not profitable, they wouldn't do it. So why is it a crime to not hand over more than 50% of their profits to a portion of the labor force? The owners are vital to the entire operation and THEY made it profitable. YES we go to see the players but we go to see them play in the game the owners set the rules for, wearing the owner's uniforms, playing in the owner's stadiums, playing in the schedule the owner set, being broadcast on TV, the Internet, and radio through broadcast deals the owner negotiated. Without any of that, the players don't sacrifice their bodies. I don't think it's out of line to need 1/2 of the revenue to fund the teams and I don't think that they should be looked at negatively for doing so. </p><p></p><p>The problem with unions is people focus on the past when talking about them. They've negotiated plenty of positive things for players. I'm not debating that healthcare, minimum salary, etc are frivolous. What I'm saying is "how much is the union needed NOW?" I understand the CBA is needed to prevent the NFL from antitrust suits, but when the minimum salary is close to $400,000 for rookies with little talent, I just don't see the need for a union this obnoxious. De Smith called the league's proposal last year "the worst deal in sports history" AP, Leonard Weaver, and a couple others all characterized the NFL as modern day slavery. It's the culture in America to bash business and get behind unions because it's somehow noble to hate power and authority. This culture has spread to the NFL where it's cool to trash Goodell and the owners. FRAUDger GODell. I'm not saying blindly fall in line, but what I am saying is nobody even has respect for their bosses in the league. The attitude has spread to fans. Suddenly the guy who admitted that concussions were a problem after decades of denial, cleaned up the game via harsh punishments, and continues to guide the game to be MORE profitable (just look at ESPN, they get worse games every year for MNF and they're paying astronomical amounts) is a villain???? How? The union. They paint him to be a player hating corporate big-wig who just wants to squash the little guy. THIS is why I think the union is frivolous. They've moved on from real issues and they just nag, trash, and impede the league. </p><p></p><p>Before you launch off on a pro-NFLPA rant, I must reiterate that I understand the concept of a union IS necessary for the NFL. Players do need representation and protection because of the inherent violence of the game. I'm saying the current manifestation of the union is frivolous.</p><p></p><p>I'm not frustrated that NFL players make the salaries they do. I'm obviously a free market guy and I'm happy that the players who deserve more money generally get it whether it's with their team or a new team. My problem is the bellyaching I hear from them and the union about the salaries. They're making "only" 48% on over $9Billion. 1,696 players split $4.3 billion. That's $2.5 million AVERAGE per player. I just can't grasp how that's not fair. I do think that most, not all, players blow through their money carelessly. Warren Sapp, Mark Brunell, TO, Travis Henry...these guys are dead broke. Henry couldn't pay child support and is in jail. Brunell got involved in a bad business deal and is broke. Sapp and TO...who knows. During the lockout, a huge percentage took out a loan from other players, the NFLPA, or 3rd parties. Some loan interest rates from banks for the players was 25%+! It was the biggest concern for the NFLPA. Most players couldn't withstand the lockout even with a war chest and tons of warning for an impending labor strike. I think my opinion is well grounded in fact here.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="packa7x, post: 447250, member: 6594"] I forgot to reply to you! My apologies! It's frivolous in the sense that it's a $9billion industry and the workers aren't being treated unfairly. Unions were necessary back when people weren't allowed to take bathroom breaks on their 16 hour shift. When its main duty is to just bust balls, it becomes frivolous to me. I understand the reasons why it exists, but please understand my position. Things aren't dire for NFL players. Owing a franchise is very lucrative. Not debating that. But why shouldn't the guy who owns the business make money on it? Because he doesn't play a children's game? I dislike that attitude towards ownership. Without owners, there would be no monetization of football. It's a fact. If it's not profitable, they wouldn't do it. So why is it a crime to not hand over more than 50% of their profits to a portion of the labor force? The owners are vital to the entire operation and THEY made it profitable. YES we go to see the players but we go to see them play in the game the owners set the rules for, wearing the owner's uniforms, playing in the owner's stadiums, playing in the schedule the owner set, being broadcast on TV, the Internet, and radio through broadcast deals the owner negotiated. Without any of that, the players don't sacrifice their bodies. I don't think it's out of line to need 1/2 of the revenue to fund the teams and I don't think that they should be looked at negatively for doing so. The problem with unions is people focus on the past when talking about them. They've negotiated plenty of positive things for players. I'm not debating that healthcare, minimum salary, etc are frivolous. What I'm saying is "how much is the union needed NOW?" I understand the CBA is needed to prevent the NFL from antitrust suits, but when the minimum salary is close to $400,000 for rookies with little talent, I just don't see the need for a union this obnoxious. De Smith called the league's proposal last year "the worst deal in sports history" AP, Leonard Weaver, and a couple others all characterized the NFL as modern day slavery. It's the culture in America to bash business and get behind unions because it's somehow noble to hate power and authority. This culture has spread to the NFL where it's cool to trash Goodell and the owners. FRAUDger GODell. I'm not saying blindly fall in line, but what I am saying is nobody even has respect for their bosses in the league. The attitude has spread to fans. Suddenly the guy who admitted that concussions were a problem after decades of denial, cleaned up the game via harsh punishments, and continues to guide the game to be MORE profitable (just look at ESPN, they get worse games every year for MNF and they're paying astronomical amounts) is a villain???? How? The union. They paint him to be a player hating corporate big-wig who just wants to squash the little guy. THIS is why I think the union is frivolous. They've moved on from real issues and they just nag, trash, and impede the league. Before you launch off on a pro-NFLPA rant, I must reiterate that I understand the concept of a union IS necessary for the NFL. Players do need representation and protection because of the inherent violence of the game. I'm saying the current manifestation of the union is frivolous. I'm not frustrated that NFL players make the salaries they do. I'm obviously a free market guy and I'm happy that the players who deserve more money generally get it whether it's with their team or a new team. My problem is the bellyaching I hear from them and the union about the salaries. They're making "only" 48% on over $9Billion. 1,696 players split $4.3 billion. That's $2.5 million AVERAGE per player. I just can't grasp how that's not fair. I do think that most, not all, players blow through their money carelessly. Warren Sapp, Mark Brunell, TO, Travis Henry...these guys are dead broke. Henry couldn't pay child support and is in jail. Brunell got involved in a bad business deal and is broke. Sapp and TO...who knows. During the lockout, a huge percentage took out a loan from other players, the NFLPA, or 3rd parties. Some loan interest rates from banks for the players was 25%+! It was the biggest concern for the NFLPA. Most players couldn't withstand the lockout even with a war chest and tons of warning for an impending labor strike. I think my opinion is well grounded in fact here. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
SudsMcBucky
Capitol 8805
tynimiller
Latest posts
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: tynimiller
10 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
Latest: CarryTheG14
21 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Josh Jacobs facing charges…
Latest: Curly Calhoun
Today at 8:28 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
The Crew - 2026
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 7:58 AM
Milwaukee Brewers Forum
Cam Achord new ST coach - Fire him
Latest: OldSchool101
Yesterday at 11:14 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
NFL Discussions
Vilma a scapegoat?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
