BillsPhan Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 The TV networks should be the ones setting the deadline on this "negotiation" between the billionaires and the millionaires. All the networks have to do is tell both sides that if this thing does not get settled within one more week, in time for UFA deals to take place before the draft, that they will not pay the NFL another dime for the next 3 years. Force the NFL itself use it's own half assed NFL Network to televise all of it's games every week for a few years. See how "easy" the negotiations for their billions of dollars would be with the cable owners and satellite providers! Without the billions from CBS, Fox and ESPN the NFL goes down without a whimper. In this economy, the networks would live on without the NFL, (they claim to lose money with the costs involved televising the games anyway) but the NFL would never survive without those networks. The league has gotten fat beyond reason because of the unholy money the networks keep paying them. Check out the Bucky Gleason article in the Buff News today. He sites the fact that the the average salary in the NFL last season was $1.8 million. The average salary for an NFL player 30 years ago was $90,000. A man making $90,000 in 1981 would have the buying power today of a man making only $218,000. Now that tells you the owners have allowed the player salaries to escalate thousands of times higher then just the "cost of living index" has risen since 1981. And why? The network money the owners get paid, of course. It defies logic, and the networks should remind both parties they can walk away and leave them all "billion-less" if they don't end this stupid impasse immediately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zulu Cthulhu Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 It would work if the media networks placed coordinated pressure on the league and players as you say. But broadcasters don't act as one - they compete for our eyeballs with each other. You could never get the current contracting networks - CBS, NBC, and Fox to agree to collectively freeze out the NFL. Even if they did, they would certainly alienate more than a few of their customers, and that ain't good for business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiggieScooby Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 (edited) The NFL owners have an agreement where they get paid by the networks if there are no games this year. The players aren't going to get paid by the owners if they can't reach an agreement and football is locked out. The real number to look at is the MEDIAN and that number was 780,000 in 2009. I read something somewhere that the average NFL career is 3 years which seems about right. I believe the owners have every right to negotiate the best deal possible, however I am skeptical that the players will give back their gains without sufficient evidence. The owners should open their books and allow the NFLPA to examine them to determine if a concession should be made. The NFL is a 9 billion business. The owners get the first 1 billion and get 40% of the next 8 billion. That works out to be 4,200,000,000 or 47% of total revenues. That isn't too bad. Edited March 8, 2011 by BiggieScooby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hplarrm Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 It would work if the media networks placed coordinated pressure on the league and players as you say. But broadcasters don't act as one - they compete for our eyeballs with each other. You could never get the current contracting networks - CBS, NBC, and Fox to agree to collectively freeze out the NFL. Even if they did, they would certainly alienate more than a few of their customers, and that ain't good for business. You are right that competition is the key issue here, but actually it is the fact that the NFL between having a partial anti-trust exemption from the Congress has the individual NFL teams collaborating with each other to deliver the NFL product as a business and really only competing with each other on the field, It is only a partial exemption (sort of partially un-American which I guess is like being a little pregnant) and does prohibit the NFL from colluding with each other over salaries and working conditions. Things changed big time when the NFLPA using traditional labor tactics led by AFL-CIO guy Ed Garvey got their heads handed to them in the mid 80s lockout. This move so discredited the Garveyites that the talented tenth of NFL players led by Gene Upshaw who really had understood stuff they learned in college ended threatening to decertify the NFLPA. This would have forced NFL team owners into operating a free market system as there would have been no draft to bind individuals to teams. Rather than compete in the free market, NFL owners ran kicking and screaming to sign the CBA. There is a great irony here in that I doubt that pro football as we know it today could even survive in a free market system (at best it would look like MLB)it actually produces more revenue in a social compact system than it does in a free market. The current labor dispute strikes me as being about the players recognizing thanks to Upshaw and a few others that people tune in to watch the players. The owners used be a necessity back in the day when there were fewer sources of capital willing to invest in a team or when folks like Halas really were football guys. However, in todays world the owners are like fifth wheel on a car at best. We all have a spare tire in the trunk but we hope we never really have to use it. I'd love it if we simply cut the owners out of this with our hearty thanks and get to 32 (or more) teams using the Packers model of ownership and management. The NFLPA actually managing the league using the Packers model is likely the best bet for how you might make this work. It would virtually certainly never happen as the Snyders and Jerry Jones of the world have too much cash to be kicked to the curb, but hey one can dream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Great plan except for those darn contracts the league and the networks signed. They can't not pay the league untill those contracts expire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddaryl Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 problem is TV makes way to damn much money off the NFL and they are not going to bite that hand because when it is settled they'll be rolling in the $$$$$ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Great plan except for those darn contracts the league and the networks signed. They can't not pay the league untill those contracts expire. Didn't Judge Doty rule that the TV contract the owners "coerced" the TV moguls into signing was a violation of the labor agreement? As it stands the Judge has not ruled on how he is going to punish the owners for this blatant violation. He could fine the owners, make the owners share the proceeds of the contract with the players or whatever else he determines to be a reasonable punishment. Now the owners are adding to their negotiation list the de-coupling of Judge Doty from overseeing a labor agreement. In other words when the judge rules against you-just change the judge. There are plenty of obedient flacks to take his place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hplarrm Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Didn't Judge Doty rule that the TV contract the owners "coerced" the TV moguls into signing was a violation of the labor agreement? As it stands the Judge has not ruled on how he is going to punish the owners for this blatant violation. He could fine the owners, make the owners share the proceeds of the contract with the players or whatever else he determines to be a reasonable punishment. Now the owners are adding to their negotiation list the de-coupling of Judge Doty from overseeing a labor agreement. In other words when the judge rules against you-just change the judge. There are plenty of obedient flacks to take his place. The most amusing thing about this whole drama is when folks offer up opinion and claim that for sure so and so is gonna happen or claim that one side is totally right and the other side is totally wrong. Actually, this is such unplowed territory that no one can say with any certainty or clarity what is going to happen. The team owners have the tactical advantage right now but only maintain it if the players pursue the same strategy of traditional employer/employee relationships. The players have demonstrated in the real world that when they get beaten incredibly badly by the owners as they did with the mid-80s lockout that they are capable of adopting a totally new strategy which in essence through out the old rulebook. The Dody finding is potentially massive as it also throws out the old script of simple labor/management dispute and instead insists that the current CBA is based on a model where the NFL and NFLPA are partners. The league in diverting part of the revenue into work stoppage insurance did not serve the interest of their partners the NFLPA. We will see how this plays out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 (edited) The most amusing thing about this whole drama is when folks offer up opinion and claim that for sure so and so is gonna happen or claim that one side is totally right and the other side is totally wrong. Actually, this is such unplowed territory that no one can say with any certainty or clarity what is going to happen. If either side is looking for a clean win then there is going to be a protracted battle ending up being self-deafting for both sides. Getting the dispute into the court system might be a strategy for a union frustrated with the intransigence of the owners but that is another box of unknowns. The Dody finding is potentially massive as it also throws out the old script of simple labor/management dispute and instead insists that the current CBA is based on a model where the NFL and NFLPA are partners. The league in diverting part of the revenue into work stoppage insurance did not serve the interest of their partners the NFLPA. Your analysis is insightful and wonderfully reduces the verbage to the basic concept of the current CBA. As it presently stands the owners don't see themselves as partners with the union. In their inflated view of themselves they are the bosses. The last thing the owners want is a strong neutral arbitrator overseeing and ruling on the CBA. They knew in time they could with ease crush the players. What they didn't bargain on is a strong judge willing to enforce the terms of the CBA. Now they need a new script. We will see how this plays out. Poetic justice is both sides screwing each other and the fan base becoming disinterested. Edited March 8, 2011 by JohnC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 The TV networks should be the ones setting the deadline on this "negotiation" between the billionaires and the millionaires. All the networks have to do is tell both sides that if this thing does not get settled within one more week, in time for UFA deals to take place before the draft, that they will not pay the NFL another dime for the next 3 years. Force the NFL itself use it's own half assed NFL Network to televise all of it's games every week for a few years. See how "easy" the negotiations for their billions of dollars would be with the cable owners and satellite providers! Without the billions from CBS, Fox and ESPN the NFL goes down without a whimper. In this economy, the networks would live on without the NFL, (they claim to lose money with the costs involved televising the games anyway) but the NFL would never survive without those networks. The league has gotten fat beyond reason because of the unholy money the networks keep paying them. Check out the Bucky Gleason article in the Buff News today. He sites the fact that the the average salary in the NFL last season was $1.8 million. The average salary for an NFL player 30 years ago was $90,000. A man making $90,000 in 1981 would have the buying power today of a man making only $218,000. Now that tells you the owners have allowed the player salaries to escalate thousands of times higher then just the "cost of living index" has risen since 1981. And why? The network money the owners get paid, of course. It defies logic, and the networks should remind both parties they can walk away and leave them all "billion-less" if they don't end this stupid impasse immediately. I don't think it is illogical at all. The NFL makes what the market will bear. The networks have decided that televising those games is worth it to them, otherwise they wouldn't do it. No one is holding a gun to their head. As the league makes more money, so do the people who make the league, the players. It stands to reason that the more successful a company is, the more it makes. This is a struggle over their respective shares of revenue. The owners have a lot of leverage, but so do the players. Periodic conflict is inevitable since people generally are interested in maximizing their income. NFL owners and players aren't unique in that way. As fans, our only interest is in watching those games on TV for free in most cases and going to the stadium to watch in others. We don't really care about best interests of the league, the network, the owners or the players, we just want our football. That is why this has your attention and why it is so frustrating. Everyother day there is a new post making a villain of one the entities involved. I share your frustration, believe me but as a fan, we are on the outside looking in whether we like it or not. If a marginally profitable league like the NHL can survive a significant work stoppage, so can the NFL. The easy remedy for a fan is to just scratch pro football off their list of things to care about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarolinaBillsFan Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 What we need is a "Fan Union" for all major sports complete with board members. When you sign up for the union, you swear to whatver the board decides to do (ie, boycott games, jersey's, etc..) until a reasonable time if the the players and owners don't get it done. Besides, we are the one's paying both their salaries! We just need a few smart lawyer fans to work out the detail! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts