Anyone think the NFLPA messed up?

[MattM]

http://www.profootballweekly.com/2011/03/13/nfl-owners-to-blame-for-the-lockout

 

Interesting perspective from someone close both to the game and running his own business (which figures into his article)....

[agardin]

I don't know if things have changed with the recent health care changes but I have heard that players lose their health insurance after a certain amount of time post retirement and then when they do have to go and get some, 'pre-existing conditions' render the policies extremely expensive if they can be purchased at all. So long term health care may not be the red herring after all. I am not American so I am not sure of all the facts on that one.

[Doc]

If the deal the owners agreed to was such a bad deal then why haven't they explained or documented why it was such a bad deal? Maybe they can't? What if the financial records they steadfastly refuse to exhibit show that they have made exponentially more under the current CBA than prior to its signing then what is the basis of their claim?

 

The judge is the one who is going to determine what happens with the un-fair labor practice TV money. I have no clue as to whether he is going to split it or withhold it. This is a mess that could have been avoided. Now instead of a negotiation done at the table it is put in a slow-moving legal system that could possibly damage both sides.

 

The irony is that the court master, possibly Judge Doty or another judge, can compel the owners to reveal more financial data than they originally wanted to. I am of the mind that both parties should battle each other into bloody submission. They deserve each other.

It's a "bad deal" in that they gave up more money than they wanted to give up. They want that money back. No one is losing money.

[Fixxxer]

If the deal the owners agreed to was such a bad deal then why haven't they explained or documented why it was such a bad deal? Maybe they can't? What if the financial records they steadfastly refuse to exhibit show that they have made exponentially more under the current CBA than prior to its signing then what is the basis of their claim?

 

The judge is the one who is going to determine what happens with the un-fair labor practice TV money. I have no clue as to whether he is going to split it or withhold it. This is a mess that could have been avoided. Now instead of a negotiation done at the table it is put in a slow-moving legal system that could possibly damage both sides.

 

The irony is that the court master, possibly Judge Doty or another judge, can compel the owners to reveal more financial data than they originally wanted to. I am of the mind that both parties should battle each other into bloody submission. They deserve each other.

 

I'm not worried if they have to but I would not like to see Judge Doty or any other judge for that matter, showing the numbers with nametags to the NFLPA or the players. The numbers should be used to make a ruling, not to give them to the players for future reference.

[JohnC]

Name one person that's even on the radar for buying an NFL team that has a billion dollars (cash) to pay for a team. Very few teams are paid for outright and even when a billionaire buys a team, he generally finances part of it.

 

The big part of the problem is the valuation of the teams doesn't mesh with the actual profit. Yes, Dallas and Washington make 200 million a year (and that's something the owners need to address, Ralph seems to have put the financial facts together. He is good at keeping money, afterall , but many teams make less than the Bills (30 million/yr) after paying back the interest and making loan payments.

 

What bank is going to finance a billion dollar investment that makes 30 million a year? It would takes 33 years to pay off a franchise at that rate if all 30 million went to paying the loan and there was no interest. This is what many fans and apparently, DeMaurice Smith , are missing. What happens if Banks do not have confidence that these loans can be paid back? The franchises would not be bought or their value would drop (which would most certainly affect the players and their salaries).

 

Haven't we seen this with the 'problem' with the Bills in Buffalo? Anyone buying the team would be looking at loan/interest payments that would basically eliminate any profit. Many owners could lose 20 million and not notice. They're certainly greedy, but this 'fight' isn't about putting a few extra bucks in their posckets. It's a much more complicated financial issue.

 

 

That aside, the owners like Jerry Jones have caused this problem to exist by forcing up valuations without care for the consequences. They can't expect the players to bail them out. However, the NFLPA made a poor hire in Smith (who was taking this legal from the moment he was hired) and has spent way too much time framing this as 'I can't feed my family or afford Health Insurance' instead of acknowledging that it's a complicated matter and that perhaps before building billion dollar stadiums on a whim that the entire financial situation of the league (and country) should be considered.

 

Neither side in this smells like anything other than poop.

 

Superb ananlysis. Well thought out and clearly explained. The financial framework for the league and various teams is very complicated. Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder would be very happy with a Yankee and Red Sox type of system with the lesser units fending more for themselves.

[Hplarrm]

If the deal the owners agreed to was such a bad deal then why haven't they explained or documented why it was such a bad deal? Maybe they can't? What if the financial records they steadfastly refuse to exhibit show that they have made exponentially more under the current CBA than prior to its signing then what is the basis of their claim?

 

The judge is the one who is going to determine what happens with the un-fair labor practice TV money. I have no clue as to whether he is going to split it or withhold it. This is a mess that could have been avoided. Now instead of a negotiation done at the table it is put in a slow-moving legal system that could possibly damage both sides.

 

The irony is that the court master, possibly Judge Doty or another judge, can compel the owners to reveal more financial data than they originally wanted to. I am of the mind that both parties should battle each other into bloody submission. They deserve each other.

It might turn out as you suggest with Doty or some other authority compelling the owners to comply with sharing the books with their partners the NFLPA (I think the mistake many make is simply viewing this as a traditional AFL-CIO dispute). Ed Garvey and the NFLPA viewed it this way in the late 80s and got their heads handed to them by the owners in the replacement player move.

 

However, led by the talented tenth of NFL players (90% are drugged up lemmings who have been told when to eat, drink, sleep by coaches all their lives) which was smart enough to hire smart NYC lawyers and understand and sell to their playing colleagues the decertification strategy they forced the owners to make them partners as embodied in the CBA.

 

My sense is that what owners really objected to in the now suspended CBA was that on paper it really reduced them to minority partner status.

 

What it looks like to me is actually that the NFLPA is setting up to get a new league created (which I have dubbed the NEWFL) which will create the thing the NFLPA actually wants which is competition, If good ol American competition were to come up against the NFL the likely result is both higher wages and more members for the NFLPA much as failures like the USFL and the WFL and successes like the AFL had the primary effect of raising player wages.

[JohnC]

I'm not worried if they have to but I would not like to see Judge Doty or any other judge for that matter, showing the numbers with nametags to the NFLPA or the players. The numbers should be used to make a ruling, not to give them to the players for future reference.

 

I absolutely agree with you. My preference would be for the judge to tell the competing parties to try to work out an agreement on their own in an intense and abbreviated negotiation session or he will make a decision that would make both parties very unhappy.

[Fixxxer]

I absolutely agree with you. My preference would be for the judge to tell the competing parties to try to work out an agreement on their own in an intense and abbreviated negotiation session or he will make a decision that would make both parties very unhappy.

 

No doubt, any judge in charge will tell both parties to bugger off (with a are you kidding me face) and sort things out, you have a good thing going.

[JohnC]

My sense is that what owners really objected to in the now suspended CBA was that on paper it really reduced them to minority partner status.

 

What it looks like to me is actually that the NFLPA is setting up to get a new league created (which I have dubbed the NEWFL) which will create the thing the NFLPA actually wants which is competition, If good ol American competition were to come up against the NFL the likely result is both higher wages and more members for the NFLPA much as failures like the USFL and the WFL and successes like the AFL had the primary effect of raising player wages.

 

I have a more simplistic view. It is about slicing the pie.

[Sisyphean Bills]

As I have said on numerous occasions there are no angels sitting at the table, now scattered about. The point I have made in my postings is that it was the owners, not the players, who precipitated this road to combat. The overreaching owners laid out a strategy that they could lock out the union and out resource them with their ill gotten TV money. Then they were going to impose their own terms to what they thought was going to be a fractured union. It didn't work out as they had planned.

 

Judge Doty changed the dynamics to the the owner/union dispute. So now we got a mess. I'm not for taking this dispute over slicing the revenue pie to the courts. That is a snake-pit that I would have preferred avoiding. But I understand why it was done.

 

The only real solution is to get back to the bargaining table and work it out. With the de-certification of the union I'm not sure if that can be done. When you open up the pandora's box you are likely to be surprised at what comes out.

 

My position on this matter has been consistent. The owners made a claim with no evidence to support their claim. Now the parties are are going to be entangled in the morass of the legal system. This development could have been avoided. It was so unnecessary.

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the incontrovertible fact that the general economy of the entire world has changed rather dramatically from where it was 6 or 7 years ago. A billion doesn't go as far.

 

Any business has the right to manage its labor costs. In my business, we do that by hiring cheap labor in Asia and freeing North Americans to "pursue other interests".

[Nostradumbass]

The Players made a mistake?

 

Does anyone really think the best offer from either side is on the table?? Is this everyone's first rodeo?

 

This CBA isn't getting settled until real pressure is on and that doesn't happen unitl August /September. Fans need to sit back and relax this is just a process and right right now neither side has any incentive to get a deal done.

 

And please quit with the players should be happy with what they have, fans should revolt, nonsense rhetoric we read on every post on this issue.

 

We will all comeback when the NFL settles this CBA, it's a fantastic product that generates Billions in revenue and it's not always going to be easy for the interested parties to determine how to divide the pie. Meanwhile quit whining like it is our god given right to have football on our TV.

[Hplarrm]

 

This CBA isn't getting settled until real pressure is on and that doesn't happen unitl August /September. Fans need to sit back and relax this is just a process and right right now neither side has any incentive to get a deal done.

 

 

I agree with you that the players did not make a mistake here under almost any circumstances as even if they choose to essentially capitulate to the owners offer, they will get a better offer later in the negotiations than right now.

 

However, my GUESS is that we will not have to wait until August/September for a final offer but actually the draft in April to some extent will be a drop dead date for the owners.

 

The lawsuit in question after decertification is an anti-trust restraint of trade action. One need only ask the question why is the NFLPA existence of such import to the team owners that the decertification tactic has resulted in the late 80s CBA which totally reversed the butt-thumping the owners laid on the NFLPA after the 87 lockout. How did this threat lead to the owners signing onto the current CBA which Upshaw publicly and correctly declared before negotiations would base the salary cap on all gross revenues rather than designated revenues, and also would award the players with a salary cap % which began with a 6.

 

The answer is that the NFL engages in huge restraints of free trade for individuals with the draft, In addition, unlike all other major league sports, the NFL flat out refuses to allow any team to sign not only undergrads, but in fact does not allow individual teams to even sign adults until the year they were born graduates.

 

The only reason the courts even allow such a horrendous violation of the rights of individuals in our capitalistic system is because the agreed upon bargaining agent for the players participates in this anti free trade anti capital assault on individual freedoms.

 

Once the NFL engages in a draft without their co-conspirator the NFLPA it really is case closed on this rampant violation of individual rights.

 

I do not see how the NFL will be able to prevail in any court that it is simply forcing any individual to only sale their wares to one buyer.

 

Its simply un-American.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Any business has the right to manage its labor costs. In my business, we do that by hiring cheap labor in Asia and freeing North Americans to "pursue other interests".

 

Like what other interests? Hanging out at the club or taking the family to Disney World?

 

Sorry to sound like a smartass... What are those other interests? Freeing them from what? Work? Supporting a family? You do realize that somebody has to buy those products (made by cheap labor) back?

 

Wow, just wow... So this is how it is justified in the minds of business... As a "right"...

 

That right is socially self-destructive.

[Doc]

I agree with you that the players did not make a mistake here under almost any circumstances as even if they choose to essentially capitulate to the owners offer, they will get a better offer later in the negotiations than right now.

 

However, my GUESS is that we will not have to wait until August/September for a final offer but actually the draft in April to some extent will be a drop dead date for the owners.

 

The lawsuit in question after decertification is an anti-trust restraint of trade action. One need only ask the question why is the NFLPA existence of such import to the team owners that the decertification tactic has resulted in the late 80s CBA which totally reversed the butt-thumping the owners laid on the NFLPA after the 87 lockout. How did this threat lead to the owners signing onto the current CBA which Upshaw publicly and correctly declared before negotiations would base the salary cap on all gross revenues rather than designated revenues, and also would award the players with a salary cap % which began with a 6.

 

The answer is that the NFL engages in huge restraints of free trade for individuals with the draft, In addition, unlike all other major league sports, the NFL flat out refuses to allow any team to sign not only undergrads, but in fact does not allow individual teams to even sign adults until the year they were born graduates.

 

The only reason the courts even allow such a horrendous violation of the rights of individuals in our capitalistic system is because the agreed upon bargaining agent for the players participates in this anti free trade anti capital assault on individual freedoms.

 

Once the NFL engages in a draft without their co-conspirator the NFLPA it really is case closed on this rampant violation of individual rights.

 

I do not see how the NFL will be able to prevail in any court that it is simply forcing any individual to only sale their wares to one buyer.

 

Its simply un-American.

Please. It's hardly "un-American" that the players aren't making more than $325K minimum and an average of $1.9M a year. They are free to pursue employment in the UFL, AFL, and CFL, but choose to enter the NFL and thus should have to abide by its rules. There is no way that the courts will a) break up the NFL or b) abolish the draft, because of the effects it would have on every other professional sports league.

[JohnC]

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the incontrovertible fact that the general economy of the entire world has changed rather dramatically from where it was 6 or 7 years ago. A billion doesn't go as far.

 

The general economy has dramatically changed. I'm aware of that. The restructuring of the economy is going to take years to unfold. Tragically, there is a large segment of the work force that is now forlornly on the outside of the economy, and will probably never get back into the labor flow. Tell that to the voracious Jerry Jones who built a gold gilded stadium that could have been built for 40% less. This is the same ego maniac who sold non-existent and non-approved SB seats so he could squeeze out more $$ and break an attendance record. How would you have liked to have been one of the customers who flew in from Pittsburgh or Wisconsin to watch a once in a lifetime SB game and be told your seats don't exist, just watch the monitor. Here's a coupon for a diluted light beer in a small cup.

 

The irony is that the owners got cocky, as did the players. While the economy tanked to the point that the country was at the precipice of a depression the owners and players still made an exorbitant amount of money. Both their worlds were very insulated from the reality of life and the economy.

 

Both sides deserve each other. Are the players overreaching and playing with disaster by going the legal route to settle this issue. In my view, yes. But I understand why they did it. The owners weren't very subtle with their fraudulent TV deal on what they were going to do when they opted out of the CBA. They wanted to crush the union and impose a settlement.

 

When you get in a fight and squeeze someone's balls to the point that their head is going to explode then don't be surprised when the other side responds by scratching your eyeballs out.

 

Both sides need to take a break and cool off. The best scenario could be that a judge could signal to both sides of the dispute that it is in both of their interests to settle their differences between themselves before he makes a ruling that neither side likes. Bombast and PR gimmickery is not going to get a reasonable settlement. A little more wisdom from both sides can get a deal done. It's not about being right or wrong. It is about making a deal.

 

Any business has the right to manage its labor costs. In my business, we do that by hiring cheap labor in Asia and freeing North Americans to "pursue other interests".

 

For sure, one way not to manage your labor costs is by using illegal methods to get what you want to get. It can have some unintended consequences.

 

I'm not a union zealot. Far from it. You may be surprised to know that I sided with the owners in hockey when they shut down the NHL to restructure the league. I am also siding when the owners in the NBA when they are likely to shut down the NBA in order to restructure the league. In my view the situation in the NFL is much different.

Edited March 14, 2011 by JohnC

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Love the post ... Keep trying to explain and perhaps some may eventually see past the propaganda.

 

You tell 'em! You tell those capitalist-imperialist running dogs!!

[tombstone56]

Please stop with this it's about the fans nonsense. The money comes from TV and TV alone. That money comes from huge corporations buying advertising funnelled through Madison Ave. To the NFL, you are a more important fan if you stay home and watch the game instead of showing up at the stadium.

BTW you do realize the owners are billionaires. The minimum wage guy should side with them? Me thinks you are a Tea Bagger.

 

ARE YOU THAT IGNORANT? THE TV MONEY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT! The money that drives the NFL IS "NFL properties" TRY DOING SOME RESEARCH YOU WONT SOUND SO STUPID

[xsoldier54]

Obviously I don't have all the details but from what I read about the NFL's proposal it seemed ok. It seemed to me the league met many of the unions demands and moved to the middle on the money. I understand the union is afraid they are being duped by not having access to all the information they need but the proposal from the NFL included more shared financial information. I suspect there would have been an out clause in the deal they union could have exercised just like the owners did if the deal wasn't working for them a couple years down the road. I think the union believes the courts are going to be more fair than the owners. However our national court system is filled with Bush I and II era appointments and the Supreme Court is decidedly pro-business. I'm not so sure the courts will consistently be on the players side. Maybe this Judge Doty will be but any decision he makes will be appealed higher to courts that are likely much more conservative and pro-owner/anti-union.

So you're suggesting that because a judge was appointed by the Bush administration that they won't be fair. What a load of crap. Typical liberal Democrat BS. Supreme court justices are supposed to be impartial. That is the nature of the position. All this politicizing of the Supreme Court is absolute nonsense. I firmly believe that Supreme Court justices are all fair. They may have personal views, but they look at each case on its merits. If the players have a case, they will win, if they don't, then they won't. Plain and simple.

[mattsox]

Hey brainiac...if people don't watch the games on TV...attend the games, buy the garb, purchase Sunday ticket, etc, etc...then the NFL folds. This is not rocket science.

 

Sounds good to me. I'm sick of all this BS. The league has turned to ****, the product on the field has suffered. I honestly hope they have a good lengthy lock out.

 

We got wars in the Middle east, Quakes in Japan and death of a living legend in Buffalo.

 

Maybe they can all stop really think about what really matters in life, instead of thinking about dollars and cents.

 

I don't give a crap if the league disbands. They got too big to fast and forgot what really matters most in life...

[Sisyphean Bills]

Like what other interests? Hanging out at the club or taking the family to Disney World?

 

Sorry to sound like a smartass... What are those other interests? Freeing them from what? Work? Supporting a family? You do realize that somebody has to buy those products (made by cheap labor) back?

 

Wow, just wow... So this is how it is justified in the minds of business... As a "right"...

 

That right is socially self-destructive.

It's called a euphemism.

 

From the working Joe's perspective, yes, being laid off isn't necessarily a great thing, hence the use of a euphemism. Still, this is reality for middle-class America. Businesses are doing this and it is even encouraged by our government. It is perfectly within their rights under the law to find cheaper labor.

 

There are plenty of "partners" (employees working for the man) out there that get downsized right out of jobs rather than receive stock and control over the company they once worked for. There are plenty of people that have taken pay cuts and not received any raises as well.