My first and final take

[Virgil]

I've done my best to stay out of the NFL Lockout hoopla as I'm convinced that we'll never really know what's going on. But, I think I've seen enough to know that I'm sick of the Union. The representing players recently said that they want to negotiate again, but without the owners rep and Goodell. For me, and I don't know why, but this is the last straw for me.

 

I'm sure I'll take some criticism for this but, these guys are employees! That's it. Yes, they are great players and give us a good product, but they aren't owed a damn thing.

 

Listen, I was a guy that always believed that Jordan should have gotten all the money in the world as he sold out every arena he played at. So, i'm all about giving players money for what they attract. How you figure that number out with a whole team of players, I don't know. But here is what I do know.

 

~Football is a contact sport. It's not a surprise to anyone and it's logical that people will get hurt. But no one puts a gun to these guys heads to play. No, they choose this life. Go to college for it. Usually don't get a worthwhile degree, and plan their life around making it to the NFL.

 

~Working for any organization is a priviledge, not a right. These guys do not have to play. No one cornered them into this.

 

~The owners have all the liability. They fronted the money to have these teams, so like baseball, they should have the right to decide on how much profit the want to retain. If the players don't like it, then don't play for that team or find another job.

 

If the players really want to show me something, then how about the guys getting 10+ million a year donating money to the guys who aren't making as much and hurting due to the lockout. They won't, cause they are greedy too.

 

I know there is a lot more to all of this. I want less preseason games or making it not mandatory for season ticket holders to have buy tickets to irrelevant games. There needs to be a rookie cap. There should be benefits for players who play a minimum 5 years. And there should be a balance in the guarenteed contracts.

 

I don't know. I'm rambling. But I do know that if I fronted all this money and gave these guys the opportunity I did, I'd be damned if I was going to let them tell me how much I have to pay them. And yes, they say they want to honor the current deal, but the current deal pays them 58% of total earnings. They don't have to pay for stadiums and other vendors. And, they get endorsements. I'm sorry, that's crap. Shame on the owners for agreeing to it a few years back. High five to Ralph for seeing it coming. And that is all.

 

Flame away

[Hplarrm]

If the players don't like it, then don't play for that team or find another job.

 

 

Rather than flame away, I am one who definitely fully agrees with the above statement.

 

Thus I think:

 

1. Led by the same high profile players who filed suit against the NFL (and whom are certainly going to make huge dollars to play football any virtually any case) I would open bidding by the networks for a new league.

 

The new league is actually more than likely fail after a few seasons like the USFL or WFL, or perhaps the significantly smaller case will happen like with the AFL who essentially became recognized full partners in the NFL) but success or failure of this league is not the point. The point in all these cases is that they raised salaries for the players and increased the total membership of the players union.

 

The formation of the NEWFL featuring high profile players like Manning, Brees, Brady and whatever other stars initially to stoke bidding for the games would generate profits even though smaller than the NFL would not have to be split 60/40 with the owners and generate huge cash gains for these stars.

 

2. The NEWFL in addition to these highly paid stars would also need a truckload of average players and special teamers who would get lesser though still enormous wealth from the NEWFL.

 

3. The NFLPA would immediately recertify itself as the bargaining agent for NFL players as well as push to be named managing operator for the NEWFL. The first reaction of various juvenile folk will be that the NFL should reject the MFLPA as the bargaining agent. However, this is not the employers choice if players decide whoever will represent them. Further, any effort to reject the players chosen representative would result in the NFL conspiring against the rights of individual if it attempts to do things inherent in the draft like barring the ability of adults to sign contracts or simply force individuals to negotiate with one and only one employer in the industry.

 

4. The NEWFLPA can choose among several options for managing the teams such as:

 

A. My personal favorite is to have the 16 or less teams in the NEWFL be owned by the people of municipalities such as the model used by the Green Bay Packers for their successful business on field and off.

B. See if there are enough Pagulas, Golisanos, or rich folk overseas (Osana bin Laden no but some Saudis maybe yes) who are willing to sign something like the current CBA,

C. It might end up being a little rollerball like in terms of corporate ownership but right now we have a job crisis because tons of corporations are sitting on cash rather than investing.

D. Something else I have not thought of yet.

 

5. The goal of this whole exercise is not to kill the NFL but simply force them to be actual buisnessfolk who compete in the good ol American capitalist system. Even chopped down by many high profile stars and a bunch of ST and average players jumping ship you want the NFK to remain strong enough to compete with the NEWFL and drive up salaries. The players who remain with the NFL and in fact the NFL itself is pretty desperately going to need a partnership with the NFLPA to sort and negotiate through the leftover and new TV contracts, stadium deals, etc.

 

While this new world is gonna be a tough one for the Bills, actually its previously developed 45,000+ fan base, deals and relationships with local companies and connections to the history of the A and NFL become significant assets (or at worse the basis for the NFL to try to defend the Toronto eyeballs with the Buf-Tor Bills.

 

I agree with you completely that this is a free country and may the best person win with any entertainment business. I think neither the owners nor the players are owed or have a right to jack beyond what they contractually agreed to,

 

I say bring on the replacement owners. The game will be better for it!

[K Gun Special]

I've done my best to stay out of the NFL Lockout hoopla as I'm convinced that we'll never really know what's going on. But, I think I've seen enough to know that I'm sick of the Union. The representing players recently said that they want to negotiate again, but without the owners rep and Goodell. For me, and I don't know why, but this is the last straw for me.

 

I'm sure I'll take some criticism for this but, these guys are employees! That's it. Yes, they are great players and give us a good product, but they aren't owed a damn thing.

 

Listen, I was a guy that always believed that Jordan should have gotten all the money in the world as he sold out every arena he played at. So, i'm all about giving players money for what they attract. How you figure that number out with a whole team of players, I don't know. But here is what I do know.

 

~Football is a contact sport. It's not a surprise to anyone and it's logical that people will get hurt. But no one puts a gun to these guys heads to play. No, they choose this life. Go to college for it. Usually don't get a worthwhile degree, and plan their life around making it to the NFL.

 

~Working for any organization is a priviledge, not a right. These guys do not have to play. No one cornered them into this.

 

~The owners have all the liability. They fronted the money to have these teams, so like baseball, they should have the right to decide on how much profit the want to retain. If the players don't like it, then don't play for that team or find another job.

 

If the players really want to show me something, then how about the guys getting 10+ million a year donating money to the guys who aren't making as much and hurting due to the lockout. They won't, cause they are greedy too.

 

I know there is a lot more to all of this. I want less preseason games or making it not mandatory for season ticket holders to have buy tickets to irrelevant games. There needs to be a rookie cap. There should be benefits for players who play a minimum 5 years. And there should be a balance in the guarenteed contracts.

 

I don't know. I'm rambling. But I do know that if I fronted all this money and gave these guys the opportunity I did, I'd be damned if I was going to let them tell me how much I have to pay them. And yes, they say they want to honor the current deal, but the current deal pays them 58% of total earnings. They don't have to pay for stadiums and other vendors. And, they get endorsements. I'm sorry, that's crap. Shame on the owners for agreeing to it a few years back. High five to Ralph for seeing it coming. And that is all.

 

Flame away

 

 

Under the current deal the owners get 1 billion for stadiums etc, you know stadiums that are financed by us the taxpayers. Even Jerry Jones took public money and taxes were raised around dallas.

 

There is virtually no risk involved with owning an NFL franchise. Its a profit machine. and its employees cant be compared to anything else.

 

you say screw the players but without them you have no product and cant make money.

[Thud]

Hplarm is a crazy talker.

[spartacus]

Rather than flame away, I am one who definitely fully agrees with the above statement.

 

Thus I think:

 

1. Led by the same high profile players who filed suit against the NFL (and whom are certainly going to make huge dollars to play football any virtually any case) I would open bidding by the networks for a new league.

 

The new league is actually more than likely fail after a few seasons like the USFL or WFL, or perhaps the significantly smaller case will happen like with the AFL who essentially became recognized full partners in the NFL) but success or failure of this league is not the point. The point in all these cases is that they raised salaries for the players and increased the total membership of the players union.

 

The formation of the NEWFL featuring high profile players like Manning, Brees, Brady and whatever other stars initially to stoke bidding for the games would generate profits even though smaller than the NFL would not have to be split 60/40 with the owners and generate huge cash gains for these stars.

 

2. The NEWFL in addition to these highly paid stars would also need a truckload of average players and special teamers who would get lesser though still enormous wealth from the NEWFL.

 

3. The NFLPA would immediately recertify itself as the bargaining agent for NFL players as well as push to be named managing operator for the NEWFL. The first reaction of various juvenile folk will be that the NFL should reject the MFLPA as the bargaining agent. However, this is not the employers choice if players decide whoever will represent them. Further, any effort to reject the players chosen representative would result in the NFL conspiring against the rights of individual if it attempts to do things inherent in the draft like barring the ability of adults to sign contracts or simply force individuals to negotiate with one and only one employer in the industry.

 

4. The NEWFLPA can choose among several options for managing the teams such as:

 

A. My personal favorite is to have the 16 or less teams in the NEWFL be owned by the people of municipalities such as the model used by the Green Bay Packers for their successful business on field and off.

B. See if there are enough Pagulas, Golisanos, or rich folk overseas (Osana bin Laden no but some Saudis maybe yes) who are willing to sign something like the current CBA,

C. It might end up being a little rollerball like in terms of corporate ownership but right now we have a job crisis because tons of corporations are sitting on cash rather than investing.

D. Something else I have not thought of yet.

 

5. The goal of this whole exercise is not to kill the NFL but simply force them to be actual buisnessfolk who compete in the good ol American capitalist system. Even chopped down by many high profile stars and a bunch of ST and average players jumping ship you want the NFK to remain strong enough to compete with the NEWFL and drive up salaries. The players who remain with the NFL and in fact the NFL itself is pretty desperately going to need a partnership with the NFLPA to sort and negotiate through the leftover and new TV contracts, stadium deals, etc.

 

While this new world is gonna be a tough one for the Bills, actually its previously developed 45,000+ fan base, deals and relationships with local companies and connections to the history of the A and NFL become significant assets (or at worse the basis for the NFL to try to defend the Toronto eyeballs with the Buf-Tor Bills.

 

I agree with you completely that this is a free country and may the best person win with any entertainment business. I think neither the owners nor the players are owed or have a right to jack beyond what they contractually agreed to,

 

I say bring on the replacement owners. The game will be better for it!

 

if the players want to back up all of the rhetoric about they ARE the game - then the players should finance their own league. Avoid all outside investors.

 

Anyone that wants to play has to buy stock in the team they will play for. In addition to financing the venture, this would greatly cut down the mercenary mindset of the players.

 

 

The big name highly paid guys get to own the most stock and take the most risk (which I don't believe there will be any since this is professional football afterall where the franchise values always go up)

 

 

 

 

 

[BillsBackersChicago]

Under the current deal the owners get 1 billion for stadiums etc, you know stadiums that are financed by us the taxpayers. Even Jerry Jones took public money and taxes were raised around dallas.

 

There is virtually no risk involved with owning an NFL franchise. Its a profit machine. and its employees cant be compared to anything else.

 

you say screw the players but without them you have no product and cant make money.

 

 

I respectfully disagree.

 

Any time you put up almost a billion dollars to buy a franchise, you are exposing yourself to MAJOR risk. That money could be invested elsewhere and possibly draw better profits in various investment opportunities, especially given the large amount of upfront liquid asset being used. If buying any NFL franchises was such an amazing investment opportunity, there would be a much longer line of people asking to buy the bills while promising to keep them in Buffalo if thats want Ralph needs to sell. Instead, Jimbo is going door to door to raise enough money to be able to buy the team.

 

Second, Without THESE players, we can easily have a product, probably a very good one. Anyone that thinks we can't sell without the current crop of superstars in the NFL has not watched how much money the NCAA is making with college ball. We will develop NEW superstars with the players who are willing to play by the league's rules, rules which will STILL allow them to become world famous millionaires. The NFL would make plenty of money without these players: there's a whole country full of excellent college players who would (and have) given their life to get a part of the NFL pie, no matter what the "current" CBA rules are.

 

Anyways, just my opinion.

 

I am going to buy the bills... My current offer?: 14 Jim's Steakout Subs... but here's the kicker... I throw in free hot sauce!!!

 

think ralph will go for it?

[T master]

Unions in this country started out as a good thing but as usual in America turned into mostly crap !!! I agree that this is mostly greed motivated & say put these guys out toting cinder blocks or bricks at a construction sight during the off season as their off season conditioning & see if they change their tune .

 

They have all just forgot what a blessing it is to PLAY A GAME FOR A LIVING !!!!

[EastRochBillsfan]

I've done my best to stay out of the NFL Lockout hoopla as I'm convinced that we'll never really know what's going on. But, I think I've seen enough to know that I'm sick of the Union. The representing players recently said that they want to negotiate again, but without the owners rep and Goodell. For me, and I don't know why, but this is the last straw for me.

 

I'm sure I'll take some criticism for this but, these guys are employees! That's it. Yes, they are great players and give us a good product, but they aren't owed a damn thing.

 

Listen, I was a guy that always believed that Jordan should have gotten all the money in the world as he sold out every arena he played at. So, i'm all about giving players money for what they attract. How you figure that number out with a whole team of players, I don't know. But here is what I do know.

 

~Football is a contact sport. It's not a surprise to anyone and it's logical that people will get hurt. But no one puts a gun to these guys heads to play. No, they choose this life. Go to college for it. Usually don't get a worthwhile degree, and plan their life around making it to the NFL.

 

~Working for any organization is a priviledge, not a right. These guys do not have to play. No one cornered them into this.

 

~The owners have all the liability. They fronted the money to have these teams, so like baseball, they should have the right to decide on how much profit the want to retain. If the players don't like it, then don't play for that team or find another job.

 

If the players really want to show me something, then how about the guys getting 10+ million a year donating money to the guys who aren't making as much and hurting due to the lockout. They won't, cause they are greedy too.

 

I know there is a lot more to all of this. I want less preseason games or making it not mandatory for season ticket holders to have buy tickets to irrelevant games. There needs to be a rookie cap. There should be benefits for players who play a minimum 5 years. And there should be a balance in the guarenteed contracts.

 

I don't know. I'm rambling. But I do know that if I fronted all this money and gave these guys the opportunity I did, I'd be damned if I was going to let them tell me how much I have to pay them. And yes, they say they want to honor the current deal, but the current deal pays them 58% of total earnings. They don't have to pay for stadiums and other vendors. And, they get endorsements. I'm sorry, that's crap. Shame on the owners for agreeing to it a few years back. High five to Ralph for seeing it coming. And that is all.

 

Flame away

I totally agree with you. I'm sure the players have some valid points but the bottom line is that they work for the nfl and they make a crapload of money as it is. Most people can't demand to their employer that they want more money. If they don't like it, go find some other work. I just can't side with the players on this one.

 

Hplarm is a crazy talker.

I couldn't even get through the whole thing. was there a point?

[K Gun Special]

I respectfully disagree.

 

Any time you put up almost a billion dollars to buy a franchise, you are exposing yourself to MAJOR risk. That money could be invested elsewhere and possibly draw better profits in various investment opportunities, especially given the large amount of upfront liquid asset being used. If buying any NFL franchises was such an amazing investment opportunity, there would be a much longer line of people asking to buy the bills while promising to keep them in Buffalo if thats want Ralph needs to sell. Instead, Jimbo is going door to door to raise enough money to be able to buy the team.

 

Second, Without THESE players, we can easily have a product, probably a very good one. Anyone that thinks we can't sell without the current crop of superstars in the NFL has not watched how much money the NCAA is making with college ball. We will develop NEW superstars with the players who are willing to play by the league's rules, rules which will STILL allow them to become world famous millionaires. The NFL would make plenty of money without these players: there's a whole country full of excellent college players who would (and have) given their life to get a part of the NFL pie, no matter what the "current" CBA rules are.

 

Anyways, just my opinion.

 

I am going to buy the bills... My current offer?: 14 Jim's Steakout Subs... but here's the kicker... I throw in free hot sauce!!!

 

think ralph will go for it?

 

 

Those are two different animals. Someone would gladly purchase the Bills its whether or not to keep them here. A new owner may want to move the team to make MORE money on the investment.

 

There is virtually no risk in buying an NFL franchise, No one has ever gone bankrupt owning a team. The comparison to other investments isnt a true one and is more of a strawman argument. Other low risk investments offer less in return.

 

The owners wont turn over financials because inevitably it would become public and piss off the fans. Btw, the info would be disclosed so you would know how much teams were making but the identities would be withheld.

 

If you honestly think they could just replace the top talent in the world you are mistaken. Does anyone want to see the two worst teams in the league that lack star talent? no the ticket sales and tv ratings show that.

 

You cannot compare it to the college game either, its a different game and a different fan.

[Sisyphean Bills]

One could say that the product is entertainment in the form of a football game. Do you go to watch a particular player, or do you watch the game? Most of the fans seem to be watching the action and not watching Ryan Fitzbeard sit on the bench when the defense is on the field, no? One could also argue that the players are a replaceable part of the equation. Roughly 5-10% of the jobs in the NFL are turned over every year and the average player's career is between 2 and 3 seasons. One could argue that the long-term health of the NFL and protecting future players interests is precisely the opposite of bringing antitrust litigation into the mix, which could have unforeseen consequences, but rather to give money back to the owners so they can invest it in the NFL and bridge financially rocky times. On the other hand, Tom Brady needs more money so he can go to the barber shop once in a while.

[K Gun Special]

Its very much entertainment.

 

The NFL is not like other businesses, there is no NFL without the product, the players are the product. Why do primetime matchups on TV have commericals touting elite players?? because no one cares? because these guys are interchangeable parts?

 

Why do players get huge endorsement deals? because he can be replaced with a scrub from college? no, bc they are the very best at what they do and fans will shell out $$ to see that player.

 

The NFL isnt losing money, and the players arent asking for more money. The owners are.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Its very much entertainment.

 

The NFL is not like other businesses, there is no NFL without the product, the players are the product. Why do primetime matchups on TV have commericals touting elite players??

Who does the touting?

because no one cares? because these guys are interchangeable parts?

 

Why do players get huge endorsement deals? because he can be replaced with a scrub from college? no, bc they are the very best at what they do and fans will shell out $$ to see that player.

 

Obviously, there are stars and many fans focus on those players. Still is seems kind of weak in a way.

 

Did you buy a Chrysler because Lee Iacocca's face was on your TV? Was he the product? Did those commercials make Tim Couch a better QB that people shelled out $$ to see?

 

Still the cold hard fact is that the vast majority of the players in the NFL are interchangeable parts and are just taking their turn in the revolving door.

 

The NFL isnt losing money, and the players arent asking for more money. The owners are.

Interesting statement. The NFL salary cap has increased each and every year. What the players are actually asking for is that the pay hike they believe they should get be given.

 

Like always, both sides want more money.

[Damian]

The salary cap goes up every year because it is tied to revenues. If revenues were going down, the cap would go down too. The cap started in '94 at $34.6 million, in 2009 it was $128 million. This tells me that the NFL has become increasingly profitable every year (at least since '94).

[K Gun Special]

Who does the touting?

 

 

Obviously, there are stars and many fans focus on those players. Still is seems kind of weak in a way.

 

Did you buy a Chrysler because Lee Iacocca's face was on your TV? Was he the product? Did those commercials make Tim Couch a better QB that people shelled out $$ to see?

 

Still the cold hard fact is that the vast majority of the players in the NFL are interchangeable parts and are just taking their turn in the revolving door.

 

Interesting statement. The NFL salary cap has increased each and every year. What the players are actually asking for is that the pay hike they believe they should get be given.

 

Like always, both sides want more money.

 

The players arent asking for more money. The cap is tied to revenues and when that goes up so does the cap. what pay hike are the players asking for?

 

Teams make their money on TV contracts and stadium sales (stuff sold in them) .... this has much more to do with the non-interchangeable players. Fans buy jerseys of their fav players who aren't likely to be interchangeable. People watch TV games with the biggest stars.

 

You cant compare the business of the NFL to anything other than another pro sports business. Buying a car is a flawed comparison im not sure why you chose it.

 

If the Bills had the #1 overall pick this year and the best QB prospect ever was their choice, fans would flock to buy jerseys tickets and watch him on TV, hence increasing revenue.

[Spiderweb]

Jeez......even Clayton is now pointing out that the owners offer numbers simply don't add up. No matter how you slice it, the owners are demanding serious give backs. Is there room to make a deal (and don't be jealous because players make more than you)?

 

This isn't a matter where the players are asking for more. But if owners do, then that's OK?

 

Clayton...numbers.

[Sisyphean Bills]

The players arent asking for more money. The cap is tied to revenues and when that goes up so does the cap. what pay hike are the players asking for?

 

Teams make their money on TV contracts and stadium sales (stuff sold in them) .... this has much more to do with the non-interchangeable players. Fans buy jerseys of their fav players who aren't likely to be interchangeable. People watch TV games with the biggest stars.

 

You cant compare the business of the NFL to anything other than another pro sports business. Buying a car is a flawed comparison im not sure why you chose it.

 

If the Bills had the #1 overall pick this year and the best QB prospect ever was their choice, fans would flock to buy jerseys tickets and watch him on TV, hence increasing revenue.

The union's stance that they are not going to take a dime less than they would've under the old agreement means precisely that they won't take a dime less than the increase they were due under a contract that is no longer in force. That increase constitutes more real money, semantics quibbling aside. (BTW, it's understandable that they feel they deserve a raise.)

 

I do not watch football to "watch the biggest stars." So, that argument may be true for other fans, but not me. Of course, I've been watching football longer than many here have been alive, so that may have something to do with it.

 

The NFL is comparable to other entertainment businesses, such as Hollywood, however. We've all seen star actors that believe their fame transcends their business and makes them untouchable; they believe that they personally are the reason a movie does well at the box office, etc. Of course, if no one had ever written the great script, had ever believed in them, had ever given them the job, had ever poured millions into the movie and advertising, then the star doesn't exist. Their claim to innate fame is immaterial and controvertible.

 

It wasn't comparing buying a car to watching football. I was knocking the legs out from under your apparently backwards claim that because an advertiser uses a football player in a commercial, fans want to watch the games. It's the other way around. Fans watch the games. Thus, advertisers pay to advertise their wares in front of those viewers. Further, some percentage of those advertisers may choose to use a football player in their ad in the hopes of resonating their product with the viewer. Even the NFL Network spots that feature star players, coaches, etc. saying mind-numbing simplicities such as "This is the NFL," are pushing the product of the NFL and NFL Network and are not truly a vehicle to sell jerseys or give Peyton Manning a little more face time.

 

Do you know how much revenue, as a percentage of the overall gross, is tied to jersey sales? It seems like an anthem, but it's significance is highly dubious.

 

Thanks for the discussion, KGS. We'll just have to agree to disagree, I guess.

[Delete This Account]

it all comes down to "fair share."

and when the numbers we're talking about add up to $8.8 billion (give or take a couple of hundred thousand), fair is a tough nut to get your arms around.

 

and i don't buy this "they're playing for the love of the game." i love my job. i love it even more that i can make a good living out of it.

sure, i don't make a million. but i don't work in a business in which people make millions.

i do hope i get my fair share -- though i'd like a little more. who wouldn't?

 

players, as employees, are no different. and they do know that people spend billions on the product they deliver. the owners know this, too, because they are making millions off of this game every year.

 

i don't begrudge players getting what they can. i don't begrudge owners for trying to get the most they can.

was the last deal tilted away from the owners? sure.

as much as they're saying? probably not.

 

trouble is, they agreed to it.

 

jw