Could (should) NFL contracts be fully guaranteed and how?

[Rob's House]

23 hours ago, matter2003 said:

Looking at the crazy fullt guaranteed contracts in other sports its hard not to feel a little bad for them. Granted there are a lot more players on an NFL team but they also have the most revenue of any league too.

 

The NBA is getting outrageous...fringe players averaging 2.5 PPG are getting $8 million a year contracts due to having so much cap space and only 12 players on a team.

 

 

It's easy if you try.

15 hours ago, MURPHD6 said:

Different industries have different standards. The NFL is below industry standard. If your cool with massive wealth divides thats your perogative, but history shows that they aren't sustainable.

And your thinking is pretty typical and negative, in my opinion. My pay aint guaranteed so no one elses should be. Its siding with managment, really. I never side with management. I side with workers. Its how I roll. If a worker can get more money for his family, good for him.

Isn't Buffalo supposed to be a Blue Collar town?

So in other words we can discount your opinion because no matter the situation you're automatically going to pick your pre-determined side.

[billsfan89]

18 hours ago, mead107 said:

They are all over paid for playing a game.    

 

This has to be one of the most idiotic arguments of all time and really one that is just people virtue signaling and trying to smell their own farts for how morally superior they are because they think athletes and entertainers are overpaid and how we should be paying teachers and firefighters more. The players are the product that is producing billions of dollars in revenue. They are the talent in an entertainment product that produces 10 billion dollars of revenue a year. The players should get every dime they could from the owners because the players are the ones putting their bodies on the line and absorbing most of the risk. 

 

Unless you want the government to ban people spending money on entertainment products you are going to have entertainers that make a lot of money. Football players are no different. It's not as though if the players get paid less that money will go to teachers and construction workers. If the players got paid less they money just goes back into the owners and the leagues pocket. So stop with this whole "They are over paid for playing a game" meme. It's not taking money away from teachers and the elderly to pay these players, they are taking their fair cut from the owners. 

 

I always side with players over the owners as long as the players are being even somewhat reasonable. Certainly, in football it is always easier to side with the players given the massive risk. I find it stunning to see how many fans side with the billionaires over the players. 

Edited July 29, 2018 by billsfan89

[Nick the Greek]

If you are an NFL owner then no, you don’t want fully guaranteed contracts. Gotta do best for the bottom line. 

 

if you are the rep for the players union then yes, you absolutely want the guaranteed contracts. Gotta do best for the employees.

 

nothing like a good old fashioned labor dispute with the bosses vs the employees. I say pay the players. 

[Kirby Jackson]

There are ways to be creative in working around the cap too. Instead of the top 51 contracts counting against the cap why not the top 40? That would help protect those vet types that are taking a near minimum deal. If you guarantee that (up to vet minimum) and then don’t count those last 13 or so contracts against the cap it will protect those veteran players at the back of the roster. That would protect guys like John Hughes.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

16 hours ago, Augie said:

The answer to this question is simple: Marcel Dareus. 

 

...LOL...The Crisco Kid......Fat Albert II.......

[NoSaint]

1 hour ago, jr1 said:

"dead money" shouldn't count. just active 53 players

Welp- that wouldn’t be great for small market teams 

[billsfan89]

17 hours ago, mead107 said:

Most companies do not share the wealth.  Why should NFL be different.   Or other sports teams.  

How much money do you make doing curling?

 

GE did not guarantee my pay.  

 

 

GE guarantee's a lot of their top executives and talents pay. NFL players that make the 53 man roster are at the top 1% of what they do professionally. So unless you are an elite level talent at your profession where there is billions of dollars made directly off of your talent you can't really compare that to most people's jobs. The NFL shouldn't be different than any other company but any company would know not to low ball and degrade their product which also happens to be their labor force. Apple isn't going to lowball their best engineers because some middle management guy at GE doesn't get his pay guaranteed. 

 

You also can't compare curling to the NFL. What athletes get paid is heavily based off of what revenue is generated from the sport. TV contracts, tickets sales, licensing, sponsorships, merch etc. If curling produced multi-billion dollar TV deals then yeah curlers should unionize to get their pay. The NFL should be different based off of how much revenue they produce from their product which is also their labor force. 

 

As another poster pointed out there is nothing that prevents a fully guaranteed contract in the CBA but the question is do you avoid holdouts by simply having the only types of contracts be a guaranteed one? If you did that I think you would also only see teams giving out 1-3 year deals for non-QB players (With 3 year deals being very rare.) I wouldn't have a problem with it. Players get the safety of 2-3 years of pay while retaining massive flexibility (By the time they are 28/29 they have a shot at a 2nd big guaranteed deal.) I wouldn't have an issue with shorter fully guaranteed contracts. 

[mead107]

2 hours ago, billsfan89 said:

 

GE guarantee's a lot of their top executives and talents pay. NFL players that make the 53 man roster are at the top 1% of what they do professionally. So unless you are an elite level talent at your profession where there is billions of dollars made directly off of your talent you can't really compare that to most people's jobs. The NFL shouldn't be different than any other company but any company would know not to low ball and degrade their product which also happens to be their labor force. Apple isn't going to lowball their best engineers because some middle management guy at GE doesn't get his pay guaranteed. 

 

You also can't compare curling to the NFL. What athletes get paid is heavily based off of what revenue is generated from the sport. TV contracts, tickets sales, licensing, sponsorships, merch etc. If curling produced multi-billion dollar TV deals then yeah curlers should unionize to get their pay. The NFL should be different based off of how much revenue they produce from their product which is also their labor force. 

 

As another poster pointed out there is nothing that prevents a fully guaranteed contract in the CBA but the question is do you avoid holdouts by simply having the only types of contracts be a guaranteed one? If you did that I think you would also only see teams giving out 1-3 year deals for non-QB players (With 3 year deals being very rare.) I wouldn't have a problem with it. Players get the safety of 2-3 years of pay while retaining massive flexibility (By the time they are 28/29 they have a shot at a 2nd big guaranteed deal.) I wouldn't have an issue with shorter fully guaranteed contracts. 

I see nothing for any executive at Ge that has salary guarantees for 4 years.  Some get a package when the are let go.  

 

Why should some one that plays a game to entertain people get 4 years of guaranteed money.

You start the season and get hurt then I’m ok with giving him his yearly salary. Take out an insurance policy.  

[mannc]

On 7/28/2018 at 6:07 AM, plenzmd1 said:

#1) if the players would act together and not sign deals unless they were guaranteed, you would have guaranteed contracts.

 

Perhaps they could even form a union?

[Dr.Sack]

A fully guaranteed contract comes with less money overall. The additional risk must be measured. 

[xxxxxxxx]

7 hours ago, Rob's House said:

It's easy if you try.

So in other words we can discount your opinion because no matter the situation you're automatically going to pick your pre-determined side.

If that side is opposite Jerry Jones then yes. If you want to agree with Jerry Jones than go for it.

Edited July 29, 2018 by MURPHD6

[billsfan89]

2 hours ago, mead107 said:

I see nothing for any executive at Ge that has salary guarantees for 4 years.  Some get a package when the are let go.  

 

Why should some one that plays a game to entertain people get 4 years of guaranteed money.

You start the season and get hurt then I’m ok with giving him his yearly salary. Take out an insurance policy.  

3

 

CEO's and super high-level executives and talents get years of guaranteed money, I don't know if it is 4 years worth or not I am not privy to their compensation contracts but high-end talent always gets guaranteed money. Because if you are integral to the running of an organization or producing the product a company will give you guaranteed money to be paid out to some degree, because if you are that good at your job some other competing company will give you that type of deal to acquire your talents. The "Golden Parachute" term comes from companies having to buyout CEO's and top executives of the remaining months or years on their contracts. I know for a fact that the commissioners of the NFL and other sports leagues are on deals that range above 4 years worth of guaranteed money so it must be common at some level. 

 

"Why should someone that plays a game to entertain people get 4 years of guaranteed money?"

Because they are elite level entertainers responsible for a product that produces tens of billions of dollars a year. For one I did not say that they should get 4 years of guaranteed money unless it is a QB. I would cap contract length at 3 years for non-QB's and 4 for QB's but all deals are guaranteed unless you are making a minimum deal and don't make the 53 man roster. That would end holdouts as you wouldn't have players unsure of their future and both sides would be forced to honor the deal. The shorter length of deals would also limit the risk to teams. 

 

It also doesn't matter what you think someone should get paid. If they produce value they should be compensated accordingly. The NFL players are literally the product the owners sell if you think they are overpaid for their value to society or some nonsense I can't argue with you, but the notion that if you paid athletes less that money wouldn't just end up in the owner's pockets is silly. As though the reason we can't pay teachers more is that NFL players need their big payday. By saying NFL players are overpaid you are saying 1 of 2 things, the owners who are all billionaires should get more money or that the government should tax everyone's entertainment dollars and keep money away from the players and owners so that they can pay that out to teachers or whoever you think really deserves it. 

 

I am not mandating the government step in and force the NFL to handout guaranteed deals. But I think if the NFL players union were to get shorter length but fully guaranteed deals that it would actually be mutually beneficial to both sides since you wouldn't have holdouts and owners would have less year of money to pay out. 

[Green Lightning]

No guarantees in life. I also prefer incentives. 

[mead107]

Still way over paid 

[billsfan89]

4 minutes ago, mead107 said:

Still way over paid 

 

So the poor owners are underpaid. 

[Teddy KGB]

40 minutes ago, MURPHD6 said:

If that side is opposite Jerry Jones then yes. If you want to agree with Jerry Jones than go for it.

 

Yea but look at your guy T’cantpass Taylor 

 

2 years 30 million.    That’s a robbery that would make Butch Cassidy proud.  

 

 

[mead107]

6 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

So the poor owners are underpaid. 

You are never going to change my mind.  

 

At some point people will not be able to afford to go to games.   

Owners are greedy. 

[billsfan89]

6 minutes ago, mead107 said:

You are never going to change my mind.  

 

At some point people will not be able to afford to go to games.   

Owners are greedy. 

 

Owners are greedy and there will for sure be a saturation point, I just think it is dishonest when looking at the facts to think that the players salaries are keeping the ticket prices high. The owners are charging those outrageous prices because people pay. They would pay the players less if they could and charge more if they could. The owners are not passing savings onto the fans. 

 

But as long as there is a lot of money being made and produced by the NFL the players deserve their share of that revenue. They aren't overpaid because they are simply getting their share of the value they produce. I think it is just silly to put out the blanket statement of "They are overpaid" without thinking through the consequences of what that statement means. 

 

The owners are going to be greedy regardless of what the players get paid. Do you honestly think if the players got paid less then the owners would pass those savings onto the fans? No the owners would just make more money. I would rather the money that is being paid by the NFL fans go to the players that are hurting their bodies and working themselves into peak physical condition than into the owner's pockets. 

 

So you can't really act like the money being paid to pro-athletes is being taken out of the hands of the fans or other people like teachers and construction workers. The players are just getting the share of money that the owners make off of them. 

[Just Joshin']

On 7/28/2018 at 5:43 PM, Kirby Jackson said:

So, you don’t think that the players should make half of the money generated by the league? They aren’t just employees; they are the assets. If you were to compare them to your job the players are closer to the cars than they are the employees. They ARE what people pay for. The league generates billions of dollars selling the talents of the players. It’s the same reason that the movie industry hires A list actors. Better talent drives better revenues and they are paid commensurate with that. 

 

There IS no cash for the owners without the players. If you replaced the top talent in the world with replacement players you’d have the XFL. If you think that the owners would make 1/2 as much money with that kind of talent then it would be a could deal for them. Of course that notion is absurd. The revenue comes from the players. 

 

The whole idea that they are “overpaid” is asinine. The league generated $8B in TV revenue last year!! That’s $255M per team JUST from the TV deal!! If you think that the $177M salary cap is too much we disagree. There are a ton of other revenue streams as well. The players salaries are not out of line at all. 

First, I agree that the players should get as much as they can negotiate.  

 

In your analysis you reference other revenue streams but ignore the other costs.  The owners do make money but they would have made more in the stock market.

 

If this was so easy, why do the players not start their own league and keep 100% of the revenue? If they had the guts to do this I would support.  Agree to no contracts that run past the end of the CBA and form the PFA - Players Football League.

[Kirby Jackson]

4 minutes ago, Dalton said:

First, I agree that the players should get as much as they can negotiate.  

 

In your analysis you reference other revenue streams but ignore the other costs.  The owners do make money but they would have made more in the stock market.

 

If this was so easy, why do the players not start their own league and keep 100% of the revenue? If they had the guts to do this I would support.  Agree to no contracts that run past the end of the CBA and form the PFA - Players Football League.

The league and players split the revenues. The owners pick up the other expenses (which are a fraction of their half of the revenue).

 

Additionally, the owners have the luxury of owning an asset that grows like no other asset. They can take years and years and years of massive profits and then sell the team for a huge profit. 

 

The players wont start their own league because the risk isn’t worth it. It’s the same reason someone buys a McDonald’s instead of Jim’s burgers. The brand has immense value.