Ongoing CBA discussions

[saden1]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Saden,

I said that I think the players could win every lawsuit they file, but still lose when the next CBA is written. The players are on very firm legal ground, in terms of antitrust law. The courts could rule the draft illegal. They could rule restricted free agency illegal. They could find the franchise tag illegal. They could find the salary cap/salary floor illegal.

After all those rulings for the players, the owners still could end up writing individual contracts that total less than the percentage of revenue that they are committed too via the CBA

What you don't realize is owners compete with each other for talent which implies costs control is lost!!!!!!! Not to mention the fact that unionization and CBA greatly benefits owners in small markets. A free-for-all system would be disastrous for most owners as is evident by their past desire to maintain a leash on free agency and rookie salaries.

It only takes a few owners to start dishing out big contracts and buy themselves championship before the rest of the owners revolt or take matters into their own hands by starting to shelling out big money too.


Bottom line, cost control is maintained in a fixed price system not in a free price system. Collectively players will never lose in a free-for-all free price system.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by saden1

What you don't realize is owners compete with each other for talent which implies costs control is lost!!!!!!! Not to mention the fact that unionization and CBA greatly benefits owners in small markets. A free-for-all system would be disastrous for most owners as is evident by their past desire to maintain a leash on free agency and rookie salaries.

It only takes a few owners to start dishing out big contracts and buy themselves championship before the rest of the owners revolt or take matters into their own hands by starting to shelling out big money too.


Bottom line, cost control is maintained in a fixed price system not in a free price system. Collectively players will never lose in a free-for-all free price system.

I do realize that. Heck that was the whole fear factor of the "Capless" year. But what I think they found out is that for every one megacontract they HAVE to write they can write multiple lowball contracts to make up their roster. Further an owner who doesn't want to pay megacontracts doesn't have to, so a Jerry Richardson or Bill Bidwell can pay well below what a salary floor would provide for the players.

I am not saying that this is the model I want to see, but I do think there are owners who are willing to bet that a free for all price war would still yield a % of revenue close to or below the current % they are forced to pay players under the now expired CBA. That in essence is why they opted out of the last CBA.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I do realize that. Heck that was the whole fear factor of the "Capless" year. But what I think they found out is that for every one megacontract they HAVE to write they can write multiple lowball contracts to make up their roster. Further an owner who doesn't want to pay megacontracts doesn't have to, so a Jerry Richardson or Bill Bidwell can pay well below what a salary floor would provide for the players.

I am not saying that this is the model I want to see, but I do think there are owners who are willing to bet that a free for all price war would still yield a % of revenue close to or below the current % they are forced to pay players under the now expired CBA. That in essence is why they opted out of the last CBA.

Agreed. I also think that owners can collude to engage in price-fixing better than some people seem to think.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I do realize that. Heck that was the whole fear factor of the "Capless" year. But what I think they found out is that for every one megacontract they HAVE to write they can write multiple lowball contracts to make up their roster. Further an owner who doesn't want to pay megacontracts doesn't have to, so a Jerry Richardson or Bill Bidwell can pay well below what a salary floor would provide for the players.

I am not saying that this is the model I want to see, but I do think there are owners who are willing to bet that a free for all price war would still yield a % of revenue close to or below the current % they are forced to pay players under the now expired CBA. That in essence is why they opted out of the last CBA.

In that scenario revenue sharing will be out the window and it will be like baseball. I can't imagine NFL owners except maybe big market teams wanting to model the league after the MLB. I remember Danny Boy being upset that the Bengals weren't spending his share of the pool money to compete not too long ago...I can't imagine him wanting to share any money with owners like that.