Ongoing CBA discussions

[Alvin Walton]

Chris Cooley - Happy fun loving American guy, gotta love him!

[44ever]

I think they should do away with preseason completely. Im all for 18 Game regular season.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by 44ever

I think they should do away with preseason completely. Im all for 18 Game regular season.

2 preseason games and 16 regular season games. I'm 100% against a 18 game schedule. The sport doesn't need to be that much harder on players longevity.

There is enough football on as is. Between college and pro, 16 pro games is fine.

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

2 preseason games and 16 regular season games. I'm 100% against a 18 game schedule. The sport doesn't need to be that much harder on players longevity.

There is enough football on as is. Between college and pro, 16 pro games is fine.

I'm just as big of an NFL fan as any and I agree with you on this.. NO need for 18 games

[Lotus]

46 games a season. Then 4 weeks of playoffs. Then two weeks vacation. Now there's a football year!

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Lotus

46 games a season. Then 4 weeks of playoffs. Then two weeks vacation. Now there's a football year!

Give the players what they want.... let them see the books, under the condition they agree to play a full year with 2 weeks of vacation time. lol.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

2 preseason games and 16 regular season games. I'm 100% against a 18 game schedule. The sport doesn't need to be that much harder on players longevity.

There is enough football on as is. Between college and pro, 16 pro games is fine.

and my arguement would be then allow the teams to have 10 or 20 more players on each team. That way they can carry more players in order to give more breaks during game play.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

and my arguement would be then allow the teams to have 10 or 20 more players on each team. That way they can carry more players in order to give more breaks during game play.

Which will drive player costs up even more so that the owners can complain yet again they are making 100 million a year as opposed to 150 million.

Good luck with that one.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by 44ever

I think they should do away with preseason completely. Im all for 18 Game regular season.

I totally agree with you. But... the evaluation of players would have to come from some sort of actual play so do they have scrimmages? Perhaps non hitting scrimmages.

[MTK]

10-20 extra players ain't happening

5-7 extra at the most

[SBXVII]

Ok, so I kinda had an "Aha" moment when I woke up.

On one side you have the owners who are claiming there is a loss in revenue partly due to the bad economy. I'm sure the owners are probably somewhat correct because fans don't have the money to purchase the expensive jerseys or purchase the expensive season passes. In some cases fans are turning in their season passes because they can't afford them anymore. I know the Redskins are somewhat in a different catagory due to the fact there has always been a waiting list and as soon as one fan turns in his passes another steps up to take his place, but there are other cities that I'm sure are not as well off as Washington. We fans have a tendency to look at what is around us or what we know. The Skins are close to us and they are one of the most profitable teams in the league so if we use them as an example we are blind to the worst markets out there.

So the owners want to take 1 bill off the top of the 9 bill the league makes to use towards revenue sharing, to help out the worst markets as well as using the money towards their stadiums.

The players know that getting a % of 8 bill is far less then getting a % of 9 bill. So they are requesting the owners show their books and if the owners can prove that there are teams struggling they will consider the 1 bill being taken off the top. Problem is they know the NFL is a money making machine between T.V. deals, commercials, advertising, seat cost for fans, and paraphernalia the NFL is getting more money every year. Honestly I'm still not quite sure how a % of 4 bill or a % of 4.5 bill effects the players who have signed contracts with set amounts of salary for each year but perhaps I'm just not the brightest crayon in the box. My understanding is the 4 bill or 4.5 bill goes towards a retirement fund for the retired players. I honestly don't know what else it goes towards. I thought at one point the players health insurance but I keep hearing about the owners have to pay for that up to a year after they are not playing.

Both sides I guess are making good arguements. Even we fans can't agree on which side is right or wrong and some of us are having a hard time deciding which side to lean towards. But in the grand scheme of things what about the fans? We've watched player salaries go up and up, we've watched ticket prices go up and up to off set the player salaries, new stadium costs, costs to upgrade the old stadiums and so forth. So I guess my question to the owners is "IF" you were to be given the 1 bill for revenue sharing would you agree to lower ticket prices by 5% and keep the price the same for the next 10 yrs? They already would have their money for the bad market teams and money to fix up their stadiums. Thats what they want the 1 bill for. Then it's all a matter of player salaries, coach's salaries, and extra personel such as secretaries and the like. So if the owners are not throwing $100 mill dollar contracts at players and doing their best to keep player salaries down then ticket prices should reflect that as well since the ticket prices went up to reflect players salaries.

To me if the owners are taking 1 bill off the top for their revenue sharing/stadiums and they are putting a Rookie salary in place, then amount saved from the Rookie salaries can off set the Vet salaries which enables ticket prices to either be lowered or stay the same for the next several years. If at all possible (which I know would not happen) lowering the ticket sales might enable the fans to keep their season passes and might enable more fans to purchase tickets to games who don't have season passes. What with people facing hard time and possible foreclosures on their homes I'm sure less fans are paying for or keeping their season passes which makes it harder for the owner to know in advance how many people will be at a game and how much money he has on average to spend.

Sorry for the long ramble. Just thought it would be interesting if the fans some how could get involved, hired an attorney to represent them and put pressure on both sides in regards to ticket prices.

[MTK]

SBXVII: you seem hung up on how a new CBA would impact current contracts, it wouldn't. But there are a ton of potential free agents sitting out there right now, and guys who will be impacted by a new CBA in the very near future.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

SBXVII: you seem hung up on how a new CBA would impact current contracts, it wouldn't. But there are a ton of potential free agents sitting out there right now, and guys who will be impacted by a new CBA in the very near future.

Definitly I am. Which I think you have provided the best example as to why I'm boggled about this whole thing.

But even if it effects future contracts I'm slightly boggled. Because I just don't see the owners looking at FA's and saying "Gee, I really would only like to pay the player 1 mill a year but because I have to meet my % of money going to the players I'll go ahead and pay him 2 mill. I'm sure it's probably similar to that though. Owners don't meet their 50% of their revenue going to the players then they could be fined or a law suit filed. I'm sure looking at the books would keep the owners in check. Maybe an independent 3rd party needs to have their salary paid by both the NFL and the NFLPA to look at the books, look at what each team is paying it's players to make sure the % is being met and to look at each teams claim of loss revenue and how much revenue. Then if an owner is claiming he needs to move to a more lucrative market the league can go to the 3rd party and ask if he's telling the truth with out giving out specific numbers.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Definitly I am. Which I think you have provided the best example as to why I'm boggled about this whole thing.

But even if it effects future contracts I'm slightly boggled. Because I just don't see the owners looking at FA's and saying "Gee, I really would only like to pay the player 1 mill a year but because I have to meet my % of money going to the players I'll go ahead and pay him 2 mill. I'm sure it's probably similar to that though. Owners don't meet their 50% of their revenue going to the players then they could be fined or a law suit filed. I'm sure looking at the books would keep the owners in check. Maybe an independent 3rd party needs to have their salary paid by both the NFL and the NFLPA to look at the books, look at what each team is paying it's players to make sure the % is being met and to look at each teams claim of loss revenue and how much revenue. Then if an owner is claiming he needs to move to a more lucrative market the league can go to the 3rd party and ask if he's telling the truth with out giving out specific numbers.

You're thinking way too hard about this.

You have to think about the % within the parameters of a salary floor and cap.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

You're thinking way too hard about this.

You have to think about the % within the parameters of a salary floor and cap.

Gotcha. But why should the players be concerned about a floor cap when the owners and players individually negotiate salary. Having a floor cap simply means the owners have to atleast spend that amount before they can use the rest for whatever they want. In other words no owner can have is % of monies to players below 50% or the rumored 59%. So my next question is what teams are sitting on the bubble of the 50% because if I'm not mistaken most teams are either close to the roof cap or just below it. which tells me there really is not an issue with teams not paying players. and if there was then I would presume the player can either take the offer extended to him by the team or go to another team or sit out because he doesn't think he's getting enough for his skills. Kinda like if your selling your house. You can be given 10 different offers but it it's not what you want you can take your house off the market.