CBA issues

[Vegasdogg]

Originally Posted by Brown Warrior

It's a partnership, whether they like it or not. Just like movies are funded by studios but don't exist without filmmakers' and actors' talents... football doesn't exist without the players. The plantation owner and sharecropper model, or Feudal System model... they just don't apply, and for good reason.

Exactly. Hollywood is a very good example. Shit, Tom Hanks can make $60M on 2-3 new movies alone, and that does not include rights to movies he has already made. Why? Because he has talents many people do not. Football players are just as unique and their talent just as scarce. I can see a meeting of the minds over this since right now it is just money and compensation. I do not think it really needed to go to litigation - the owners do NOT want this since they have a very poor record in the courts - but the players really want to see the books and discovery may allow this to happen.

[Flugel]

Originally Posted by Vegasdogg

Tom, I don't want to insult you so let me say this is a serious question: Have you gotten any information from any source besides Goodell. I suppose you have since you're pretty on the ball.

You're saying giving up 1/2 should start negotiations. Maybe you don't know this but the owners offered to shave the amount three different times, and from what I understand the owners last offer was $185M more taken off the top, and the players countered with $535M over 5 years of the CBA. At this point the owners would not budge, and the players said ok, let us see the numbers. Let us see the books.

What some people here don't understand is this is not like you and your boss arguing over pay raises or overtime, or any shit that does not apply to players. This is about the financial rights of players in this league who have a stake in all things with an NFL logo.

So please someone tell me how the owners can ask the players to give BACK money TO the owners in an age of unparalleled and unprecedented prosperity and growth. And then tell me how the guys representing the players can actually agree to this without seeing the numbers on the books.

You can all wag your finger at the greedy players who are not sitting their and taking it on the chin from the "broke" owners, but the fact is maybe some of you do not understand revenue sharing and the bargaining that takes place. This is not public workers in Wisconsin.

.

Veg,
The economy being what it is today is the WRONG time to be in this thing. Sorry man. And since Goodell IS the NFL Commissioner - I'm going to assume he's LESS apt to be deceitful with info provided. I KNOW how politics works at presenting convenient truths and concealing inconvenient truths. All you gotta do is watch 1 political campaign trashing the other side based off partial truths to GET it. It sounds to me like you and Shep have read a compelling arguement favoring the owners. You're telling me if I discount Goodell and take the same side you took that I now have enough info? Coem on.

I don't have sympathy and when Peyton Manning is out-earning BOTH Dakotas while Tom Brady outearns the sum of total populations of Iowa, Wyoming and freakin Nebraska combined. Meanwhile I'm witnessing a guy like Albert Haynesworth making 100 million $ resisting what his supervisor wants of him to better the TEAM.

If you guys want to feel bad for people getting boned for retirement, healthcare and/or disability benefits - feel bad for the war vets in this country.

FWIW, have you read how proactive the players union has been all along with the benefits? Have they had a focus group or commission in tact involving agents to help players prepare for life after football or serious injury? They're REALLY playing this disability shit up all of a sudden. And IF they are so into the wellbeing of their fellow players, why do they RESIST advancing drug testing far enough along to detect HGH? Why do they back head hunters and dirty players like James Harrison if the general welfare and wellbing of their fellow players is TRUELY the issue they are fronting on? I'm not buying this one freakin bit.

I think they're being more deceitful than Goodell is. Salaries have continued to escalate through the roof so a 100 million $ man became possible. Can you show me how many 100 million $ employees are out there in this economy? I'm supposed to worry about his healthcare coverage when Fat Albert just had his 2nd road rage incident when he was driving 140 miles per hour on the road? And what did Dante Stallworth do with his 2 signing bonuses in Cleveland? Got liquored up but was too cheap to pay for a taxi ride home. Meanwhile, Jamal Lewis was complaining about work days longer than 2 hours just 365 days after Savage increased his salary to stay.

In the NBA, players aren't even coachable since the coaching position has been rendered pee-on material. Is this REALLY where you want the NFL heading? You better think of the stuff you're not even considering right now. Albert Haynesworth and Tourettes Owens have both been salaried high enough to defy leaderships in Washington, Dallas and Philly. I think the players have had it better than ever. If we've even been conscious the last 12 years in Cleveland we've seen some VERY generous salaries with crappy exchange value on the field. We've overpaid countless vets best works in rear view mirrors.

I'm content with where I stand in that the owners initiated a negotiation the players gave a bunch middle fingers to and then walked away. Starting with half the difference to BEGIN the negotiations process with could have gone much better than saying no chance. You don't REALLY want to see more Charlie Sheens, Albert Haynesworths, Lindsay Lohans, and Tourettes Owens holding their entertainment businesses hostage do you? If Tom Brady and Peyton Manning REALLY care about others - why are they demanding soooo much of their salary cap?

What I'm understanding least of all, is HOW SOFT today's player has become in the chest cavity. I grew up seeing players LOVE the game to the point they appreciated whatever salary they were given. These players also used to work another job the 6-7 months during the offseason and be responsible for coming to camp in shape. There were even alot of 2 way players in the 60s that only INCREASED their susceptibilities to injury without whining. And the equipment was far less suitable. Ironically, guys didn't consider missing games for hang nails or foot blisters.

If they don't want to play - FUCK EM! We're not exactly spoiled with the BEST football we've ever seen in Cleveland the last 2 decades.

[Flugel]

Originally Posted by Vegasdogg

Exactly. Hollywood is a very good example. Shit, Tom Hanks can make $60M on 2-3 new movies alone,.

Let's understand that Tom Hanks isn't complaining about how life sucks while Tom Brady and Peyton Manning are. One of those guys GETS it and it ain't the QBs. And by all means, let Drew Brees inform all the residents of New Orleans how bad he and the Saints have things today. They'll understand.

[Brown Warrior]

Tom, you're turning it on its ear, man. Brady and Manning and Brees are not asking for more money or a bigger piece of the pie. The owners are. And it's actually MORE ironic that they're asking when their businesses are flourishing while so many others aren't.

It's misleading to suggest that the players are the ones asking for more. They aren't. But they can use other sports leagues for precedent when asking why they should give up what they have now, which is less than MLB or NBA.

They already agreed on the rookie wage scale, which is terrific. Let them prove that they belong before they get rich. But they SHOULD be rich, because it's their unique talents that fuel a 9.3 billion industry.

If the players get what they want -- status quo or at least closer to it along with a rookie wage scale -- Brees and Manning and Brady don't get richer. Just don't want it characterized as that.

[Brown Warrior]

But also, along the lines of a Dave Mason song (there ain't no good guy, there ain't no bad guy, there's only you and me and we just disagree)...

Art Rooney assails union’s tactics, expects initial court ruling as soon as this week | ProFootballTalk

[Flugel]

Originally Posted by Brown Warrior

Tom, you're turning it on its ear, man. Brady and Manning and Brees are not asking for more money or a bigger piece of the pie. The owners are. And it's actually MORE ironic that they're asking when their businesses are flourishing while so many others aren't.

It's misleading to suggest that the players are the ones asking for more. .

What part about offering HALF of the disputed amount says the owners are asking for more Shep? You've got a habit of finding your favorite columns sometimes and acting as if there is no other source of valid info out there.

If the owners are STARTING with offering up HALF of 9 billion $ they are differing over - what shouldn't I TRUST about Goodell finding that is very generous? Beginning at half, actually creates the opportunity to land ho at least 60% of that amount in dispute. Instead of that being a positive starting point to open negotiations, the players closed negotiations with middle fingers and this alleged NEED to see the books from their employers that have been treating them so rotten in this economy. The biggest problem I see from the player's union is they had too many chiefs and not enough Indians so they brought too much attention deficit disorder to a bargaining table that necessitated order and focus for a progressive outcome.

I'm not wired to see that as players getting raped by their employers. Sorry! Maybe they should go get better utopian careers in Corporate America where everything is just perfect today. Let me be the first to wish them good luck with that.

And if we want to refer to them as ENTERTAINERS - what kind of entertainment is 5 wins every freakin year? They REALLY need raises in Buffalo, Cleveland and Detroit? Just out of curiosity, why do today's Cleveland Browns deserve so much more money than the Cleveland Browns that actually TACKLED people, scored TDs and frequented playoffs in the 80s? You get that to make sense for me, and I'll say check mate for you to me.

Let's all pinch our skin for a second. Are we or are we not STILL awaiting the return of good football to Cleveland? What am I missing here while we've never had an owner as salary generous to his players? I'm gonna be honest when I tell you the exchange value on the field has been disappointing. The answer isn't to cave in and give them more. And then in the next breath we wonder why a guy like Shawn Rogers or Albert Haynesworth doesn't want to sweat after landing his dream salary today. They're gonna get their money just like every free agent and first round draft pick has here since we got our team back. And where has that taken us in terms of performance of the field? WISHING we were back in the 80s my friends! This doesn't get me to siding with the players that walking away from negotiations is the RIGHT thign to do. It's ONLY making me question if this hobby I've selected has been a colossal waste of time.

[Vegasdogg]

Originally Posted by Flugel

I'm content with where I stand in that the owners initiated a negotiation the players gave a bunch middle fingers to and then walked away. Starting with half the difference to BEGIN the negotiations process with could have gone much better than saying no chance.

You're wrong Tom. But just in case you think you aren't, what are you talking about? The players negotiated a lot of things. They said they would give up the current rookie pay scale. They said they would void bonuses and contracts for certain players who get in trouble with the law. You act like the players walked away in bad faith.

Who cares if some player was lucky to get a $100M contract? Albert Haynesworth does not represent the players. You're very happy and content with the owners jacking around the players in these negotiations, so I am not certain you're debating in good faith.

What you may fail to realize is there are 32 teams, and $9 Billion + to split up, and that number is rising steadily. Bad economy or not, the players need to look out for future players.

Originally Posted by Flugel

What part about offering HALF of the disputed amount says the owners are asking for more Shep?

Again what are you talking about "1/2 the disputed amount?" The owners take $1B per year off the top of all revenues before any of the money is shared. Now the owners came into these proceedings stating they wanted another $1B per year. When the players pushed for opening the books to explain this number, the owners backed off to $500M per yer, and right now it sits at $185M per year off the top. Interesting that the owners gave back $815M per year all so the players could not get a look at the books. So the players said okay, we will agree with the owners taking $500M plus over the course of the 5 year CBA.

The owners said no.

The players said okay, see you in litigation.

Nobody can point the finger here and say this side walked away.

You're debating this on less than facts and more on emotion, and none of it is making sense.



.

[Brown Warrior]

Originally Posted by Flugel

What part about offering HALF of the disputed amount says the owners are asking for more Shep?

The part where they currently take one billion off the top and now want to take more? Maybe I didn't understand the question. Middle ground would be keeping it the same. The players winning would be the owners taking less than they currently do.

I'm not sure I understand how you're trying to characterize my POV as unfair... driven by what bad habit? Reading?

[Tobalaz]

I'm sorry, but if the players want to get their hands on the stadium repair money they're just getting damned greedy.
Let their spoiled asses work in a factory at $9 an hour for a year or two and see how good they've got it right now. Face it, most are not qualified for anything else. They bailed at the chance of a quality education the second they whiffed money.
Maybe that'll make their bitchy asses straighten out.

[Flugel]

Originally Posted by Tobalaz

I'm sorry, but if the players want to get their hands on the stadium repair money they're just getting damned greedy.
Let their spoiled asses work in a factory at $9 an hour for a year or two and see how good they've got it right now. Face it, most are not qualified for anything else. They bailed at the chance of a quality education the second they whiffed money.
Maybe that'll make their bitchy asses straighten out.

EXACTLY! Just how bad do guys like Michael Vick and Ray Lewis have things after wearing orange jump suits in prison? Where else in America does a felon get a salary that pluralizes a million dollars? Or, what does a Ben Roethlisberger have to complain about when the ROONEYS saved his ass from rooming with murderers and rapists to preserve a multiple million $ salary. Not only that, Leonard Little and Donte Stallworth both returned to million dollar salaries following manslaughter charges. Albert Haynesworth is back in court for his 3rd road rage incident; and he's made the TN papers in previous years for vehicle speeds i excess of 140 mph. Just where do these guys have it rough?

And if anyone thinks this over helping the Jim Ottos, Dennis Byrds and Darryl Stinglys and other seriously disabled football players of yesterday, I have realestate for sale in alligator alley.

I HEARD Frank Wycheck on the radio all week. He was asked is this REALLY about disability? He said, if they get the RIGHT money offer - they'll be okay. He did say the retirement sucks waiting 20-30 years. It sounded more like if you want someone to read your book - you gotta an appealing book cover to get it attention. That's what's goign on with the fans that want to think its about crappy healthcare. When they get the RIGHT prioce tag 1 more time, watch where all that healt benefits concerns go. And then I'll be happy to ask 1 more time why agents continue to power ciphon millions of dollars at signing bonuses.

Hey Tobolaz, if you do your job extremely well, do you get to go to Hawaii for 1 week with all expenses paid and then get rewarded with another 10-15 K depending on how well you do in a 2 hand touch football game? I don't either. If my company does well, we get small bonuses. If teams make playoffs, players also get something like 25,000-30,000 per game.

On top of that, when I worked in an offseason program for Tampa Bay, the players got PAID $60 for every 1 hour workout they showed up to on top of their normal salary. I mean they REALLY have it alot worse than coal miners and war vets, don't they?

I'm sorry but I can't sympathize. If there's anything they should be looking at better is what the agents are doing for their clients when a FA like Cromartie is already fussing about how broke he is after last year's generous contract. And if anyone has heard him fuss, he ain't pissed at the owners today. He's a free agent that would argue he's a broke agent. Go look at what he was paid and tell me I should feel sorry for him today.

[Flugel]

Originally Posted by Vegasdogg

You're wrong Tom. But just in case you think you aren't, what are you talking about?

Again what are you talking about "1/2 the disputed amount?" The owners take $1B per year off the top of all revenues before any of the money is shared. Now the owners came into these proceedings stating they wanted another $1B per year.

You're debating this on less than facts and more on emotion, and none of it is making sense.

Staright from Roger Goodell's letter:

Unfortunately, I have to tell you that earlier today the players’ union walked away from mediation and collective bargaining and has initiated litigation against the clubs. In an effort to get a fair agreement now, our clubs offered a deal today that, among other things, was designed to have no adverse financial impact on veteran players in the early years, and would have met the players’ financial demands in the latter years of the agreement.

The proposal we made included an offer to narrow the player compensation gap that existed in the negotiations by splitting the difference; guarantee a reallocation of savings from first-round rookies to veterans and retirees without negatively affecting compensation for rounds 2-7; no compensation reduction for veterans; implement new year-round health and safety rules; retain the current 16-4 season format for at least two years with any subsequent changes subject to the approval of the league and union; and establish a new legacy fund for retired players ($82 million contributed by the owners over the next two years).

While you choose to see that as a crappy START to negotiations Veg, I don't. Again, this is millionaires we are talking about during a day and age where my wife showed up to work Friday to see their 10% of their nursing staff laid off. There's guys losing lives overseas protecting our freedoms and these guys are pulling the poor me shit? Really? I'm more in line with your thinking the day that guy showed up asking us to sign a petition to prevent all this. Back then, you weren't nearly as sympathetic to the poor players.

Sounds to me like alot of these spoiled brats need better agents.

[Riffer X]

Here is a simple question: Why is it supposed to work that these players have to supposedly make enough in their short careers to be set for life? I think there are an awful lot of people out there who would love having large 6 and 7 figure salaries to start off their life. Kind of makes things quite a bit easier, unless you are blowing it or giving it to child support etc.

Players don't look at it that way though, they think that for playing football a few years after leaving or graduating college, they are supposed to be spoonfed for years with pensions, medical benefits, you name it.

How about looking at football as an opportunity to make really big money for a few years and use the money wisely? Parlay it into another career investment and collect interest, not blow up nightclubs with Champagne while making it rain.