NFL lockout looming for 2011 season.

[burn_baby_burn]

Looks like things could get ugly on the NFL Labour front.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?id=3288568

Although there is some dispute over the owners' claims of declining profits, there is no doubt that what had been 15 years of a mostly harmonious partnership since the historic free agency and salary-cap agreement of 1993 is turning into a brawl. If the fight continues at its current intensity, the owners will seize their first opportunity to terminate the current contract and start the process that will lead to a confrontation and a lockout in the 2011 season.

With the two recently filed legal actions, there is no longer any doubt that the owners and players are on a collision course. Instead of prospering together, they will be meeting each other in court and tossing around words such as "collusion" and "decertification" and "lockout."

[rubecube]

Bull. They were saying the same thing two years ago about 2008.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Bull. They were saying the same thing two years ago about 2008.

and it took a very charismatic commissioner to keep them out of a lockout.

Many have thought for awhile that the NFLPA leader has been way too friendly with the league and it seems to prove a point in the last 2 years or so he has been throwing his weight around.

It's still early so it's hard to know how real a lockout is, but I think it's a little naive to dismiss it so quickly.

Also I think they have squeezed all it can out of their current medium (netowrk TV) and they are lagging behind others such as MLB in terms of developing new revenue streams such as streaming via mlb.tv. It won't help if the pie they are fighting over has stopped growing, which I sense it has.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

and it took a very charismatic commissioner to keep them out of a lockout.

Many have thought for awhile that the NFLPA leader has been way too friendly with the league and it seems to prove a point in the last 2 years or so he has been throwing his weight around.

I have heard retired players complaining about Upshaw only caring about his $6,000,000 salary.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

I have heard retired players complaining about Upshaw only caring about his $6,000,000 salary.

Yeah, I have been hearing that for a while. But while the salary cap goes up every year, no one seems interested in ousting him.

I think the biggest issue should be the pension for players. Both sides can afford to throw some money into the pot for past players.

But there is in-fighting among the owners - the ones that are highly profitable are getting peeved at giving up some of their profits to the penny-pinching owners. I see that point, but I would hate to see Green Bay fall back into mediocrity because they can't compete with the Cowboys or Patriots at spending money.

[troutman]

NFL players don't seem to make very much when you consider how much revenue the NFL is generating.

Than again, why should they be paid much more, when they only play 16 times a year, and might only have 5 minutes of actual exertion in a game?

Non-guaranteed contracts must be a real sticking point.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by troutman

NFL players don't seem to make very much when you consider how much revenue the NFL is generating.

Than again, why should they be paid much more, when they only play 16 times a year, and might only have 5 minutes of actual exertion in a game?

Non-guaranteed contracts must be a real sticking point.

The players make 60% of revenues. Allthough there are 53 players to pay.

[habernac]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

I have heard retired players complaining about Upshaw only caring about his $6,000,000 salary.

I've heard some things about him being positively Eagleson-like. I can't believe they don't get guaranteed contracts in a sport as hard on your body as football is.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by habernac

I've heard some things about him being positively Eagleson-like. I can't believe they don't get guaranteed contracts in a sport as hard on your body as football is.

The NFL's disability program for retired players is absolutely morbid and a lot of ex-players blame Upshaw for this, and rightfully so.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by habernac

I've heard some things about him being positively Eagleson-like. I can't believe they don't get guaranteed contracts in a sport as hard on your body as football is.

Its something I wish the NHL could adopt. Plenty of agents complain about it on TV. The problem with the non guaranteed contract is the huge signing bonuses it creates. Get drafted high and it is an instant lottery win regardless of your performance out on the field.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by rubecube

The NFL's disability program for retired players is absolutely morbid and a lot of ex-players blame Upshaw for this, and rightfully so.

I'm sure you have seen pictures of Chuck Bednarick's hands. Even Johnny U had a disfigured hand. Bednarick has been really critical of the NFL, NFLPA and the current players.

[habernac]

Johnny U threw so many footballs, his arm had a big curve in it. Scary.

[burn_baby_burn]

[KTown]

Originally Posted by troutman

NFL players don't seem to make very much when you consider how much revenue the NFL is generating.

Than again, why should they be paid much more, when they only play 16 times a year, and might only have 5 minutes of actual exertion in a game?

Non-guaranteed contracts must be a real sticking point.

You need to elaborate more.

One thing you miss is that NFL players spend more time in practise and film rooms than any hockey player ever will.

But you don't see many players in the NHL having 20million plus for a signing bonus which is gauranteed money for doing nothing.

The biggest issue I have with the NFL system is the rookie gauranteed money. I finid it just ridiculous that a team has to shell out such big money for rookies, who are unproven.

Cough cough Ryan Leaf

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

Also I think they have squeezed all it can out of their current medium (netowrk TV) and they are lagging behind others such as MLB in terms of developing new revenue streams such as streaming via mlb.tv. It won't help if the pie they are fighting over has stopped growing, which I sense it has.

Streaming MLB though makes sense and can be a significant source of revenue because of the super long season and number of games. The NFL coverage is already saturated on TV there wouldn't be the same market for it as there is the MLB.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Dan02

Streaming MLB though makes sense and can be a significant source of revenue because of the super long season and number of games. The NFL coverage is already saturated on TV there wouldn't be the same market for it as there is the MLB.

Not only that, but it would suck the revenue out of Sunday Ticket and NFL Network.

[rubecube]

Honestly, I think the only way the NFL is going to generate new revenue opportunities is by getting more people to see the games live, specifically those that don't normally get that opportunity. The international games are a good way to start, but I'm thinking more in terms of travel packages.

Partner up with airlines and hotel chains and start offering "NFL Experience" packages that include premium seats that people would normally have to pay scalpers for. The NFL could even put a premium charge on these as a lot of people would be willing to pay an arm and leg for the chance to go to a game.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by troutman

NFL players don't seem to make very much when you consider how much revenue the NFL is generating.

Than again, why should they be paid much more, when they only play 16 times a year, and might only have 5 minutes of actual exertion in a game?

Non-guaranteed contracts must be a real sticking point.

Why other athletes do in other sports really isn't very relevant though. It's simply about the business that they generate.

And yea, non guaranteed contracts is huge, especially in a sport so injury prone as football. I think every athlete in every sport desreves their salaries. So long as tens of thousands of fans will pay $100 bucks for a few hours then of course they are worth it. And besides, I can do what I do for 35 years. They can for about 4.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Dan02

Streaming MLB though makes sense and can be a significant source of revenue because of the super long season and number of games. The NFL coverage is already saturated on TV there wouldn't be the same market for it as there is the MLB.

But then all americans would have access to all games, something that doesn't exist right now. Not all americans can get the ticket and the majority of them can't get the NFL channel.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

But then all americans would have access to all games, something that doesn't exist right now. Not all americans can get the ticket and the majority of them can't get the NFL channel.

The NFL wants to reap the benefits of broadcasting their own games on their own network, or eventually networks. Instead of giving the rights to the highest bidders who then make profits off of Ad revenue. They want to make the profits from advertising themselves. How else do you explain the NFL putting marquee match ups exclusively on their own network? They want to force the cable companies and dish networks to offer the NFL Network in its basic packages so the Network reaches the majority of viewers.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3155133

http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/st...5/daily34.html