NFL Final Offer To Players

[SuperSpck]

From what I've read at the NFP the books are open, to a degree, what the PA wants to see is line-items.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

The audited statements will not...guaranteed not...include the detail behind the numbers...so if the players reps think they are going into the ledgers etc of the owners that will never ever happen. They may get the financials....which I personally don't agree with...but they will not see the detail behind the financial...the auditors reviewed that and in their certification they say "fairly presents........" and that is where this will end.

The ONLY thing at this point the players have going for them IF what I read about the offer is true is the fact that Judge Dody is handling the case...he is totally a "players judge" and both sides know that...he proved that in the past.

Doty may not get the case after all. This is from ESPN:

The case first went to Judge Richard Kyle, who recused himself for unspecified reasons. It was reassigned to Judge Patrick Schiltz. On Monday, Schiltz cited a conflict of interest because he represented the NFL in several cases as a private practice attorney. The case then went to Nelson.
Deb Bell, interim division manager in the court clerk's office in Minneapolis, said cases are randomly assigned by computer.
The players want the case before U.S. District Judge David Doty, who has overseen NFL labor matters since the early 1990s and issued a number of rulings against the league.
Although it was throught that the case could not be reassigned again, former U.S. Attorney for Minnesota Tom Heffelfinger told The Associated Press on Monday that there is a way for the case to still wind up in front of Doty, even after the injunction request is settled.
"If either the court or one of the parties designates the case as a related case to one that has been previously assigned to another judge, it could get reassigned," Heffelfinger said.
Doty presided over the landmark settlement in 1993 that opened the doors for true free agency. Because that case has not been closed, Bell said, the possibility remains that the new case could be designated as related and therefore reassigned to Doty.
Nelson would have to consent to the case being reassigned, Bell said.

 

[kerouac9]

If this is what the ownership offered and it was rejected, I can't even imagine what they are holding out for. Maybe the retired players should be able to vote for this.

Notice there's nothing there about the split of money. Of course owners would like a flat stated amount of cap for the next five years, but that's not going to happen. The NFLPA gets a certain percentage of revenue minus an initial amount. There's nothing there about this right now.

This is all fine, but doesn't include some of the remarks made by Pasch and Smith following the breakdown.

The issue still remains that the teams want more off the top money.

It's a bit rich to say you are splitting the difference when in fact you are asking for an additional 700 to 800M per annum (Pasch referenced $750M, Smith $800) off the top to be added to the $1.0B that teams recieve under the now expired agreement.

This is why Smith says, and I paraphrase: "We are not going to sign a $5B cheque without seeing the books."

It should be noted that Pasch did say that the teams were prepared to offer a third party audit to satisfy this player demand.

I can imagine that an audit with strict terms of reference agreed to by both parties will at some point come into play. If the teams are secure in believing that this will make their case for additional cash off the top, and the players also see that this is the likely outcome, they will likely then come to a mutually agreed figure.

It's about the money. If the NFL wants the players to give money back, they're going to have to explain why. The NFL is offering an audited accounting of the aggregate revenues for all 32 NFL teams together, but until the Players see whether or not the Giants and Cowboys are making money hand over fist while the Panthers and Bengals are ekeing out a living, there isn't going to be an agreement.

The reason why owners are trying to force players to take less money is because the big-market teams don't want to share as much revenue.

 

[THESMEL]

oops

There is no picket line to cross? The Union poofed into thin air so that the teams have to honor the player's current contracts , between the PLAYER and the TEAM.

The NFL Locked out all UNION Players, there are no UNION Players left.

Any Judge beyond Doty would spank the players for trying to play the judge like a fool! They said they were gonna do this years ago! And they did! its all about talking in good faith, which is quite the opposite.

This first bit was smoke and mirrors about fans blame game. Not that it really matters. The owners can not lock out NON UNION PLAYERS. and must honor their current contracts.

After that, I think the Anti trust status falls to dust. UFL, Arena can sign them or Kurt Warner can go back to baggin food if he wants. It's right to work in the NFL.

Bonuses may be a thing of the past. Players union cut their own wrist ver 1% like I predicted. 50/50 partnership was too UNFAIR!

The players will not hold out for a year or longer. Owners are fully funded to pay all their stadium debts as only about 20-30% of the stadium revenue comes from NFL games. The stadiums are separate corporations and stand on their own. The players have nothing to do with stadium revenue. Standard & Poors estimates the owners can fully fund any stadium debt for 1-2 years and be just fine. There are a lot of millionaire players but their are more who are not millionaires and who will cross picket lines long before one year passes with no pay. Some are already grumbling. It is going to be very difficult to keep the players from coming out and blasting the union after the scheduled start of the season. The owners in fact have a lot more money than the players. The players insist on seeing the owners books. I do not think that will happen or should happen. These are privately owned businesses (except Green Bay who are exempt because they are a public company) and no private business should be forced to open its private books to anyone except the IRS, if they have need. There should never be a legal precedent set for such action. I want to see the Cards books but I have no such right. This is an overreach by the union. Maybe they should request a search of Mr. B's house while they are at it.

 

[lobo]

From what I've read at the NFP the books are open, to a degree, what the PA wants to see is line-items.

You are probably right...but as I said before..no possible way that is going to happen under any circumstance for a myriad of reasons....if the owners have "Uncle Johnny and Aunt Mary" on the payroll they are doing nothing illegal by hiring relatives....but you can be sure that the reps of the union would like to make a deal about that to try and get the sentiment of the masses to believe they are doing something "illegal and wrong."

 

[Goldfield]

I think that is a damn good deal for the players.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

The devil is in the details:

Here is why the Players walked away

The NFLPA, in turn, listed reasons why no new CBA was reached, saying the NFL:

Demanded a multibillion-dollar giveback and refused to provide any legitimate financial information to justify it.

Wanted to turn the clock back on player compensation by four years, moving them back to where they were in 2007.

Offered no proposal for long-term share of revenues.

Demanded 100% of all revenues that went above unrealistically low projections for the first four years.

Refused to meet the players on significant changes to in-season, off-season or pre-season health and safety rules.

Kept on the table its "hypocritical" demand for an 18-game season, despite its public claims to be working toward improving the heath and safety of players.

Wanted cutbacks in workers' compensation benefits for injured players.

Sought to limit rookie compensation long after they become veterans — into players' fourth and fifth years.

Instead we are left wondering if there will be a real season. The move by the union to decertify helps the possibility that there will be a season. If the NFL had locked out the players as a union, then the season would have been in much more jeopardy. But decertifying means it is more likely that we do have a 2011 season, although courts will decide that. The league can now file an injunction to prevent a lockout -- which the NFL plans to do -- and that would make the league implement a set of rules to guide the 2011 season, which the players would play under if they were to their liking as the anti-trust suit wound its way through the courts.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

These ones stick out at me:

Demanded a multibillion-dollar giveback and refused to provide any legitimate financial information to justify it.

This is why they want to see the books.

Demanded 100% of all revenues that went above unrealistically low projections for the first four years.

Another reason to see the books. If they are projecting low revenue and then take everything above that...that can be a HUGE amount of money.

Sought to limit rookie compensation long after they become veterans — into players' fourth and fifth years.

NFL career average 3.5 years. Keeping guys locked into 5 year slotted deals that aren't guaranteed is pretty brutal. NBA's slotted deals are 3 years.

 

[Shane]

The salary cap in 2007 was 109 million. Now under current proposal in 2011 it would be nearly 170 million. That's hardly requesting players to go back to 2007

 

[Chris_Sanders]

1. We more than split the economic difference between us, increasing our proposed cap for 2011 significantly and accepting the union's proposed cap number for 2014 ($161 million per club).

Where do you see $170 million? I see a proposed cap acceptance of 161 in 2014. That doesn't say what it is in 2011, 2012, 2013

See my guess in the NFL is being honest with their information, but leaving out the bad stuff.

The players union is doing the same.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Ironically the listing of 2011, 2012, 2013 is 3 years not 4 years. Maybe the NFL rolls back and then jumps up when it projects the economy will be better?

 

[Shane]

The salary cap in 2007 was 109 million. Now under current proposal in 2011 it would be nearly 170 million. That's hardly requesting players to go back to 2007

???

 

[Chris_Sanders]

???

Sorry I answered that above.

 

[Shane]

The salary cap in 2007 was 109 million. Now under current proposal in 2011 it would be nearly 170 million. That's hardly requesting players to go back to 2007

Where do you see $170 million? I see a proposed cap acceptance of 161 in 2014. That doesn't say what it is in 2011, 2012, 2013

See my guess in the NFL is being honest with their information, but leaving out the bad stuff.

The players union is doing the same.

Ironically the listing of 2011, 2012, 2013 is 3 years not 4 years. Maybe the NFL rolls back and then jumps up when it projects the economy will be better?

???

Sorry I answered that above.

I'm sorry Chris I must have missed something. Where did you answer?