How do we get a new CBA?
by CaliFanInTx on Jul 25, 2010 1:28 PM CDT
Email
PrintMy first fan post...kinda nervous about it...
I had too much time on my hands this weekend so I was musing about the NFL CBA....My first draft was pretty lengthy and tangented off covering too many facets of the issue at hand, so I decided to abbreviate my thoughts to create a more easy discussion...
The main issue preventing the creation a new CBA is money. Both sides want more money and can't decide on a middle ground that each can live with...
Players want more financial security, while the owners want to reduce their risk. Both sides can agree that they want the best players receiving the highest salaries.
Neither side wants to kill/harm the "Golden Goose" which is the NFL...a lockout may do that...so both sides would prefer not to go down that route.
There are certain aspects of the NFL that prevent a true free market model...some of the more prominent ones are the draft, restricted free agency (franchise tags), and barrier to entry of new teams. Drastically changing any of these effects overall competitiveness and or dilute the NFL brand.
Some form of salary cap should be maintained to keep smaller market teams viable. Players will agree to that because fewer teams mean fewer available jobs. But players want some visibility to maintain a "fair" cap.
In my opinion, the fastest way to get a new CBA is to tweak the existing one and not start anew. It's not like the current system is broken, since both sides are making obscene amounts of money. Make the following tweaks and concessions...
1) Set a fair cap. Have all teams provide financial figures on their operation that include revenues and expenses from home games stadium sales, television rights, league sponsorship agreements, league licensing profits...with exceptions to stadium income outside of direct football related operation and individual team ancillary sales. In other words, Jerry Jones shouldn't have to share profits from Boxing matches he stages in Cowboys stadium and mugs and t-shirts he sells of the team. Players should share in the profits of the league, not exclusive team profits...do the players assume the risk of an inventory overstock of pink Romo jerseys, or take a pay cut if ticket sales fall short? Penalties should be imposed for teams that do not reach a cap "floor" or exceed a "ceiling".
2) Owner profit sharing should be set against league revenues, not respective/exclusive team revenues. That is, if Jerry Jones sells more Romo jerseys than Yorks sell of Alex Smith jerseys, the Yorks shouldn't get a piece of that Cowboys pie. Conversely, if Jerry is able to sell naming rights of his stadium for 20 times what other owners are able to do, he shouldn’t have to share those profits because he did a better job of promoting his brand. As with better players getting paid more, better owners should make more money.
3) Change the rookie contract model. Impose a cap on the guarantees for the first half of the 1st round. There's no way Sam Bradford should get 50 million guaranteed before he even plays a single snap in the NFL, while Peyton Manning and Tom Brady need to wait on their money. Teams should be able to limit their exposure to "bust" rookies. No guarantee cap on veteran signings. If a team makes a mistake on that signing, they only have themselves to blame. In order to get this from players, owners should concede restricted free agency (franchise tag). A player should not have to deal with this unfair loophole when he has fulfilled his contract agreement. If you want the player, pay him...
4) Finally, I feel sympathy for the some of the retired early NFL players. But why is this even a viable bargaining chip for the NFLPA? Those players were not forced to play in the NFL, why should the NFL now assume financial responsibility? I personally, would like to see the NFL do something to help these players that paved the way for its current success, but this should be handled as a separate matter. I don't see the current players lining up to offset this cost with a percentage of their salary.
We all know a CBA will eventually get done, I just don't see the benefit of the current posturing.
Another user-created commentary provided by a BTB reader.
18 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Concessions Necessary
If the move is made to add two additional games to the regular season I would think that the roster limit would have to go up. As far as paying too much for high draft picks it is obvious that the owners are forced into a gamble that can cripple a franchise for years forcing them to pay up front removing incentive if a player is a bust. Rewards should be spread out to proven players. At the same time the players need to realize that owners risk everything to buy, provide for,promote, and run a team and are entitled to a return on their investment, and effort. It is a business.
Golden Rule: He who has the gold makes the rules.
Mark Schlereth brought up a really good point the other day about expanding the amount of reg season games
He said if you cut down to 2 games in preseason, you lose chances of hitting on late rounders and UDFA’s, his examples were Terrell Davis, Kurt Warner, to name a few.
This was something that I thought was concerning, as right now, or team has a very strong foundation of late round picks. If we had only 2 preseason games, there is the possibility that Romo, Miles, Ratliff, John Phillips, and KO could all have been after thoughts and never got a chance to shine.
Now, I think we should stick to 16 games, but work out something where fans are not paying full price for preseason seats.
The players are balking at 18 games, so keeping the preseason games at 4 wouldn't fly with the NFLPA.
One of the concessions to the expanded 18 game season is an expanded roster…increasing the 53 man roster to possibly 60-65. Perhaps with a big enough increase, some of these late picks/free agents will have their chance. Ticket prices will not go down, there’s a smattering of reasons, one of which the overhead costs of operating the stadium during preseason isn’t less than the regular season. As a fan, I would like an extra 2 games.
But with only 2 preseason games, the majority of one being used to get the starters in sync
Can you be sure you have enough game time to evaluate players? You want to see them stack up against live competition. I understand expanding the rosters, but for example, if Josh Brent cant beat out Junior Siavii for backup DT, I assume he isn’t worth a roster spot.
I do LOVE the idea of 18 games, it’s more football. Romo etched his place on the team during preseason. With fewer preseason games, a guy like him would be getting the majority of his snaps in practice/training camp. With an increase, yes, more late round picks would have to make the team, but is that good? What would Mike Mickens have done for us last year in an expanded roster/schedule? Or Deangelo Smith? One’s out of the league, and the other is on his second stint with the Browns.
I agree prices cannot be lowered. But I definitely do not feel the preseason is worth paying for attendance to—as I sit looking for HOF game tickets..lol—but sites like ours make me want to know who all these late round picks, UDFA’s, and shot’s in the dark are and see them in action. I just worry with an 18 game schedule/2 game preseason, that might be tougher to do.
Life is about trade offs. If the decision was easy, we wouldn't be debating it.
I wrote this post because I was reading about all the back and forth between the owners and players about a new CBA. For my own edification, I wrote out my own thoughts about what should happen. Like I noted, it’s not practical to tear everything down and start new, so a modification of the current deal with compromise is the most realistic solution. I’m sure there are many other issues to iron out in addition to the ones I’ve listed, but I think I hit the major sticking points.
In regards to the 18 games, it will happen, I believe both the owners and players want the extra income. It’s just the details they need to work out.
calfanintx.....grats.....
on 1st post…you did well..liked it was informative and easy to understand… well done!
woman !, dont try to understand em, dont try to make them understand you, for they are a breed apart ! lol
rookie salaries.....
yess, i do often think that most 1st rnd players are often waay over paid and they need to set a 1st rd bonus and base pay scale for all 32 1st rounders, and there should also be available to them incentives that makes a player earn his big payday, there for easing the chance of a 1st rd draft pick being a lazy bust…( as in hey i have my money now and guarantees , so ill just bleep off now). those are very real fears for owners, and what of serious injuries , where both owners lose value for payment made but yet the players need to know that they are also covered in case of time lost due to injury. both the owners and players should realize that they both play a vital role in keeping this sport together,and most notably w/o the fans they play for free if at all. truely, the vets who have earned and proven themselves on the field should be taken care of and they have paid their dues on the field, things are a$$ backwards ,,,me thinks!
woman !, dont try to understand em, dont try to make them understand you, for they are a breed apart ! lol
ALL AROUND COWBOYS OF THE PAST: #1.Charlie Waters
As I sit and contemplate 13 more days until the official start of Football season, after a hard days work I cant help but reminisce about the Glory days of Past. The days when the Cowboys had NOTHING to prove to the NFL. In fact with out the Dallas Cowboys what would be the sense in watching Football?
There were players on the Cowboys team that were naturally the ones to garner your interest the most. Forme it was Charlie “THE PLAYMAKER” Waters. Charlie started his football career in North Augusta HS as a starting QB, and was recruited by the Clemson Tigers in 1967. Charlie struggled as a QB at Clemson and in his Jr. year converted to WR where he still is ranked 8th all time in receptions and 18th all time in yards. Was inducted eventuall into Clemsons HOF.
In 1970, Charlie was drafted in the 3rd round of the NFL draft, and was ALMOST CUT in training camp. Started as a back-up to Cliff Harris at Strong Safety, and started 6 games when Cliff had to perform military duty. That year he ggrabbed 5 INT, returning 2 for TD. Made the NFL All-Rookie team that year. With the return of Cliff Harris Charlies was installed as a back-up CB for the next 4 years where he struggled greatly. In 1975 he started as Strong Safety with the retirement of Cornell Greene. And for the next 7 years along with Cliff Harris made the Cowboys Secondary second to NONE. Charlie played 12 years with the Cowboys, and in that span of time, the Cowboys never experienced a loosing season, missing the Playoffs only once. Charlie played on 5 Dallas Cowboy SuperBowl teams, and winning 2. Charlie holds the Franchise record with 50 INT, and still holds the NFL record with 9 INT in the Playoffs(including 3 in one game)..Charlie never made the Pro Football HOF, but me and every other Cowboy Fan knows he should be.FEAR THE STAR
a true story unto itself......
thanks for those memories….
woman !, dont try to understand em, dont try to make them understand you, for they are a breed apart ! lol
Rookie Salary Structure
I don’t know why the NFL can’t just set a structure for the draft that pays the draftee in accordance to the position he is drafted.
- makes X amount of money
- makes Y amount of money
- makes Z amount of money
etc…
Adjust it to inflation, over the years, and it should be solid.
That way, the rookies are going into the draft knowing exactly how much they will make when they get drafted.
Well that was supposed to read...
1st overall pick makes $X
52nd overall pick makes $Y
213th overall pick makes $Z
etc
Because the NFLPA feel that if you limit what rookies get, that cost savings will never get to the veterans without
other systems in place. The NFLPA want to make sure the overall pot (their share/%) keeps growing and want a way to verify this…owners don’t want to just turn over their books, because of potential loss of competitive advantage if other owners get this information. Owners in smaller markets want to share in profits from larger markets. In a sense, the owners need to solve their own profit sharing structure before they can address those with the players.
Well...
Even though it’s an extreme case of it, the NFL is still a supply and demand economy, no matter what the salary cap is the teams are going to be right at it if they want to be competitive.
Less money for rookies = more money for vets.
Not like they can save money on rookies and still pay the same amount on vets, a $1.00M salary cap hit is still the same either way, so it will be used to bring in more PROVEN talent rather than draft players who think they deserve an $1.5M check before they even play in an NFL game.
I’m not saying they won’t earn that check in the future, but at least let them prove themselves before paying them.
This is true if you have transparency, and you currently, don't. This is a point of contention for the NFLPA.
Supply and demand works only if you have free system. The NFL is a monopoly. There are actually some teams that don’t spend up to their salary cap. Look at Tampa…they were $40+ mil under the salary cap, clearly the veterans aren’t getting their full share…that’s why, as I have noted above, you need cap floor penalties to assure teams pay out a fair share to the players. Tampa just pocketed that 40 mil and it never got to the players. Maybe other teams would pay more but rules that favor the team does not allow this to happen.
by CaliFanInTx on Jul 28, 2010 10:59 PM CDT up reply actions
Well shouldn't the restriction be lifted on Free Agency then?
If a player agrees to a contract with a team then I don’t see how NFLPA can have a problem with that. Maybe RFA’s need to be done with so that deals can get done before their contract is up or the player can simply go to the highest bidder or team they want.
The current FA system definitely favors owners, but it also favors fans. If Miles Austin wasn’t a restricted free agent, then who knows if he would have ended up on the Jets last year.
I don’t disagree that there should be cap floor penalties, though. That is really a good idea.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
