Friday, February 11 2011
After a regular season featuring 17 weeks of thrills and a postseason capped by an entertaining Super Bowl with a record-breaking TV audience, it might seem a no-brainer to give America what it can't get enough of: This article was written by Stephen F. Holder and appeared in the St. Petersburg Times.
More NFL.
That's what the league says is behind its recent push to expand the regular season from 16 to 18 games, an issue that has become a major sticking point in the ongoing labor fight between owners and players that threatens to bring the world's most lucrative sports enterprise to a standstill.
Commissioner Roger Goodell seems intent on making the change. Meanwhile, players continue to band together in staunch opposition.
Will it happen? Should it happen?
There are few absolutes. In fact, the only thing that is clear is the sides' disparate points of view.
The league's owners have approached the issue by appealing to fans' disdain for meaningless preseason games. The current proposal would reduce the four-game exhibition season to two, replacing the final two preseason games with two additional regular-season contests.
"Repeatedly, the fans have said the quality of the preseason doesn't meet NFL standards," commissioner Roger Goodell said during his Super Bowl address last week. "That is one of the basis on which we started to look at the 18-and-two concept, by taking two of those low quality, non-competitive (preseason) games and turn those into quality, competitive (regular season) games that the fans want to see.
"I feel an obligation to make sure we are doing the best we can to present the best football."
Goodell has targeted season-ticket holders in particular, because they are charged full price even for preseason games.
But the NFL Players Association, whose members are preparing to be locked out by owners when the collective bargaining agreement expires in three weeks, is steadfastly against the proposal. Its contention is that more regular-season games will result in an increase in injuries and shortened careers.
They cite rising injury numbers. Union data said 352 players ended the season on injured reserve, including 13 Buccaneers (up from 250 overall in 2009). Among those players, a total of 3,278 games were missed, each player averaging 9.5 games on IR.
"You can't paint the picture any clearer than that," said George Atallah, NFLPA assistant executive director of external affairs.
While the total number of games (preseason and regular season) would remain at 20, the cumulative effect of playing more regular-season games will be absorbed mostly by prominent players. They are the ones who play sparingly in the preseason when rosters can have as many as 80 players, spreading out the wear and tear. When the regular season begins, rosters are capped at 53 and starters play their requisite 40 or 50 snaps.
Over the years, the toll of two additional games could add up.
"We had 352 active players finish on injured reserve," said Browns linebacker Scott Fujita, a member of the union's influential executive committee. "That's a really, really high number. And the way 18 games so far has been proposed, with no consideration for players and post-career benefits, making sure players are taken care of over the long haul … it's disappointing.
"It feels like a slap in the face."
Fujita added that players currently receive five years of health coverage after their careers end, but, "When I talk to players who retired, eight, nine, 10 years ago, a lot of those guys didn't really have any issues in their first five years post career. A lot of issues started to come up eight, nine, 10 years post-career when you've got to get another knee operation, or you've got to get a knee replacement or hip replacement. Those are the things that cost a whole lot of money."
The issues both sides are citing as their motivation are all legitimate. But, to a great extent, this whole fight hinges on the same issue holding up the labor negotiations in general: Money.
For all the talk of giving fans what they want, it's undeniable owners want to expand the season because they think it will result in additional revenue — something they openly admit. And players seem willing to discuss the expansion if they believe they are being adequately compensated — despite their health and safety concerns.
It's difficult to say how much an expanded regular season would impact revenues, but one expert says it might not create the automatic windfall some might assume.
"I don't think that's the case at all," said Scott Rosner, academic director of the Wharton Sports Business Academy at the University of Pennsylvania.
"You're not expanding your gate receipts (because the number of total games doesn't change). You can argue that, locally, you could see a marginal increase in concessions and in stadium sponsorships being worth more because the preseason games aren't well attended. But the real increases would come from national media. We're talking about television revenues seeing a proportional increase."
Rosner agreed that, in the short term, the idea of 18 regular season games could make financial sense. But he urged caution in the long term.
"One of the reasons the NFL is so successful is because they have the perfect formula — 16 games in 17 weeks," he said. "You're certainly concerned about diluting the product. You have to wonder whether there's going to be the same demand.
"It's certainly not a risk-free endeavor."
Given the sizable gulf between the sides, this also is an endeavor that's a long way from becoming reality.
martes, 15 de febrero de 2011
NFL appears headed for a costly lockout
Friday, February 11 2011
As NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and NFL Players Association director DeMaurice Smith go deeper into the negotiating dance of a new collective bargaining agreement, they want to be careful not to become known as the executives who killed the $9 billion golden goose. This article was written by D. Orlando Ledbetter and appeared in the Atlanta Journal Constitution.
The NFL has surpassed baseball as the nation's favorite sport, and Super Bowl XLV was the most watched event in television history with an estimated 111 million viewers, according to Nielsen Co.
The players and owners have benefited financially from a system that has made the players rich and the owners, even richer.
But that financial stability is in a state of flux as the negotiations took an ugly turn Thursday when the owners, according to ESPN, walked out of a negotiating session in Washington and cancelled an owners' meeting that was scheduled for Tuesday.
Some of the key issues include:
Revenue sharing
Drug testing
Rookie wage scale
Expanded schedule
Retired player benefits
Financial transparency
Salary cap
International play
In May 2008, the owners opted out of the CBA, which is set to expire March 3. They are seeking $1 billion in concessions per year from the players over a seven-year period, according to Smith.
Some of the teams have used public funds to help build stadiums, in a public-private partnership. Public funding is not as viable an option in hard economic times, and the NFL needs its own funds to build the new mega-stadiums that would allow franchises, such as the Falcons, to generate their own revenue.
The NFL also would use the money to expand rosters, establish more of a European presence, expand benefits and expand health-and-safety programs.
"We would be able to have stadiums in Los Angeles," said Jeff Pash, the NFL's executive vice president, during Super Bowl week in Arlington, Texas. "We could have a new stadium in the San Francisco Bay area. We could have a new stadium in Atlanta. We could have a new stadium in Minnesota."
The fight has been getting a little snippy as the deadline approaches.
"There is a lot out there, things that small-minded lawyers can't even dream of, but we need to have a system that fuels it," Pash said in a not-so-veiled shot at Smith.
The union wants to continue playing under the current system that guarantees the players 50 percent of the revenue, according to Smith. Before giving back any money to the owners, the union wants to see the owners' financial records.
"You're now asking the players to give back a billion dollars a year for the next seven years, and our simple question is before anyone would want to write a $7 billion check, what financial information would you think is relevant?" Smith said.
With the owners walking out Thursday and no future meetings scheduled, a lockout appears imminent. On the NFLPA's website, nflplayers.com, there's a large graphic that reads "Lockout Countdown."
Some fans certainly will be alienated by the fight between the millionaire players and the billionaire owners.
The players' average salaries by position all were over $1.3 million for the 2010 season. Quarterbacks average $4.1 million while running backs average $1.39 million, just ahead of the kickers at $1.32 million.
"If we can't get an agreement done. ... we will have failed to fulfill our obligation to our fans," Pash said.
Green Bay Packers president Mark Murphy has been on both sides of this fight. As a player in the 1980s, he served as the Washington Redskins' player representative and went through the strike of 1982. The league also had a strike in 1987.
"I remember the first game after we came back from the strike," Murphy said. "Fans were yelling at us. Yelling at me. ... That was a tough time for players and for the league."
Murphy understands why the players like the current system.
"[The earlier strikes] helped set the stage for the system that the players have now," Murphy said. "It's been good for the players."
Now, that the games are over, the players have prepared for the fact that they don't know where their next six-figure paycheck will come from.
"A lot of people don't understand, come March 4, we don't have insurance," Pittsburgh wide receiver Hines Ward said. "They are stripping away our insurance. ... This is a serious matter."
Jay Feely, a former Falcon, is the union representative for the Arizona Cardinals. He believes the players will support the union.
"I think we've done a great job of educating our players, and the players understand what the past players have done to get to this point," Feely said. "They know you have to make a little sacrifice to get to the greater good."
The players are fine with the lockout if all they miss are mini-camps and organized team activities. If it lingers into the preseason and the regular season, they likely will start to get antsy.
"It's the favorite sport played," Ward said. "It makes millions. To sit there and have a lockout would be crazy."
The financial losses could be staggering.
"If you lost the entire preseason, it would be upwards of $1 billion," Pash said. "I don't know how much you would salvage if you had a deal done by July 1."
As NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and NFL Players Association director DeMaurice Smith go deeper into the negotiating dance of a new collective bargaining agreement, they want to be careful not to become known as the executives who killed the $9 billion golden goose. This article was written by D. Orlando Ledbetter and appeared in the Atlanta Journal Constitution.
The NFL has surpassed baseball as the nation's favorite sport, and Super Bowl XLV was the most watched event in television history with an estimated 111 million viewers, according to Nielsen Co.
The players and owners have benefited financially from a system that has made the players rich and the owners, even richer.
But that financial stability is in a state of flux as the negotiations took an ugly turn Thursday when the owners, according to ESPN, walked out of a negotiating session in Washington and cancelled an owners' meeting that was scheduled for Tuesday.
Some of the key issues include:
Revenue sharing
Drug testing
Rookie wage scale
Expanded schedule
Retired player benefits
Financial transparency
Salary cap
International play
In May 2008, the owners opted out of the CBA, which is set to expire March 3. They are seeking $1 billion in concessions per year from the players over a seven-year period, according to Smith.
Some of the teams have used public funds to help build stadiums, in a public-private partnership. Public funding is not as viable an option in hard economic times, and the NFL needs its own funds to build the new mega-stadiums that would allow franchises, such as the Falcons, to generate their own revenue.
The NFL also would use the money to expand rosters, establish more of a European presence, expand benefits and expand health-and-safety programs.
"We would be able to have stadiums in Los Angeles," said Jeff Pash, the NFL's executive vice president, during Super Bowl week in Arlington, Texas. "We could have a new stadium in the San Francisco Bay area. We could have a new stadium in Atlanta. We could have a new stadium in Minnesota."
The fight has been getting a little snippy as the deadline approaches.
"There is a lot out there, things that small-minded lawyers can't even dream of, but we need to have a system that fuels it," Pash said in a not-so-veiled shot at Smith.
The union wants to continue playing under the current system that guarantees the players 50 percent of the revenue, according to Smith. Before giving back any money to the owners, the union wants to see the owners' financial records.
"You're now asking the players to give back a billion dollars a year for the next seven years, and our simple question is before anyone would want to write a $7 billion check, what financial information would you think is relevant?" Smith said.
With the owners walking out Thursday and no future meetings scheduled, a lockout appears imminent. On the NFLPA's website, nflplayers.com, there's a large graphic that reads "Lockout Countdown."
Some fans certainly will be alienated by the fight between the millionaire players and the billionaire owners.
The players' average salaries by position all were over $1.3 million for the 2010 season. Quarterbacks average $4.1 million while running backs average $1.39 million, just ahead of the kickers at $1.32 million.
"If we can't get an agreement done. ... we will have failed to fulfill our obligation to our fans," Pash said.
Green Bay Packers president Mark Murphy has been on both sides of this fight. As a player in the 1980s, he served as the Washington Redskins' player representative and went through the strike of 1982. The league also had a strike in 1987.
"I remember the first game after we came back from the strike," Murphy said. "Fans were yelling at us. Yelling at me. ... That was a tough time for players and for the league."
Murphy understands why the players like the current system.
"[The earlier strikes] helped set the stage for the system that the players have now," Murphy said. "It's been good for the players."
Now, that the games are over, the players have prepared for the fact that they don't know where their next six-figure paycheck will come from.
"A lot of people don't understand, come March 4, we don't have insurance," Pittsburgh wide receiver Hines Ward said. "They are stripping away our insurance. ... This is a serious matter."
Jay Feely, a former Falcon, is the union representative for the Arizona Cardinals. He believes the players will support the union.
"I think we've done a great job of educating our players, and the players understand what the past players have done to get to this point," Feely said. "They know you have to make a little sacrifice to get to the greater good."
The players are fine with the lockout if all they miss are mini-camps and organized team activities. If it lingers into the preseason and the regular season, they likely will start to get antsy.
"It's the favorite sport played," Ward said. "It makes millions. To sit there and have a lockout would be crazy."
The financial losses could be staggering.
"If you lost the entire preseason, it would be upwards of $1 billion," Pash said. "I don't know how much you would salvage if you had a deal done by July 1."
Broncos employees learn Lockout 101
Friday, February 11 2011
The Broncos understand a work stoppage in the NFL is a real possibility and they have let their employees know so. This article was written by Mike Klis and appeared in The Denver Post.
Team president Joe Ellis recently conducted a staff meeting in which he informed employees about the possible ramifications in the event of a labor impasse between the NFL and its players.
"Specifics of our operations in the event that a collective bargaining agreement isn't reached by March 4 are internal and have been communicated clearly to every employee," said Broncos spokesman Patrick Smyth. "We're moving forward with our preparations for the 2011 season and are hopeful that the labor situation is resolved as soon as possible."
If a new collective bargaining agreement isn't reached by March 4, players will be locked out from team facilities and all football business in the NFL will be shut down. Without a new CBA, Broncos coach John Fox won't be allowed to communicate with quarterback Tim Tebow. Broncos football operations boss John Elway and general manager Brian Xanders won't be able to trade quarterback Kyle Orton or work on a new contract for cornerback Champ Bailey, an un-restricted free agent.
Then there are the office workers. If Ellis told lower-level Broncos employees that they had better start saving their pennies, it could have been worse. The New York Jets recently fired 30 salespeople and the Kansas City Chiefs recently fired 11 employees.
NFL owners and the NFL Players Association appear deeply divided on several key issues.
The owners say costs in recent years have outgained revenues, currently placed at about $8.8 billion annually, and they're asking the players to give back a significant percentage of their revenue.
According to the NFLPA, players received 50.6 percent of "all" revenues in 2009 and 51 percent in 2008. It's not until the owners take a credit of approximately $1 billion off the top, for items such as stadium construction and enhancements and the NFL Network, that players receive the more widely reported "total" revenue figures of 57 to 60 percent.
To help bridge the revenue reduction to players, owners say increasing the regular season from 16 to 18 games will expand the revenue pie. The players are against the expanded schedule, at least without greater health and salary benefits.
The Broncos understand a work stoppage in the NFL is a real possibility and they have let their employees know so. This article was written by Mike Klis and appeared in The Denver Post.
Team president Joe Ellis recently conducted a staff meeting in which he informed employees about the possible ramifications in the event of a labor impasse between the NFL and its players.
"Specifics of our operations in the event that a collective bargaining agreement isn't reached by March 4 are internal and have been communicated clearly to every employee," said Broncos spokesman Patrick Smyth. "We're moving forward with our preparations for the 2011 season and are hopeful that the labor situation is resolved as soon as possible."
If a new collective bargaining agreement isn't reached by March 4, players will be locked out from team facilities and all football business in the NFL will be shut down. Without a new CBA, Broncos coach John Fox won't be allowed to communicate with quarterback Tim Tebow. Broncos football operations boss John Elway and general manager Brian Xanders won't be able to trade quarterback Kyle Orton or work on a new contract for cornerback Champ Bailey, an un-restricted free agent.
Then there are the office workers. If Ellis told lower-level Broncos employees that they had better start saving their pennies, it could have been worse. The New York Jets recently fired 30 salespeople and the Kansas City Chiefs recently fired 11 employees.
NFL owners and the NFL Players Association appear deeply divided on several key issues.
The owners say costs in recent years have outgained revenues, currently placed at about $8.8 billion annually, and they're asking the players to give back a significant percentage of their revenue.
According to the NFLPA, players received 50.6 percent of "all" revenues in 2009 and 51 percent in 2008. It's not until the owners take a credit of approximately $1 billion off the top, for items such as stadium construction and enhancements and the NFL Network, that players receive the more widely reported "total" revenue figures of 57 to 60 percent.
To help bridge the revenue reduction to players, owners say increasing the regular season from 16 to 18 games will expand the revenue pie. The players are against the expanded schedule, at least without greater health and salary benefits.
Talks stall
Friday, February 11 2011
Talks aimed at producing a new NFL collective bargaining agreement may have slowed on Thursday when the league and union called off a planned negotiating session. This article was written by Sean Leahy and appeared in USA Today.
The sides met on Wednesday and had expected to meet again for a second straight day. NFLPA spokesman George Atallah told ProFootballTalk he didn't know the reason for the cancellation.
Also, the NFL cancelled a planned owners' meeting next week. "The commissioner did not see a need for it right now," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello told PFT.
The dismissal of Thursday's meeting came five days after the sides met in their first formal bargaining session since November.
"The most important thing is you're talking and you're communicating," NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said Monday when if he was optimistic after Saturday's session. "So that's a good thing."
The last deal of the current CBA is March 3, and the NFL faces a potential work stoppage if the sides can't agree to a new one.
Goodell warned last week that the sides faced a critical deadline in early March to avoid potentially significant financial consequences of allowing the CBA to lapse.
NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith has said the players must get access to more of the owners' expenditure details in order for talks to proceed. Goodell has rejected that.
On Monday, Goodell refused to characterize the state of the talks or whether Sunday' Super Bowl might have been the last football game fans see for a significant time due to a potential work stoppage.
"I'm focused entirely on trying to get an agreement done here in the next few weeks," Goodell said.
Talks aimed at producing a new NFL collective bargaining agreement may have slowed on Thursday when the league and union called off a planned negotiating session. This article was written by Sean Leahy and appeared in USA Today.
The sides met on Wednesday and had expected to meet again for a second straight day. NFLPA spokesman George Atallah told ProFootballTalk he didn't know the reason for the cancellation.
Also, the NFL cancelled a planned owners' meeting next week. "The commissioner did not see a need for it right now," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello told PFT.
The dismissal of Thursday's meeting came five days after the sides met in their first formal bargaining session since November.
"The most important thing is you're talking and you're communicating," NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said Monday when if he was optimistic after Saturday's session. "So that's a good thing."
The last deal of the current CBA is March 3, and the NFL faces a potential work stoppage if the sides can't agree to a new one.
Goodell warned last week that the sides faced a critical deadline in early March to avoid potentially significant financial consequences of allowing the CBA to lapse.
NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith has said the players must get access to more of the owners' expenditure details in order for talks to proceed. Goodell has rejected that.
On Monday, Goodell refused to characterize the state of the talks or whether Sunday' Super Bowl might have been the last football game fans see for a significant time due to a potential work stoppage.
"I'm focused entirely on trying to get an agreement done here in the next few weeks," Goodell said.
Time for both sides to get to work
Thursday, February 10 2011
Football is finished. This article was written by Kevin Acee and appeared in The San Diego Union-Tribune.
OK, maybe just for now. But with Super Bowl XLV now history, talk can officially commence that XLVI could be in jeopardy.
A dwindling calendar has ratcheted up urgency, seemingly moving the NFL and its players’ union to negotiate in earnest. And an entire season being lost seems unlikely at this point.
But it is a very real possibility the NFL could go on hiatus.
While fans wouldn’t be tangibly affected until games are lost in late summer, the league is in danger of a work stoppage that would affect free agency, interrupt revenue flow and player earnings, risk alienating fans and delay the development of rookies who will drafted in April.
The NFL and the NFL Players Association met Saturday in their first formal bargaining session in almost three months and plan to meet again in the coming week. Time is of the essence, as the current league year expires at 9 p.m. PT March 3.
Unless there is significant progress toward a new Collective Bargaining agreement by then, which could prompt the sides to agree to a postponement like there was in 2006, the owners are expected to lock out players.
“The window of opportunity is in the next few weeks to get an agreement that works for everybody,” NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said in his state-of-the-league address at the Super Bowl. “… If we’re unsuccessful in getting an agreement by March 4, I expect that the uncertainty will continue, which will be bad for our partners. It will be bad for the players, it will be bad for the clubs.
“That uncertainty will lead to a reduction, potentially, in revenue, and, when that revenue decreases, there will be less for us to share. That will just make it harder to make an agreement. So, what we have to do is remove the uncertainty.”
You could sit for hours listening separately to the sides’ issues and not be entirely sure what is reality and what is rhetoric.
Bottom line, biggest issue: The owners want a bigger piece of the league’s $9 billion revenue pie.
The union is headed by fast-talking and theatric DeMaurice Smith, an attorney and former lobbyist. Smith is prone to bombastic statements like when he told the New York Times the union is “at war.”
Even if their claims are at times just as dubious, the NFL suits are more reserved.
“This is not a war, it’s a business negotiation,” NFL executive vice president Jeff Pash, the NFL’s lead negotiator, said last week. “I don’t even know if I’d call it a business dispute. It’s a business negotiation.”
It sure seems like a dispute.
The owners say they don’t want to lose money or risk alienating fans, but they are taking a hard line that the status quo is unacceptable.
The players, who are not the ones asking for a new deal, though they admit they got a great one in 2006, say they want to play. Still, they are presenting a united front that they won’t give in.
The owners are unabashedly asking the players to give back, as much as $1 billion a year, according to the NFLPA.
And the reality is the owners have the leverage.
The battle has been billed as billionaires vs. millionaires. That is perhaps painting with too broad a brush, but the fact is the billionaires can afford a longer impasse.
The average NFL salary in 2010 was $1.8 million, but that owes to the number of mega deals. For instance, far fewer than half those who suited up for the Chargers in 2010 made $1 million.
Several agents estimated over the past two weeks, in conversations at the Senior Bowl and Super Bowl, that at least 20 percent of players are essentially living paycheck to paycheck. They said those players will most feel the sting of no offseason paychecks and predict they will essentially revolt at some point.
While players are only paid during the 17 weeks of the season, many have workout bonuses that provide at least some offseason income. Others have roster bonuses that are usually paid early in a new league year. And more than half the players in the league usually benefit from the performance-based pay ($109.5 million last year) the NFL disperses each year but will not this year.
Even at the top of the players’ ranks, there is acknowledgment that time is not on the players side.
“They know they have leverage and they’re trying to use it,” said Jay Feely, the Arizona Cardinals kicker and union rep. “… Where the leverage comes into play is they can afford to wait. Their feeling is ‘If we hold out long enough, even if we lose $1 billion, if we can get them to the deal where we make $2 billion (a year) over the long term, we’re up $10 billion.’ “
The league is not hiding its position. Comments from the top are not overtly confrontational but contain subliminal messages of strength.
“Both sides have very substantial incentives to try and get an agreement done by March 4,” Pash said. “We’ve been very open about what a prolonged delay and uncertainty means from our perspective … We know, as night falls to day, that if we sustain significant revenue losses, it will be harder not easier to make a deal but the initial agreement will be more costly and more difficult.
“For everyone’s benefit it makes sense to try to get something accomplished sooner rather than later. I think that is equally true for the players as well because we know that come March, there will be about 500 players who will become free agents. In the ordinary course, those players … many of them would be signing new contracts and hundreds of millions of dollars in bonus payments would be made.
“We are talking about just in March alone, hundreds of millions of dollars, maybe as much as a half a billion dollars, that will not change hands. As we go forward and March becomes April and May and June, the number of players affected and the number of dollars of pure financial losses will simply grow for both sides. The financial consequences alone ought to be sufficient to compel the parties to get together.”
Football is finished. This article was written by Kevin Acee and appeared in The San Diego Union-Tribune.
OK, maybe just for now. But with Super Bowl XLV now history, talk can officially commence that XLVI could be in jeopardy.
A dwindling calendar has ratcheted up urgency, seemingly moving the NFL and its players’ union to negotiate in earnest. And an entire season being lost seems unlikely at this point.
But it is a very real possibility the NFL could go on hiatus.
While fans wouldn’t be tangibly affected until games are lost in late summer, the league is in danger of a work stoppage that would affect free agency, interrupt revenue flow and player earnings, risk alienating fans and delay the development of rookies who will drafted in April.
The NFL and the NFL Players Association met Saturday in their first formal bargaining session in almost three months and plan to meet again in the coming week. Time is of the essence, as the current league year expires at 9 p.m. PT March 3.
Unless there is significant progress toward a new Collective Bargaining agreement by then, which could prompt the sides to agree to a postponement like there was in 2006, the owners are expected to lock out players.
“The window of opportunity is in the next few weeks to get an agreement that works for everybody,” NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said in his state-of-the-league address at the Super Bowl. “… If we’re unsuccessful in getting an agreement by March 4, I expect that the uncertainty will continue, which will be bad for our partners. It will be bad for the players, it will be bad for the clubs.
“That uncertainty will lead to a reduction, potentially, in revenue, and, when that revenue decreases, there will be less for us to share. That will just make it harder to make an agreement. So, what we have to do is remove the uncertainty.”
You could sit for hours listening separately to the sides’ issues and not be entirely sure what is reality and what is rhetoric.
Bottom line, biggest issue: The owners want a bigger piece of the league’s $9 billion revenue pie.
The union is headed by fast-talking and theatric DeMaurice Smith, an attorney and former lobbyist. Smith is prone to bombastic statements like when he told the New York Times the union is “at war.”
Even if their claims are at times just as dubious, the NFL suits are more reserved.
“This is not a war, it’s a business negotiation,” NFL executive vice president Jeff Pash, the NFL’s lead negotiator, said last week. “I don’t even know if I’d call it a business dispute. It’s a business negotiation.”
It sure seems like a dispute.
The owners say they don’t want to lose money or risk alienating fans, but they are taking a hard line that the status quo is unacceptable.
The players, who are not the ones asking for a new deal, though they admit they got a great one in 2006, say they want to play. Still, they are presenting a united front that they won’t give in.
The owners are unabashedly asking the players to give back, as much as $1 billion a year, according to the NFLPA.
And the reality is the owners have the leverage.
The battle has been billed as billionaires vs. millionaires. That is perhaps painting with too broad a brush, but the fact is the billionaires can afford a longer impasse.
The average NFL salary in 2010 was $1.8 million, but that owes to the number of mega deals. For instance, far fewer than half those who suited up for the Chargers in 2010 made $1 million.
Several agents estimated over the past two weeks, in conversations at the Senior Bowl and Super Bowl, that at least 20 percent of players are essentially living paycheck to paycheck. They said those players will most feel the sting of no offseason paychecks and predict they will essentially revolt at some point.
While players are only paid during the 17 weeks of the season, many have workout bonuses that provide at least some offseason income. Others have roster bonuses that are usually paid early in a new league year. And more than half the players in the league usually benefit from the performance-based pay ($109.5 million last year) the NFL disperses each year but will not this year.
Even at the top of the players’ ranks, there is acknowledgment that time is not on the players side.
“They know they have leverage and they’re trying to use it,” said Jay Feely, the Arizona Cardinals kicker and union rep. “… Where the leverage comes into play is they can afford to wait. Their feeling is ‘If we hold out long enough, even if we lose $1 billion, if we can get them to the deal where we make $2 billion (a year) over the long term, we’re up $10 billion.’ “
The league is not hiding its position. Comments from the top are not overtly confrontational but contain subliminal messages of strength.
“Both sides have very substantial incentives to try and get an agreement done by March 4,” Pash said. “We’ve been very open about what a prolonged delay and uncertainty means from our perspective … We know, as night falls to day, that if we sustain significant revenue losses, it will be harder not easier to make a deal but the initial agreement will be more costly and more difficult.
“For everyone’s benefit it makes sense to try to get something accomplished sooner rather than later. I think that is equally true for the players as well because we know that come March, there will be about 500 players who will become free agents. In the ordinary course, those players … many of them would be signing new contracts and hundreds of millions of dollars in bonus payments would be made.
“We are talking about just in March alone, hundreds of millions of dollars, maybe as much as a half a billion dollars, that will not change hands. As we go forward and March becomes April and May and June, the number of players affected and the number of dollars of pure financial losses will simply grow for both sides. The financial consequences alone ought to be sufficient to compel the parties to get together.”
Who will blink first?
Thursday, February 10 2011
Who will blink first? That's the question that emerged after a Super Bowl week dominated by labor saber-rattling with the NFL and the league's players' association set on a collision course. The sides' dual warnings about a work stoppage threaten to shutter the league in less than a month. This article was written by Sean Leahy and appeared in USA Today.
First NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith chided owners that they must open their books and provide "financial transparency" in order to reach a deal.
Then NFL commissioner Roger Goodell warned that, with the last day of the current deal coming March 3, a new agreement must be reached fast to avoid costly consequences that could include an owner-imposed lockout.
"The window of opportunity is on the next few weeks to get an agreement that works for everyone," Goodell said.
He also blasted the idea of opening owners' books as a "negotiating ploy."
"That's all it is," Goodell said. "The players have more than sufficient information to understand why the economics of this deal do not work."
It's a message, sports business analyst Marc Ganis said, aimed not just at the fans who represent the NFL's consumers, but at the 1900 players that make up the NFLPA's constituency.
So far, Ganis said, Smith and the union leadership have done a more effective job convincing players that they cannot agree to a new CBA without full access to the spending details of the owners — even if resisting a deal on those grounds comes in the form of a work stoppage.
"Right now, we don't have the necessary information we feel like we need to get a deal done," union president Kevin Mawae said.
Ganis said the league hasn't yet effectively explained to players why they may already have all the information needed to negotiate .
"The players association has about 95% of all the NFL expense information," he said. "You're only talking about a very small amount of money the union can't identify with reasonable certainty."
That could leave Goodell and the owners in the position of imposing the league's first work stoppage in 24 years.
Said Goodell, "There will be a number of things that I'm sure both sides will consider (after March 3), that, strategically, I believe will move us away from the negotiating table rather than toward the negotiating table."
What's at stake?
Among the sides' biggest disagreements is how to split revenues that total in the billions annually.
Negotiators met Saturday in the first formal bargaining session since November, and pledged in a joint statement afterward "to increase the number, length and intensity" of their sessions.
The owners want the players to reset the split of revenue to account for what they say are exorbitant infrastructure costs in areas such as stadium construction and maintenance that have risen in recent years. The players are distrustful of the owners' expenditure claims.
"There are fundamental disagreements," Smith said, noting that several independent studies point to sky-high values for teams. He added that he "cannot point to any economic harm from any team" from the down economy.
Goodell, however, painted a completely opposing view of NFL economics. The commissioner was asked how to reconcile the union's stance with the NFL's position that most of the new revenue since the sides' last CBA deal in 2006 has gone to the players.
"I think one is a fact and one isn't," Goodell said. "If you want to deal in facts, the president of the union (Mawae) just in the last week said that the players got a great deal in 2006, and that clearly is indicating that the pendulum has shifted too far in one direction."
Another big disagreement is the NFL's proposal to expand the regular season from 16 games to 18, something Goodell said will help grow revenue. Players are skeptical about the injury risks associated with extra games.
Said Goodell, "There are no deal breakers. We need to sit down and have a healthy negotiation about how we address the issues."
The pressure points
Goodell called the March deadline "critical" because of what he said was a rippling set of financial consequences that could follow. They could be felt by the league in the form of reneged business deals and by the players in the form of potentially lost bonus and free-agent money. Smith and the union haven't said they share that sense of urgency.
Still, Ganis said union leaders face a challenge keeping their membership on point if a lockout kicks in.
"That group does not want to lose paychecks," Ganis said. "They want to play without any interruption. They want to get roster bonuses and to sign contracts."
New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft said the league already has heard from two national companies — whom he didn't name — who claimed "they're walking from the league" if a work stoppage begins.
The challenge for Goodell may be to convince the union membership that the early March deadline — a year after owners allowed the NFL's salary cap to expire — is serious, even if it is more than six months before the new regular season would start.
"If it's not March 4, when?" Ganis said. "Until that time is reached, it's going to be very difficult to get the kinds of modifications to the CBA that the owners are insisting on."
Optimism to be found?
The rhetoric between the sides has been strong. Smith maintained that he thinks the owners have been preparing for a lockout for years.
Jeff Pash, the NFL's chief negotiator, said that if March 4 arrives without significant progress made toward a new deal, "then you probably would be looking at taking some action. Both sides would take some action.
"The union's prepared to decertify. … So I think both sides have to regard (March 3) as a very serious date to try to get something accomplished."
Smith didn't back away from the union's options.
"We will always take the steps that we need to protect ourselves and to protect our interests," he said.
Yet there are some who see a deal as reachable. Kraft, who considers a lockout "criminal," said a deal could be done "in a week" if the stakeholders put aside the lawyers, lobbyists and public relations experts.
"Put them in the background. Lawyers are dealbreakers, not deal-makers," Kraft said.
Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said creating "angst" and "tension" in the process was key to reaching a new agreement. Smith shot that down, but Ganis argued that with the NFL preaching compromise the union leader will only be able to maintain his hard-line stance as long as players remain committed to his vision.
"When will they start to feel enough discomfort that they tell their union leadership, even if we don't have the books, go negotiate around the clock and see what you come up with?" Ganis asked.
The side that begins to buckle when it reaches that insurmountable threshold of pain — perhaps financially or maybe in the court of public opinion — could jump-start real negotiations to produce a deal.
Who will blink first? That's the question that emerged after a Super Bowl week dominated by labor saber-rattling with the NFL and the league's players' association set on a collision course. The sides' dual warnings about a work stoppage threaten to shutter the league in less than a month. This article was written by Sean Leahy and appeared in USA Today.
First NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith chided owners that they must open their books and provide "financial transparency" in order to reach a deal.
Then NFL commissioner Roger Goodell warned that, with the last day of the current deal coming March 3, a new agreement must be reached fast to avoid costly consequences that could include an owner-imposed lockout.
"The window of opportunity is on the next few weeks to get an agreement that works for everyone," Goodell said.
He also blasted the idea of opening owners' books as a "negotiating ploy."
"That's all it is," Goodell said. "The players have more than sufficient information to understand why the economics of this deal do not work."
It's a message, sports business analyst Marc Ganis said, aimed not just at the fans who represent the NFL's consumers, but at the 1900 players that make up the NFLPA's constituency.
So far, Ganis said, Smith and the union leadership have done a more effective job convincing players that they cannot agree to a new CBA without full access to the spending details of the owners — even if resisting a deal on those grounds comes in the form of a work stoppage.
"Right now, we don't have the necessary information we feel like we need to get a deal done," union president Kevin Mawae said.
Ganis said the league hasn't yet effectively explained to players why they may already have all the information needed to negotiate .
"The players association has about 95% of all the NFL expense information," he said. "You're only talking about a very small amount of money the union can't identify with reasonable certainty."
That could leave Goodell and the owners in the position of imposing the league's first work stoppage in 24 years.
Said Goodell, "There will be a number of things that I'm sure both sides will consider (after March 3), that, strategically, I believe will move us away from the negotiating table rather than toward the negotiating table."
What's at stake?
Among the sides' biggest disagreements is how to split revenues that total in the billions annually.
Negotiators met Saturday in the first formal bargaining session since November, and pledged in a joint statement afterward "to increase the number, length and intensity" of their sessions.
The owners want the players to reset the split of revenue to account for what they say are exorbitant infrastructure costs in areas such as stadium construction and maintenance that have risen in recent years. The players are distrustful of the owners' expenditure claims.
"There are fundamental disagreements," Smith said, noting that several independent studies point to sky-high values for teams. He added that he "cannot point to any economic harm from any team" from the down economy.
Goodell, however, painted a completely opposing view of NFL economics. The commissioner was asked how to reconcile the union's stance with the NFL's position that most of the new revenue since the sides' last CBA deal in 2006 has gone to the players.
"I think one is a fact and one isn't," Goodell said. "If you want to deal in facts, the president of the union (Mawae) just in the last week said that the players got a great deal in 2006, and that clearly is indicating that the pendulum has shifted too far in one direction."
Another big disagreement is the NFL's proposal to expand the regular season from 16 games to 18, something Goodell said will help grow revenue. Players are skeptical about the injury risks associated with extra games.
Said Goodell, "There are no deal breakers. We need to sit down and have a healthy negotiation about how we address the issues."
The pressure points
Goodell called the March deadline "critical" because of what he said was a rippling set of financial consequences that could follow. They could be felt by the league in the form of reneged business deals and by the players in the form of potentially lost bonus and free-agent money. Smith and the union haven't said they share that sense of urgency.
Still, Ganis said union leaders face a challenge keeping their membership on point if a lockout kicks in.
"That group does not want to lose paychecks," Ganis said. "They want to play without any interruption. They want to get roster bonuses and to sign contracts."
New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft said the league already has heard from two national companies — whom he didn't name — who claimed "they're walking from the league" if a work stoppage begins.
The challenge for Goodell may be to convince the union membership that the early March deadline — a year after owners allowed the NFL's salary cap to expire — is serious, even if it is more than six months before the new regular season would start.
"If it's not March 4, when?" Ganis said. "Until that time is reached, it's going to be very difficult to get the kinds of modifications to the CBA that the owners are insisting on."
Optimism to be found?
The rhetoric between the sides has been strong. Smith maintained that he thinks the owners have been preparing for a lockout for years.
Jeff Pash, the NFL's chief negotiator, said that if March 4 arrives without significant progress made toward a new deal, "then you probably would be looking at taking some action. Both sides would take some action.
"The union's prepared to decertify. … So I think both sides have to regard (March 3) as a very serious date to try to get something accomplished."
Smith didn't back away from the union's options.
"We will always take the steps that we need to protect ourselves and to protect our interests," he said.
Yet there are some who see a deal as reachable. Kraft, who considers a lockout "criminal," said a deal could be done "in a week" if the stakeholders put aside the lawyers, lobbyists and public relations experts.
"Put them in the background. Lawyers are dealbreakers, not deal-makers," Kraft said.
Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said creating "angst" and "tension" in the process was key to reaching a new agreement. Smith shot that down, but Ganis argued that with the NFL preaching compromise the union leader will only be able to maintain his hard-line stance as long as players remain committed to his vision.
"When will they start to feel enough discomfort that they tell their union leadership, even if we don't have the books, go negotiate around the clock and see what you come up with?" Ganis asked.
The side that begins to buckle when it reaches that insurmountable threshold of pain — perhaps financially or maybe in the court of public opinion — could jump-start real negotiations to produce a deal.
miércoles, 9 de febrero de 2011
After NFL's tough SB week, league faces tougher future
Wednesday, February 09 2011
Now what? This article was written by Vito Stellino and appeared in the Florida Times Union.
That was the question hanging over the National Football League on Monday after what should have been a moment of celebration.
Preliminary television ratings showed that Green Bay's 31-25 victory over the Pittsburgh Steelers was the most-watched event in the history of television.
But that was tempered by looming labor strife, with the owners apparently ready to lock out the players on March 4 if they can't reach a collective bargaining agreement.
And that would mean the league would come to a halt — except for the draft in April — until a deal is reached.
Commissioner Roger Goodell said it's a good sign that the two sides are at least talking. They met Saturday and plan to meet again this week.
The league also has to deal with the ticket fiasco that was the culmination of a nightmarish week. A winter storm virtually shut down North Texas much of the week, and there was none of the usual festive atmosphere associated with the game.
That was followed by the problems at the stadium Sunday. Four entrances were closed because of the danger of falling ice, which made it difficult for many fans to get into the stadium.
Then there was a problem with the installation of seats, which meant that about 400 ticket-buying fans had to watch the game on television.
Goodell apologized and said those fans will be invited to next year's Super Bowl — assuming there is one — in Indianapolis in addition to being offered three times the face value of their tickets.
Goodell said a thorough review will be conducted to figure out what went wrong, but stressed the league put a lot of emphasis on fans' safety.
The league, of course, would prefer the focus be on the football after the fourth exciting Super Bowl finish in a row as the Packers defense stopped Ben Roethlisberger from pulling off a game-winning drive in the final two minutes.
Last year, the Indianapolis Colts and Peyton Manning were driving for the tying touchdown before throwing a pick-six that gave the Saints the victory.
The two previous seasons, Roethlisberger and Eli Manning led the Steelers and the New York Giants to game-winning drives in the final minute.
The Packers will try to become the first NFC team since the 1996-97 Packers to reach the Super Bowl two years in a row and the first NFC team to win two in a row since 1993-94 Cowboys.
The Steelers will attempt to become the first team to lose the Super Bowl and come back to win it the next year since the 1972 Dolphins.
The league also has a new star in quarterback Aaron Rodgers.
"He's a great young man," Goodell said. "He's really does things right. He's a terrific person to have involved in the NFL. I'm so proud he's the Super Bowl MVP."
Rodgers has none of the off-the-field baggage of Roethlisberger, and while Goodell said he doesn't root, he was probably happy not to have Roethlisberger — who was suspended for the first four games this season after a sexual assault investigation — as the MVP.
The Packers not only have an emerging star at quarterback, but they have a lot of confidence. Coach Mike McCarthy said Friday that "This is our time and Sunday will be our night." He even had his players' fingers sized for Super Bowl rings on Saturday.
"I wish I'd made a bigger deal out of it," he said of the ring-sizing. "I thought it was the right time to do it."
McCarthy hopes to stay with the Packers for the long haul. Coach Mike Holmgren left for Seattle in 1999, three years after winning the Packers' last Super Bowl.
"I hope this is my last job," said McCarthy, 47.
A year ago, Saints coach Sean Payton said he slept with the Super Bowl trophy after the game.
McCarthy said he didn't sleep with it although coaches don't tend to get much sleep the night of the game.
"My wife is too good looking," McCarthy said with a smile.
Rodgers then took the podium and said, "I didn't sleep with the trophy, either."
Now what? This article was written by Vito Stellino and appeared in the Florida Times Union.
That was the question hanging over the National Football League on Monday after what should have been a moment of celebration.
Preliminary television ratings showed that Green Bay's 31-25 victory over the Pittsburgh Steelers was the most-watched event in the history of television.
But that was tempered by looming labor strife, with the owners apparently ready to lock out the players on March 4 if they can't reach a collective bargaining agreement.
And that would mean the league would come to a halt — except for the draft in April — until a deal is reached.
Commissioner Roger Goodell said it's a good sign that the two sides are at least talking. They met Saturday and plan to meet again this week.
The league also has to deal with the ticket fiasco that was the culmination of a nightmarish week. A winter storm virtually shut down North Texas much of the week, and there was none of the usual festive atmosphere associated with the game.
That was followed by the problems at the stadium Sunday. Four entrances were closed because of the danger of falling ice, which made it difficult for many fans to get into the stadium.
Then there was a problem with the installation of seats, which meant that about 400 ticket-buying fans had to watch the game on television.
Goodell apologized and said those fans will be invited to next year's Super Bowl — assuming there is one — in Indianapolis in addition to being offered three times the face value of their tickets.
Goodell said a thorough review will be conducted to figure out what went wrong, but stressed the league put a lot of emphasis on fans' safety.
The league, of course, would prefer the focus be on the football after the fourth exciting Super Bowl finish in a row as the Packers defense stopped Ben Roethlisberger from pulling off a game-winning drive in the final two minutes.
Last year, the Indianapolis Colts and Peyton Manning were driving for the tying touchdown before throwing a pick-six that gave the Saints the victory.
The two previous seasons, Roethlisberger and Eli Manning led the Steelers and the New York Giants to game-winning drives in the final minute.
The Packers will try to become the first NFC team since the 1996-97 Packers to reach the Super Bowl two years in a row and the first NFC team to win two in a row since 1993-94 Cowboys.
The Steelers will attempt to become the first team to lose the Super Bowl and come back to win it the next year since the 1972 Dolphins.
The league also has a new star in quarterback Aaron Rodgers.
"He's a great young man," Goodell said. "He's really does things right. He's a terrific person to have involved in the NFL. I'm so proud he's the Super Bowl MVP."
Rodgers has none of the off-the-field baggage of Roethlisberger, and while Goodell said he doesn't root, he was probably happy not to have Roethlisberger — who was suspended for the first four games this season after a sexual assault investigation — as the MVP.
The Packers not only have an emerging star at quarterback, but they have a lot of confidence. Coach Mike McCarthy said Friday that "This is our time and Sunday will be our night." He even had his players' fingers sized for Super Bowl rings on Saturday.
"I wish I'd made a bigger deal out of it," he said of the ring-sizing. "I thought it was the right time to do it."
McCarthy hopes to stay with the Packers for the long haul. Coach Mike Holmgren left for Seattle in 1999, three years after winning the Packers' last Super Bowl.
"I hope this is my last job," said McCarthy, 47.
A year ago, Saints coach Sean Payton said he slept with the Super Bowl trophy after the game.
McCarthy said he didn't sleep with it although coaches don't tend to get much sleep the night of the game.
"My wife is too good looking," McCarthy said with a smile.
Rodgers then took the podium and said, "I didn't sleep with the trophy, either."
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)