NFL completes owners' meetings
by Fooch on May 25, 2009 8:00 AM PDT
in News
8 comments
Happy Memorial Day to everybody. The first OTAs of the offseaso wrapped up last week and there was certainly plenty of excitement, particularly with the injury to Walt Harris. However, I'd imagine things will quiet down until the next OTAs get going. The 49ers might sign some minor free agents, but otherwise I'm not expecting much.
While the OTAs were going on, important league-wide business was taking place. The owners held their annual May meetings last week in Ft. Lauderdale. These meetings are particularly important in light of the new Executive Director of the NFLPA and the looming battle over a new collective bargaining agreement. I realize some people are not all that interested in this subject, but long-time readers know this is something of great interest to me.
Some of the issues on the table at this meeting included the potential extended schedule (more regular season, less exhibition season) and including the hiring of general managers under the Rooney Rule. The scheduling has yet to be completely figured out, as it will definitely involve negotiations with the players.
Rookie Salary Scale
Speaking of the players, the biggest issue revolves around the potential rookie salary scale. Salaries have gone through the roof for rookie draft picks. Whether that's just the way the economics of it will work or not, there are a lot of parties that have a problem with it. The current veterans of the league are losing out on potential income (if more of the pie is going to rookies, that means less to veterans obviously).
The owners don't like it because of the economics of it. The country is already in a recession and owners would certainly like to cut back on costs if at all possible. It's hard to cut back on current player salaries, so the easiest option is the rookie pool. And the only folks who would raise a stink would be agents. I don't include the future rookies because they're not in the league yet and get no say. However, current agents stand to lose a fair amount of money if a rookie scale is instituted.
What will be most interesting about this issue is what kind of leverage the union can gain, if any. When negotiating a labor deal, it's all about having bargaining chips. In the end, this might not really be much of a bargaining chip for either side. They both want it to happen. Any thoughts on how it might otherwise play out?
Television Deal and War Chest
There was one other bit of owner news that was rather intriguing. The league announced their extension with Comcast last week, but made other news with their new deals with Fox and CBS. The league will see a 1 to 2% increase in tv money which is always good for the league. More importantly though, the league is guaranteed money in 2011, even if there's a strike that season.
That kind of deal is huge for the owners for many reasons. Aside from just getting the money no matter is the fact that owners can remain united in the face of a strike. One of the benefits of a strike to the striking employees is the economic damage that can be done to the employer. While the owners would certainly lose a good deal of money if there was a strike, this tv deal guarantees them a large portion of their annual revenue.
Conclusions
Given what baseball, basketball and hockey have been through over the last fifteen years, one could argue football would be foolish to follow them down the path of a work stoppage. As they say, those who ignore the past are condemned to repeat it. Let's hope both sides have recognized the mistakes of the other leagues and unions.
Given the rough economic times many folks are facing, fans would certainly not look kindly upon millionaires and billionaires getting in a pissing contest over billions of dollars. At the same time, you don't have to be a genius to make your millions or billions. It's entirely possible that stubbornness kicks in and the two sides reach a stalemate. It'd be an awful shame, but at this point, anything is possible.
Supposedly the two sides will open talks in this coming month. I'm sure we'll get plenty of sabre-rattling over the coming year. Even with negotiations starting, it's still way too early to see how things will go down. However, I think this is sufficiently important enough that I'll do what I can to keep updates flowing on the subject matter.
0 recs |
8 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
My vote
I think my vote is more wishful thinking than anything else. I have no idea how this will sort itself out. The idea of living through a fall without the NFL is pretty bleak. I can’t see myself doing yardwork every Sunday. By December I’d be racking other people’s yards.
Here’s a couple other issues. If the league expands to 18 games, and why wouldn’t it, that means more revenue. It also means more injuries, and should dictate an expansion of the roster, which would mean more players paying into the NFLPA. That should be a plus to the union.
I personally would like to see an expansion of the pension benefits for retired players. Considering the damage that a football player endures, I would hope that the medical side is well-covered and that a more generous payment is set aside for the retirees. That’s an old man speaking.
by Bob On The Coast on May 25, 2009 10:47 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Yes to 18 games and a rookie salary scale.
I don’t think there’s a big constituency for a four game preseason. In fact, maybe the only people who really like the preseason are the bubble players who have a chance to demonstrate their game skills and make the roster. But I think two games is enough to see how players react under game conditions and evaluate the team depth. The two extra season games would give coaches more time to adjust during the season and bring in extra revenue for the franchise. But the players deserve more money, too. They’re the reason people watch the games.
As for the rookie pay scale, I don’t believe it’s the salaries that are the problem – it’s the guaranteed money. A team can simply release or trade a bust player and his salary stops there, but that guaranteed money – $20-30mil for a top pick, just keeps on going out the door no matter how well or poorly the player performs. A bad pick at the top of the draft can burden a team economically for years. So I would propose a cap on guaranteed money only, based on the round in which a player is drafted. Arbitrarily, let’s say $5mil in the 1st, $2mil in the 2nd, $1mil in the 3rd, etc. Or simply make a rule that requires teams to pay all the guaranteed money in the rookie’s first year or two. No team is going to want to pay out $30mil in year one for a rookie, or even over two years. This method might be preferable to an arbitrary cap for legal reasons involving employment law. But something should be done because the distortions in the draft that are caused by the current scheme are hardly in the long-term interest of the game.
by MontanaPass on May 25, 2009 12:26 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
3k from TurfShowTimes
Great write-up, Fooch. I won’t vote, because I don’t think it’s fair for me to come over here and disrupt what I assume is an attempt to gauge the sentiment among Niners fans for your poll, but if I was going to vote, I would have gone for “no.”
As for 18 games at full-speed with your starters, I’m against it. I could endorse shortening the preseason to 3 games, but extending the regular season seems dangerous and an easy ploy for more revenue for the league.
And I agree with MP, the guaranteed money is the issue, and it has gotten absolutely out of hand for the top quintet of each draft.
Your uncle molests collies.
by 3k on May 25, 2009 1:51 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
votes
You’re more than welcome to vote if you want. The only polls I’d prefer to have only 49ers fans vote in would be niners-centric posts. In this case, anybody with an opinion on football is welcome to vote. But thanks for deferring initially.
by Fooch on May 25, 2009 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with every thing you said
Crazy.
by chikmagnet_565 on May 25, 2009 8:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Alex Smith is gonna be rich from now on...
Mike Webster died almost penniless.
Well, we're waiting....
by drummer on May 25, 2009 11:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Yes to 18 game season. We already play 20 games, might as well make a couple of them official. More meaningful games will make the season better and longer.
Yes to reducing the rookie salary scale. There’s no way prospects who have never played in the NFL should come in making more than the best or second best player in the league at their position. It’s gotten totally out of hand. The veterans who have proven they’re worthy of the big contracts should get them.
by Neon on May 26, 2009 12:42 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Shorten Preseason
If they went to a 18 game Season, wouldn’t it be hard to evalulate rookies and FA? It’s one thing to watch at Practice but another in real game situations.It’s even harder when it comes down to the last preseason game.Will they increase the roster?How will payroll be affected?There are many questions to asked and answered before that decision is decided.
by LASVEGASNINER on May 26, 2009 4:06 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 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.
