**Official CBA Thread II - Update: Owners Approve CBA!**

[PhinBeck]

Heres a copy of my post for Geauxfins:

I laugh at the notion that people blame Gene Upshaw & the NFLPA. You wont find an example anywhere in the world of a Union that works so closely with its employer - and with the same interests - as the NFLPA over the last 20 years. Gene Upshaw, while fighting for player rights, ultimately has the Leagues best interests at heart. He is one of the silent heroes of the NFL, and one of the of the key protaganists for the leagues continued growth. And all he gets for it is grief.

A salary cap is NOT in the players best interest, yet Upshaw goes along with it ONLY because its in the best interest of the League. As a result, he asks for a greater percentage of revenues for player salaries, even though its still less FAR LESS than players would earn in an uncapped NFL. The players DESERVE better. And the League knows it.

In addition, think about the current NFL labor deal and just how much it favors owners: The average NFL player career is only three years, shortest among all major American Sports. Yet player contracts are NOT garanteed, even though the succeptibility to injury is greater than in any other sport. Players get paid LESS than their peers from the NBA and MLB, even though Football is more popular and generates more revenues than other leagues. How can anyone point the finger at Upshaw when he has taken such a moderate stance against the owners over the years? Hes the good guy in all this, not the villain.

Do you want to point the finger at someone? Look at the new, greedy, "leveraged" owners that purchased their Franchises in small markets for $500 million, and now have to do everythting imaginable to turn a profit and justify their investment. These are the people that are rocking the boat, not the NFLPA. They want to keep player salaries down AND prevent rich-owners from over-spending (cash over cap). Essentially, they want to have their cake and eat it too. They are the ones causing the problems here, not the union

while I agree with you overall i do disagree on some points. I will not dbate them as to me they are irrrelvant to overall argument.

When you hve a labor dispute an there are 3 sides not two, you are doomed. It just wont work. There is another sid poking its head out aa litlle and thats the actual players some who are upst at the union itself, it isnt a big thing now, nor will it surly be, but there are grumblings. Just cant solvee the issues if there are so many that conflict with each other that you cant separate them and resolve them. When a 2 sided fight becomes a 3 or 4 sided fight, it sets up automatic failure. Unless the owners get on thee same page, no deal will get done.

Upshaw is not without blame here at all. At this point throwing ultimatums and absolutes would bee a concern if I were on the opposite side. Like there will never be a cap again. Then the league counters with well then the player pool drops below 50%, and then a huge stoppage occurs and everyone loses. That kessler guy for the union? who is this guy? He looks and sounds like that kid who was picked on all his life and now fels he is a big bad tough guy and is flexing his "muscle" to show look at m look at me. Yeah I know not relevant just an observation. But most of it is posturing to being used to pressure the owners to get the deal done.

in a nutshell, the players came in and negotiated in good faith but the owners cant agree among themwsleves and so cant agree on a deal. Jerry Jones is teh ring leader of the new owners out for themselves first then the league. I always hated that idiot.

 

[Geauxfins]

while I agree with you overall i do disagree on some points. I will not dbate them as to me they are irrrelvant to overall argument.

When you hve a labor dispute an there are 3 sides not two, you are doomed. It just wont work. There is another sid poking its head out aa litlle and thats the actual players some who are upst at the union itself, it isnt a big thing now, nor will it surly be, but there are grumblings. Just cant solvee the issues if there are so many that conflict with each other that you cant separate them and resolve them. When a 2 sided fight becomes a 3 or 4 sided fight, it sets up automatic failure. Unless the owners get on thee same page, no deal will get done.

Upshaw is not without blame here at all. At this point throwing ultimatums and absolutes would bee a concern if I were on the opposite side. Like there will never be a cap again. Then the league counters with well then the player pool drops below 50%, and then a huge stoppage occurs and everyone loses. That kessler guy for the union? who is this guy? He looks and sounds like that kid who was picked on all his life and now fels he is a big bad tough guy and is flexing his "muscle" to show look at m look at me. Yeah I know not relevant just an observation. But most of it is posturing to being used to pressure the owners to get the deal done.

in a nutshell, the players came in and negotiated in good faith but the owners cant agree among themwsleves and so cant agree on a deal. Jerry Jones is teh ring leader of the new owners out for themselves first then the league. I always hated that idiot.

I gotta agree with you for the most part (definitely on Jones), but I don't agree the players came in and negotiated in good faith. the players say the union is keeping them in the dark and they don't even know what is going on. The only players that I have heard speak up, say the union is just spouting off and that they union is NOT representing what they players want (but that is only a few players, the rest seem to be staying silent). I also don't know who the kessler guy is either...just wanting his 15 minutes is my guess.

 

[nopony]

No you are wrong. Players salaries, admin salaries, overhead costs, other revenues, and markup % etc all play a part in ticket prices. Once again cost accounting 101. They dont randomly pulll a number out of a hat. If the peoeple dont come, the have to adjust one of the components of the price to reduce the ticket price, first being the markup. But it isnt solely based on what people will pay. If people would only pay 10 bucks, they wouldnt get the tickets.

And this from Geauxfins:

It is really simple to figure this one out...if the players salary's cost 60% of the total revenue, then that is the single largest expense (assuming the owners are making a profit). Ticket prices are certainly driven by costs, as well as supply and demand. It's really pretty simple.

You guys ever run a business? Take an econ class?

The price of something is determined by the market, not by cost.

If demand is greater, price goes up. If demand is lower or supply is higher, price goes down.

The owners aren't going to charge less if they pay players less unless people will not pay it otherwise.

By the same token, if they can get people to pay X, they are going to charge it.

 

[nopony]

ummmm, ok, not exactly from a great source (PFT) but you can't argue with the fact that the union is really screwing the players here..

UNION IS FAILING ITS MEMBERS

We've long believed that the NFLPA is doing a less-than-ideal job (we were going to say "piss-poor," but we're trying to be nice) in representing its membership.

Tonight, we're convinced of it.

At times of great tribulation, where multiple diverse interests must be considered and a balance seems nearly impossible to reach, strong leaders don't get close to working it all out and then storm out of the room.

But NFLPA executive director Gene Upshaw continues to posture and preen at a time when the two sides are as close as they might ever get to getting a deal done. Once the teams cut their players in order to get under the cap, the sense of urgency to get something done will diminish, and all of the momentum of the past few days will be lost.

And then the players who get dumped will sign crappy deals due to the restrictive rules of the last capped year, and they'll soon be craving the uncapped year in order to make their money back. And as more guys sign those crappy deals under the current rules, it'll be harder to justify extending the CBA, since more and more of the players who signed deals under the old one will be screwed.

So before anyone knows it we'll be into the uncapped year, when some teams will spend a lot more money that otherwise would be permitted.

And some teams will spend a lot less than otherwise would be required.

Our guess is that, despite the lure of a year without a cap, the total dollars spent on player salaries will be less than what they would have been if there had been an extension and a cap in 2007.

So next comes the expiration of the CBA in 2008, decertification of the union, antitrust lawsuits if the league imposes a uniform set of compensation and free agency rules, and maybe a work stoppage.

As one league source told us on Sunday night, "The union and the players have no idea what they just did to themselves. No one is going to win, but they will suffer the greatest."

It's time to wake up, players. Demand that the guys whose salaries you pay earn their money and get a deal done. The owners will always be making money, but the players have a limited window.

If the 2006 league year gets rolling without a new CBA, you're all going to be making a lot less of it over the next few years.
​

My god, PFT has gotten even more stupid. I didn't really think that was possible.

Salaries go down in an uncapped year?:sidelol: :sidelol: :sidelol: Keep dreaming.

 

[nopony]

Anyway, it's been fun arguing socialism vs capitalism with ya'll as part of this whole CBA thing, I can't wait until we go back to talking Drew Bree's draft picks and football though....

Go capitalism, then. The players would LOVE to.

But the owners sure would hate it.

Or do you just want the owners to be free market, but the players to be socialized?

 

[PhinBeck]

And this from Geauxfins:




You guys ever run a business? Take an econ class?

The price of something is determined by the market, not by cost.

If demand is greater, price goes up. If demand is lower or supply is higher, price goes down.

The owners aren't going to charge less if they pay players less unless people will not pay it otherwise.

By the same token, if they can get people to pay X, they are going to charge it.

uh yeah I am a CPA.

Yes markeet plays a big part. It effects markup %. costs asscociated are also effeected by market pricing. Never discounted that prices are set based on what they can get. They are, but there is a base minimum. So my only point was to say that owners costs dont effeect pricing is incorrect. It does effect, but isnt the only concern. Many factors go into pricing. Go take a cost management accounting class it is clearly spelled out there. If an owner can mark up prices 100% over their costs, of course they will do it. But if they can only sell tickets for 10 bucks, think the salaries stay the way they are right now?

 

[Geauxfins]

And this from Geauxfins:




You guys ever run a business? Take an econ class?

The price of something is determined by the market, not by cost.

If demand is greater, price goes up. If demand is lower or supply is higher, price goes down.

The owners aren't going to charge less if they pay players less unless people will not pay it otherwise.

By the same token, if they can get people to pay X, they are going to charge it.

And yes, I own and run my own business, I've had more than enough econ classes (two) etc.

and I will assure you cost always impacts price.

 

[nopony]

uh yeah I am a CPA.

Yes markeet plays a big part. It effects markup %. costs asscociated are also effeected by market pricing. Never discounted that prices are set based on what they can get. They are, but there is a base minimum. So my only point was to say that owners costs dont effeect pricing is incorrect. It does effect, but isnt the only concern. Many factors go into pricing. Go take a cost management accounting class it is clearly spelled out there. If an owner can mark up prices 100% over their costs, of course they will do it. But if they can only sell tickets for 10 bucks, think the salaries stay the way they are right now?

I'm not sure where we disagree here. I never suggested that profits don't effect payroll... I said payroll doesn't effect ticket prices.

If you are pointing out that I am oversimplifying the issue, then you are absolutely right.

But I think that you recognize my point and that for the most part we agree on this particular.

 

[PhinBeck]

My god, PFT has gotten even more stupid. I didn't really think that was possible.

Salaries go down in an uncapped year?:sidelol: :sidelol: :sidelol: Keep dreaming.

In 2007 it may. mort reported last nite that one clause in the current CBA is that salaries cannot exceed 30% of previous years salary. So inturn not all players would get that 30%. Many teams would also be slow to give out huge contracts for fear of th unknown. What would the next CBA look like? Also because thee bonuses can only be spread out over 4 years instead of seven, it would effect the amount of guarenteed money offerred.

This may not happen (decrease in overall salaries) maybe not likely, but to say it is impossible is wrong.

 

[nopony]

And yes, I own and run my own business, I've had more than enough econ classes (two) etc.

and I will assure you cost always impacts price.

You may want to hire an outside consultant for your business.


If you let costs dictate your prices, you are doing something wrong.

 

[PhinBeck]

I'm not sure where we disagree here. I never suggested that profits don't effect payroll... I said payroll doesn't effect ticket prices.

If you are pointing out that I am oversimplifying the issue, then you are absolutely right.

But I think that you recognize my point and that for the most part we agree on this particular.

But I think you

No payroll does factor in, it is part of the overall costs of the owner, which beecomes the base for pricing. Then you add the profit markup onto the base pricing. Base pricing also factors in other revenues such as tv money. after the base is established or break even point. Markup based on market value is added to the price model to establish th overall price.

 

[Geauxfins]

My god, PFT has gotten even more stupid. I didn't really think that was possible.

Salaries go down in an uncapped year?:sidelol: :sidelol: :sidelol: Keep dreaming.

I think your opnion on PFT is fairly common, but what do you think of the points in the article?

Does this mean you think the union is doing a good job of representing what the players want or a bad job? In your opinion, would the NFL be able to put out a better product with no salary cap, and therefore more people would watch and there would be more revenue, or do you think the product would become less popular in a less competive environment, and therefore fewer people would watch so NFL revenue would go down, but somehow player salaries would still go up??

 

[PhinBeck]

You may want to hire an outside consultant for your business.


If you let costs dictate your prices, you are doing something wrong.

If you dont factor costs into pricing you are gonna go out of business. You dont limit your rpicing at costs, that is your break even point, you thn add markup, which is your profit margin. But to ignore costs in your pricing model is dangerous.

 

[Geauxfins]

You may want to hire an outside consultant for your business.


If you let costs dictate your prices, you are doing something wrong.

Actually in my business the fees are fixed (very common with gov't contracting), and costs exactly dicate prices (cost plus fixed fee contracts is what they are called, very common in the defense business). I also do use several outside consultants so (accountants lawyers and such), so I think that is a good point.

 

[greatwade]

Geez fellas, I'd jump in but its hard to tell what you are talking about. Salaries going up or down??

Looks like there's already one CPA here. Two of us and we'll start a FIFO/LIFO discussion.

I still blame Covington & Burling for this entire mess. The CBA is a legal rubix cube.