One of the key arguments between the NFL owners and players concerns the willingness of the owners to open their books. The NFL owners have been crying broke and asking the players to make concessions because the owners say they haven’t been making as much money as the players think.
The players say that they will decertify the union if they don’t get a better offer or a chance to look at the owners’ books.
Up until now, the owners have told the players to trust them, while the players association has said they would rather look at the owner’s books for themselves. It’s starting to look like the books may get opened in the near future.
DeMaurice Smith and the NFLPA have hired the International Investment Bank to look over the owner’s books and decipher the status of the NFL’s profitability books should the players be allowed to do so.
The owners and players met yesterday for nine hours and they’re scheduled to talk again today. They have a couple of days to either 
reach an agreement or extend their negotiations for another week or so.
I doubt that the owners ever agree to let their players look at their books. Once they let the players look at their books, it will give the players tremendous information for negotiating going forward.
I remember when a reporter asked NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell during the 2010 season why the NFL owners didn’t allow the players to look at their books, Goodell told him that the players already knew what was in the NFL owners’ books.
If that were the truth, it would be all the more reason for the owners to let the players look at their books. That’s a con. I’m not saying that the owners should let the players look at their books, because most business owners aren’t willing to let their employees look at their books but they should “stop the silly trust us statements”.
A couple of questions: Does any other major sports organization permit the players access to the financial data of the team?
Is there a legal requirement that any team must permit the books to be viewed by people outside the organization (aren’t the Packers publicly owned)?
Does any other privately owned organization (not sports related) required to open their books to permit inspection prior to salary negotiation – for example, does company X have to show employees how much income they get from selling advertising on the outside of the building, or permiting people to park in their lots after hours)?
WHile I have empathy for the players, it seems the players want special rules, as I think (and I am asking for people to sound off if they think otherwise) to govern their negotiations. If the players get one percentage, the owners the other – shouldn’t that tell how much money is being made?
Now if the owners are savy enough to negotiate deals with pepsi, UA etc, good for them, the same as if a player gets an endorsement from HEad and Shoulders – isn’t that the players agents job, to find money making deals for the player (and himself) .
My proposal, they are 10% apart – each side give 3% and the remaining 4% go into a fund to help retired players with football related injuries and to fund future research on brain injuries.
As soon as you have an agreement that ties compensation to revenues I don’t see how you can get away with not opening and auditing the books. If the NFL had a set amount that they and the NFPLA agreed to it would be a different story. That’s not the case though. Why would I agree to a percentage of something that could be manipulated without my knowledge?
I’m not sure why they’ve been so scared, but if the owners want to do a deal with the players, who clearly have the leverage now, they have to show them the books.
You aren’t going to get the players to agree to give you another $1 billion expense credit on top of the $1 billion that is already carved out of the deal for the owners without showing them why you need it.
I am so glad that fans are starting to change their perception of labor disputes. It seems as if every time there is a work stopage for sports. Fans automaticly side with the owners. I get it because it is because we are use to are bosses making all the money and we get whatever they feel like paying us.
Now in the year 2011 things have changed. No one parks their car on your job for $45, pays $8 for a beer hundred dollars for tickets to watch you work. I ask any sane person. Do you belive that if players made less that the prices for any of these things will come down? The owners will pocket every cent. These owners don’t get any sympathy from me! They are able to own there teams for as long as they live. Then pass it along to their children. They take all the risk? That’s right just like any other business. Last time I checked the St. Louis Rams just sold the team to one of the Walmart heir! That was a hefty price tag!
I’m not saying that players should be equal to the owners, but when you ask to give 1 BILLION dollars back to anything you have to be a fool to just take someones word for that!!!!!!!!
Navy
It’s the owners who refuse to stick with the original deal. And it’s the owners who are requesting an additional $1 billion off the top. With NFL revenue expected to INCREASE as much as “$11 billion dollars per year” (up to $20 billion) within the next 5 years, it’s the owners who want a bigger piece of the pie. Why shouldn’t they show the labor union what they’re making?
Think about it. Thirty-two owners split approx. 40% of $9 billion. That’s roughly $ 1 billion apiece. Meanwhile, the 2,000 or so players share 60% of that money (and not equally, mind you). You have players like Larry Fitzgerald who earn more in one game than DeSean Jackson earns in one year. Certainly, he’s better than Jackson, but I don’t think he’s more than 18 times better than Jackson. Anyway, my point is that MOST players don’t earn close to $ 1 million per year. On the other hand . . . owners are making much more.
Everyone knows what the players earn. Why shouldn’t we know exactly what the owners are being paid? Seeing how “your” costs are being driven up, one would think that you’d want to know why. And seeing how MOST of your money is going to individual owners, one would also think that you’d want to know exactly how much each owner is getting.
Personally, I’m not as much concerned about a player’s salary of $500,000 per year as I am an owner who’s raking in a billion or more. But that’s just me. I’m crazy like that.
Eagle Co.
You should teach economics at Harvard.
Gotta
I just saw your comment. My bad. Both you and Eagle Co. should start your own investment firm.
That’s the smartest comment I’ve read about this whole issue, Gotta.
Because compensation for the players is based on percentage, shouldn’t the owners have to “prove” how much money is being paid to the NFL?
I think everybody has it wrong, The owners arent scared to open the books because everyone will see what they really make, The owners are scared cause they dont want everyone to see whos on their payroll, I bet if they opened the books you would see their mothers all the way down to their great nephews getting crazy salaries, Whos on these owners payroll has alot to do with this!
Would somebody please explain to me how the Steelers are able to make money and the Pirates are not? Football is king in the sports world! You always here about supposedly small market teams not being able to keep up with big market teams. These owners need to get there house in order before they cry broke. I hear all the time that these owners didn’t become rich by being dumb. Really? I can think of a lot more creative ways to make money if you owned a professional sports team. Why in 2011 would you not sell the naming rights to your stadium ie Paul Brown stadium, Ralph Wilson stadium.
I bet you the Jerry Jones and Bob Krafts are secretly pissed at these other owners who are getting a slice of that pie and cutting into that revenue. I recently read that some former players get 300 per month under the retired benefits from years back. Why should anybody have sympathy from a league that generates 9 billion annually? Get that money to benefits and former players. I bet you not one owner is fighting for that!
Andrew – does the P stand for ‘Paranoid’?! You’re crazy man. The owners dont have family members on the payroll – that’s just silly. They make tons of money themselves, and likely distribute some of it to their family members (um, like all good fathers do), but you’re crazy.
And Co32 – do you understand that Baseball has no salary cap? So the Pirates can’t match the spending of the good teams, hence, their players always suck, and therefore their product sucks – not profitable. That’s the answer to your question. Any more questions?
Eagle Co
You’re right about Jerry Jones not wanting to share their slice of the pie with other owners. But guess what. . . So is Jeffrey Lurie. Both he and Jones tried to change the NFL merchandising agreement, wherein profits are shared equally. However, because, at the time, the Eagles and Cowboys sold much more merchandise than the other teams, they wanted to distribute the money accordingly.
Greed knows no boundaries, not even amongst comrades.
To EagleCo32
Pirates have 81 home games in which they average 15 Thousand Fans probably paying an average of $25 per ticket.
Steelers play 8-10 home games and get 60,000-70,000 fans paying an average of $60-$75 a ticket ..
Think of all the overhead that a MLB team has to have for hosting 81 games while football has only 10.. Baseball has guaranteed contracts for it’s players while Football does not..
Acutally I was comparing the market size. I agree with all of you guys points. It all comes down to doing business. Some small market teams are successful Indy, NO, GB. Others are not based on bad business decisions. Bad analogy Steelers and Pirates. Baseball and Football apples and oranges!
Drum – I hear ya, but that didn’t answer the questions I asked. The owners did refuse to stick to the original deal – they had the option to depart the agreement and executed the option.
And 60% of 9 Billion (going up to 11 Billion) per player is 2.7 Million per player for 2000 players per year.
But see, here is what I do not undertsand about the business – each owner is getting roughly 1.125 Billion. How much does it cost to pay the coaches, the medical (how many MRIs does a team do each year), the transportation, security IT public affairs, facilities costs, maintenance, who pays the refs, the chain crews, the stat people, rent for stadiums, or who makes the payment on stadiums, equipment.
Does anyone know how much it costs just to do training camp in Lehiegh each year?
So, out of the average 2.7 million a player makes, what are his additional costs –
out of an owner’s 1.1 billion, what are his additional costs – what else does he pay for from that revenue?
Does that revenue include hot dog and beer sales, or is that seperate? How much does the city and state take in taxes from parking, concessions, etc…
But I digress… the issue is a fairly common management vs. labor argument. Management will always claim they can’t afford more, labor will always say management can afford more and that as the backbone they deserve more. In this case it isn’t about taking a ‘side’ between management and labor, because in the end, the fans will get screwed – and instead of costing 150 bucks a game, it will go to 250 bucks a game, just as the price of American cars continued to rise until people realized they could find a better product, cheaper, and the auto industry collapsed (as did steel, most manufacturing the airlines etc.). The big question is will we the fans continue to pay the high cost of tix, beer, hot dogs, parking, NFL Ticket and ‘official apparel’ to support either side?
Schiller, Everybody knows every team including the small market teams are making money, The Packers are public owned and we see even that small market team made 9mill last year, This is not a secret, Theirs more to teams not showing the books then just not wanting to do it, Wake up ! FYI, Their was a big discussion on espn concerning what i said so if im paranoid then so are the former players and former people that worked in the offices of some of these owners, But what would they know, They only worked for them.
navy, those are great points and i often think of them when possibly siding with the owners which i do to a certain extent. the one thing that makes me cringe is that 2nd home preseason game they ram down your throat at full price no less. and that is all owners doing it . and i am anti owner on that page.
Navy – going up to $20 billion, an increase of $11 billion.
If the owners’ overhead costs were cutting so deeply into their profit margins, they’d gladly open the books. So, why don’t they? Common sense says that they’re making even more money than calculated.
I can guarantee that the average player doesn’t earn $2.7 million. That’s what many are trying to get on their 2nd contract. Like I said, Jackson earned less than $500,000 this year. After 3 years and 2 pro bowl appearances (one as the first-ever double position player), he’s under $500,000. How much has Lurie made from his play in those 3 years?
This is a typical labor dispute. Not different than any other industry. Owners say we can’t pay more because we have a lot of expenses, employees say “yes you can”. Personally, I’m not going to assume who can do what. That’s just me because I understand it from both sides. Players and owners. The owners spend a lot of money promoting the product and keeping it running and players are the ones that make the product.
I think players deserve to be paid more and I think a big step is getting a rookie salary cap. Veteran players get screwed every year when a 1st round rookie joins the team. Get the rookie cap and teams HAVE to allocate the money saved to veteran players. But players also can’t accept signing bonuses and then 2 years later whine about their contracts and want new money. Either do short term guaranteed contract without signing bonuses or stick to the current structure BUT players can’t whine about it later after they already took the money and ran.
Players who underperformed should be subject to renegotiation of contracts and the same for those who outperformed. Whether we like it or agree with it, teams get killed all the time when a players gets big money and then doesn’t perform but another player on that same team outperforms his contract and wants more money.
The owners do need to soften their stance on certain issues but here’s the thing, I don’t want to give too much power to the players. I agree they need to make more but if teams start really getting handcuffed by player contracts and stuff then the league will turn into the NBA and I don’t want that. It’s unfortunate, the league is as good and competitive as it is today because of the power that the ownership has. I’m not saying that’s a good thing… just what it is. But if you start paying players too much money then it will become what the NBA is today and I don’t think anyone wants that.
Drum, as Scorp points out, this is such a common labor dispute it seems silly. The old ‘if you had nothing to hide you would show me’ is the equivalent of, if your not guilty take a lie detector…… If the Union has proof, they would be putting it out there saying ‘look’ at this great data that proves we are getting pooched.
I do like your idea of a rookie salary cap. I also think both sides should agree to binding arbitration, but I don’t think that is going to happen. As with most labor disputes, each side is going to scream the other is the main cause of the problem, and evntually the issue will get settled.
Again, I have no side in this. It is we the fans that will get screwed, higher prices for everything.
on this topic – great article on
http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2011/03/09/union-asked-nfl-financial-data-200/# that talks about all this crap –
How can the union have proof of anything if they have no info? Why are the owners asking for an additional $1 billion off the top? It’s not the players who seek a change. It’s the owners. Check out this article:
Blame the owners in NFL labor impasse
By Phil Sheridan
Inquirer Sports Columnist
For unintentional comedy, it has been difficult to top the National Football League as it lurches clumsily and idiotically toward a labor war.
Two weeks ago, in Dallas, commissioner Roger Goodell and his lead negotiator, Jeff Pash, harrumphed about the union’s use of the courts in the run-up to the March 4 lockout deadline. Just over a week later, the league filed a complaint against the union with the National Labor Relations Board.
Hilarious.
One minute, you get an e-mail from the league’s PR officials trumpeting the enormous success of the league: Highest-rated this! Most popular that! The next minute, you get somber word that the owners are really, really hurting because of the onerous collective bargaining agreement with the players.
Knee-slapping.
If you’re having trouble following the intricacies of this latest sports labor brouhaha, here are the essentials.
The owners voted, 30-2, for the CBA extension that was ratified in 2006. The owners, for whom a contract is sacred when some player decides he’s underpaid and wants to renegotiate, decided in 2008 to opt out of that same deal, forcing the deadline that looms now at the beginning of March.
The owners hired the outside attorney who steered the NHL’s 2004 lockout of its players. The owners arranged to have their broadcast partners pay them their fees even if there are no games. The owners demanded that discussions on a new deal begin with roughly a billion-dollar-a-year giveback by the players.
The owners whine about the debts they’ve taken on to build the new stadiums they insisted they had to have, but never mention the hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars invested in those same facilities.
If you’re having any trouble spotting the bad guy in this, here’s a clue: It’s the owners.
In fairness, there probably is no graceful way to shove your so-called “partners” to the side while you command a larger place at the trough. Those who see the NFL’s annual revenues of about $9 billion and figure there ought to be enough for everyone are missing the bigger picture.
Goodell and the owners believe revenues are going to expand exponentially over the next 20 years. There will be an 18-game regular season. There will be expansion. There will be games in London and Japan and Mexico. Eventually, there will be franchises on other continents. There will be another explosion in income from new technologies.
This is a league that sold $200 tickets for fans to stand outside Cowboys Stadium and watch the Super Bowl on a large screen. Think there may be some new apps available for your iPads and smartphones?
These future billions are the real issue here. It isn’t that the owners can’t grow their profits while paying players the percentages spelled out in the expiring agreement. It’s that the future profits are so enormous, the owners can’t bear the idea of the players getting that big a share.
It’s where the unintentional comedy comes in. It sounds like something out of Dr. Strangelove when Goodell gets going on the potential billions out there. His swagger short-circuits the part of his brain in charge of crying poor on behalf of his billionaire constituents. He can’t help himself.
There was a fascinating bit of coincidence on Friday:
In Washington, the league and the union held their first meeting under the guidance of George Cohen, director of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.
In Indianapolis, the Colts released one of the best defensive players in their history, safety Bob Sanders, because his body was too broken down for him to play effectively anymore.
In Miami, former NFL safety Dave Duerson was found dead. He was 50. While the cause of death was not immediately known, it was impossible not to reflect on how many former NFL players die well before their time.
It is often said that this labor battle pits billionaires against millionaires, and that is partly true. But most NFL players are not, and never will be, millionaires. Most of them make very good money, by any standard, for a few short years. Some are able to live off those earnings, or parlay them into business ventures. The one dividend that keeps paying all of them is physical pain from the brutal sport they played.
That’s their choice, to play the game. No one is suggesting that you feel sorry for the players. Just know that it was the owners who tore up the deal they’d agreed to and started the clock ticking on a lockout. It is the owners who couldn’t abide seeing the players get the same cut of what they believe will be a much larger, richer pie.
Maybe, with a grown-up in the room in Washington, a fair deal can be struck without a labor stoppage. Let’s hope so, because the alternative just isn’t as funny as the jokers who started this.
Again, if the agreement is based on percentages, why shouldn’t the players know the total? Why should they just take the word of the owners, especially seeing how it’s the owners who seek a change.
Like I posted earlier, if I agree to pay you 10% of what my company earns, wouldn’t you like to know my total?
Scorp
The owners aren’t saying they can’t pay more. They’re saying that they want more money, despite the fact that this industry is growing exponentially. This is not a business with marginal profits. It’s a thriving and growing business, expected to soon become global. Projections are for revenues to more than double in 5 years. So, why the give-back? In my opinion, this is anything but typical.
I still can’t understand why the paying customer wouldn’t want to know where his money is going. That totally confuses me. How can anyone complain about rising ticket prices, parking, concessions or merchandise? How any paying customer could argue against full disclosure is beyond me. That’s like saying I don’t care to know where my money is going (as long as it’s not going to the athletes). Personally, I wouldn’t care to see Jeffrey Lurie catch a football.
LOL at dummer pedaling the same stupid article for weeks.
Oh, and your comparison or whatever you wanna call it is a big fail.
The players know what the NFL is making in revenue, 9 billion and going up…….. That is what they are getting a percentage of. Not what the owners of the teams are making. They want to know what the owners of the teams financial state is, so they can have justification for giving them an extra billion or whatever the owners are asking.
Now I do believe that the owners should show proof, but not to the players. The players don’t need to know how teams run their business. It could cause problems if they know what teams are having financial problems or whatever. It should be shown to someone like the mediation service that has been sitting in on this whole thing. A company that has no bias, and won’t let anything leak on the state of certain teams.
And if the owners are asking for an extra billion off the top, the players are idiots if they don’t jump at that. The owners would be better off accepting the deal that was supposedly proposed by the union early in the negotiation, which was, instead of the owners getting a billion off the top and splitting the rest of the revenue like 60/40 in favor of the players (the current deal), they would go with a 51/49 split in favor of the players. That is what the percentage would be without the 1billion off the top. In the long run though, the NFL could take in more money with a whole revenue split like that as opposed to the current deal where they took the billion off the top. If the NFL wants to take off another billion, the players would be better off in the long run when the revenue goes up and they are getting that 60/40 split with 2 billion off the top. Tell me what that would look like when the NFL is generating 25 billion in revenue?
Although, the owners are probably asking for another billion and to close the percentage gap afterwards, because I can’t see the deal not getting done if all they are asking is another billion off the top with the same split afterwards. The players are stupid and so are the owners if that is the case.
Bum
I find it incredible that you have a better handle on all this than the attorneys who represent the players. Why do you waste your time blogging when you could be earning some of that cash? Let me guess . . .
Do the “idiot players” not know the name of your firm?
Suddenly, things are quiet.
If you read some other articles instead of the same stupid one you keep pedaling around, you will see that they are talking about possibly using a firm to read over the finances of the teams instead of the players.
And instead of saying some stupid statement trying to bash me without anything to back it up, try doing some research. I could say the same thing to you, watch…..
Drummer,
I find it incredible that you have a better handle on all this than the attorneys who represent the owners. Why do you waste your time blogging when you could be earning some of that cash? Let me guess…..
See how stupid that statement is? Of course you don’t.
Suddenly things are quiet. LMAO at you. You are an idiot. You make 3 post in a span of 8 minutes like I am on here monitoring ever minute of this thread looking for updates. Obviously you do, but I like to get info/news on more than 1 site or 1 article. I like to expand my brain instead of being so narrowminded. Try coming up with some new material. It is good to know that a sports reporter made such an impact on you and your outlook on this whole thing that you keep using it over and over and over and over……….
It’s you who called the well-paid attorneys representing the players “stupid.” Yet, you’re blogging with an idiot like me. That’s puzzling.
If I had your great insight, I’d be representing the “idiot” players. Yet, you sit at home blogging with the little people. Thank you for taking the time converse with the little people. BTW – Do you actually read what you post?
Better yet . . . do you actually “believe” what you post. Do you really think you having a better understanding than the “idiot players” and their attorneys?
Don’t you find that the least bit laughable?
Wow, the players are idiots, their attorneys are idiots and I’m an idiot. That whole world is wrong and you’re right. We’re fortunate to have smart guys like you around to set us straight. I can’t speak for everyone, but I’m grateful.
I find you laughable. I repetitive use of the same arguments laughable. I also find it laughable that you say that because I am blogging here that I can’t know what I am talking about….. You are basically admitting that you don’t know what you are talking about. LMAO, you called yourself an idiot. Yeah, I definitely find that laughable.
Don’t you find it the least bit laughable that you think you have a better understanding that the owners attorneys? See, I can play that game too.
Your argument is dumb, and you keep repeating it because you can’t go to some website and post an article written by some great sports journalist who knows everything to combat what I am saying. What makes me not credible? Because I am not a journalist? Or is it because I am blogging with you? LOL, Garry blogs here too, but he is a sports journalists, and an ex player, but I guess since he blogs here, that makes him not credible? Don’t you find that the least bit laughable?
Do you realize that lots of journalists like to blog? Lots of players do too. Twitter is a form of blogging. Do you realize that? I guess they aren’t credible though or know what they are talking about because they blog? Wait……. Did you just call them idiots, yet keep arguing with me because I called them idiots? Don’t you find that the least bit laughable? I certainly do.
Do you realize that every argument you are making is hypocritical? Wait, do you find it laughable? LOL
Garry doesn’t claim to know better than the attorneys what the “idiot players” should do. In fact no one does, except you. Yes, I admit that I’m just a guy who knows very little about the pro game. I express my opinions and that’s it. I don’t take myself so seriously and I don’t have delusions of grandeur. On the other hand, guys like you crack me up. You claim to know better than those getting paid big bucks. Yet, you probably earn minimum wage. I had a few good laughs, but I’ve grown bored with you. You can go play in traffic now.
LOL, yeah you sound like you had a few good laughs. You are so hurt by my thoughts that you try to insult me by saying I make minimum wage then suggest I go play in traffic. Nice character.
Here is a thought though……. Maybe I do know more? Maybe I am really an attorney? Maybe I have a very successful business? Maybe I have an MBA from Wharton? Maybe I am a genius who just happens to be socially awkward and feels uncomfortable out in the real world?
You have no idea what I am. You make a stupid assumption of what I am because contrary to what you stated, you believe that you know better than me or that I can’t possibly know what I am blogging about because I post here. Do you realize how stupid you sound?
Why do you continually keep posting about me calling the players idiots for not doing a deal if that is the deal that was proposed to them, yet sidestep every other point I am making? Do they know all? Are they infallible? If you know so little, then how would you know that they know what they are doing?
You didn’t grow bored with me. You just realized that you can’t pedal the same stupid article to argue with me, and you apparently don’t have a big enough brain to handle it yourself. You need the opinions of sports journalists to make up your mind.
Take it for what it’s worth guys. You don’t have to believe me.
I work at the Pentagon (military) and I just left work and hopped on the metro. I noticed a gentleman reading from a binder and what not but paid him no mind. When the final stop arrived (which was mine and apparently his as well) I saw him pull up his briefcase and immediately noticed the NFLPA logo on it. I thought to myself — I have to talk to this guy. So as we were going up the escalator I just said “How you doing sir?” He replied and the next thing I said was “No deal yet?” — the conversation went on for about ten more minutes about the legal aspect of it all….before we separated (so I could get to MY parking lot, I had already damn near walked him to his car) I just came out and asked him — Is there going to be a season next year? He brought up how the players still played even during the Reggie White situation (which I was 9 at the time so I didn’t recall) and said that the best thing for them to do was decertify and go into litigation. He said barring a miracle, it didn’t look good.
So yea, he pretty much ruined my night.
To Birdo,
Interesting story, I bet the this guy was a “spy” for NFL Commish’s office to go out in the public and spread false stories about the Negoitiations..
Did this fella have a blue scarf on by the way and a pecuilar cough..
LoL — whoever it was, he knew his stuff. Pretty much told me not to get my hopes up. Best thing for them to do was decertify and go into litigation.