Rick Reily lets owners have it

[Blockhead]

Re: Rick Reily lets owners have it

No Crash- the point of the article was the owners are rich bastards and Rick feels we should hate them for wanting more.

That article is mindless drivel. He's basically hating on the owners for being rich.

The owners of NFL teams are rich? Wow, I never would have thought.

Most of them have made their money well before they purchased NFL teams. His comments on Bud Adams and Paul Allen show this is simply a hatred piece. Both of them made much more money outside of football than they ever will make from football.

[Chadman]

Re: Rick Reily lets owners have it

Just lifted this off another site..

As with most labor disputes, this is a gap that can be bridged through creativity and compromise – and, ultimately, it will come down to money and perception. The first thing that has to happen for a deal to be forged is that each side has to move past the rancorous rhetoric and intense emotion that is likely to worsen over the coming months. Certainly, this is a volatile issue that involves principle and impacts the careers and lives of numerous individuals and their families – but in the end it’s a business dispute between two entities that have it pretty good in a strained economy. If the owners and players test fan loyalties by robbing them of an entire season – or, in a worst-case scenario, dragging the dispute past the fall of 2012 – both could end up as losers. Conversely, there is a way to resolve their differences in a win-win scenario that involves growing the pie, rewarding the owners for their investment risks and keeping total player revenues relatively stable. By adding two regular season games and establishing a rookie pool, a new CBA can theoretically create enough additional revenues that owners can get some of what they want (more money credited off the top) and veterans won’t have to take less. For this to happen, the NFLPA needs to abandon its focus on its percentage of revenues – a holdover from the Upshaw regime – and focus on total dollars. Owners, meanwhile, have to get past the perception that they were duped into taking a poor deal in 2006 and try to leverage a deal with the union that seems more like a partnership than a vengeful comeuppance. All of this can be accomplished by rational, well-meaning negotiators who have pro football’s – and its adoring public’s – best interests at heart. “People on both sides have to study the lessons of the Cuban Missile Crisis,” says one league source. “Ultimately, in order to settle this standoff, everybody has to feel that they’ve won, or at least saved face, and that they were part of the process.” Until then, players, owners and those of us who love football will be experiencing labor pains on an uncomfortably frequent basis.

[feltdizz]

Re: Rick Reily lets owners have it

No Crash- the point of the article was the owners are rich bastards and Rick feels we should hate them for wanting more.

That article is mindless drivel. He's basically hating on the owners for being rich.

The owners of NFL teams are rich? Wow, I never would have thought.

Most of them have made their money well before they purchased NFL teams. His comments on Bud Adams and Paul Allen show this is simply a hatred piece. Both of them made much more money outside of football than they ever will make from football.

He isn't hating on the owners for being rich.. he is hating on the owners for trying to make us believe they aren't rich.

I wouldn't be surprised if Rick wrote the same type of article about Albert Haynesworth or any player who says "I need to make sure my family is taken care of"

[Blockhead]

Re: Rick Reily lets owners have it

No Crash- the point of the article was the owners are rich bastards and Rick feels we should hate them for wanting more.

That article is mindless drivel. He's basically hating on the owners for being rich.

The owners of NFL teams are rich? Wow, I never would have thought.

Most of them have made their money well before they purchased NFL teams. His comments on Bud Adams and Paul Allen show this is simply a hatred piece. Both of them made much more money outside of football than they ever will make from football.

He isn't hating on the owners for being rich.. he is hating on the owners for trying to make us believe they aren't rich.

I wouldn't be surprised if Rick wrote the same type of article about Albert Haynesworth or any player who says "I need to make sure my family is taken care of"

I haven't heard one owner say they weren't rich. They are complaining about the shrinking margins of their NFL businesses. What does it matter if their other businesses are profiting well?

The players are contracted employees. They need to realize they are not owners and are easily replaceable.

[feltdizz]

Re: Rick Reily lets owners have it

No Crash- the point of the article was the owners are rich bastards and Rick feels we should hate them for wanting more.

That article is mindless drivel. He's basically hating on the owners for being rich.

The owners of NFL teams are rich? Wow, I never would have thought.

Most of them have made their money well before they purchased NFL teams. His comments on Bud Adams and Paul Allen show this is simply a hatred piece. Both of them made much more money outside of football than they ever will make from football.

He isn't hating on the owners for being rich.. he is hating on the owners for trying to make us believe they aren't rich.

I wouldn't be surprised if Rick wrote the same type of article about Albert Haynesworth or any player who says "I need to make sure my family is taken care of"

I haven't heard one owner say they weren't rich. They are complaining about the shrinking margins of their NFL businesses. What does it matter if their other businesses are profiting well?

The players are contracted employees. They need to realize they are not owners and are easily replaceable.

I meant rich from the profits of football since the last deal. Not rich in general.

The players aren't easily replaceable. It's not like they are putting bumpers on cars for 8 hours. If the owners have to start over with new players kiss all the profits goodbye.

The Peyton Manning's, Big Ben's etc... they helped make this league what it is today. People aren't showing up to watch the owners eat steak at the game. The players have leverage and they worked hard for it.

Players get cut/injured everyday in the NFL.. they know first hand how replaceable they are as individuals.. but as a collective they have power.

[Blockhead]

Re: Rick Reily lets owners have it

I meant rich from the profits of football since the last deal. Not rich in general.

Their profit margins have shrunk since the last deal was created.

The players aren't easily replaceable. It's not like they are putting bumpers on cars for 8 hours. If the owners have to start over with new players kiss all the profits goodbye.

Yes they are. Most of them will be out of the league in 4-5 years anyway. The down period of talent would be short.

The Peyton Manning's, Big Ben's etc... they helped make this league what it is today. People aren't showing up to watch the owners eat steak at the game. The players have leverage and they worked hard for it.

Would be replaced by the Gabberts, Newton's, Locker's, etc. You think Ben wants to sit at home and watch $11 million go away next year? He'd be begging to play. He knows he can't make anything similar anywhere else. It's not like he's smart enough for real world business that would make that much.

Players get cut/injured everyday in the NFL.. they know first hand how replaceable they are as individuals.. but as a collective they have power.

Absolutely. the league is the power entitity and the players union has been given too much power. I'd gladly take a year of no NFL to see the owners get a deal better suited for league and owner profits and league survival.

[flippy]

Re: Rick Reily lets owners have it

Seems like $1B is peanuts compared to losing popularity in the sport.

I could care less about who gets it. All these guys are making money hand over fist. And they should focus on the bigger picture of making the whole pie bigger. That way, they all win and we the casual fan lose.

I'll just have to watch hockey, baseball, college sports, WWE, UFC, etc. And I hope all these other sports eat into the NFL's overall dollars. That way they'll seem silly arguing over $1B while losing multiple billions.

[Blockhead]

Re: Rick Reily lets owners have it

Seems like $1B is peanuts compared to losing popularity in the sport.

I could care less about who gets it. All these guys are making money hand over fist. And they should focus on the bigger picture of making the whole pie bigger. That way, they all win and we the casual fan lose.

I'll just have to watch hockey, baseball, college sports, WWE, UFC, etc. And I hope all these other sports eat into the NFL's overall dollars. That way they'll seem silly arguing over $1B while losing multiple billions.

The owners are having their profit margins shrunk each year and bottomline profits for some teams are below the star players salaries.

The owners do have the big picture in mind. It's the players that care about getting as much as they can now and couldn't care less about the future.

PS, I think you meant couldn't care less unless you could actually care less?

[hawaiiansteel]

Re: Rick Reily lets owners have it

Bring on the Lockout: A Belief that the NFL Will Be Better in the Long Run

by Michael Bean on Mar 3, 2011


UPDATE: The NFL and the NFLPA have agreed to a 24-hour extension before the CBA officially expires. It's still extremely unlikely that anything gets resolved by tomorrow night, but it's at least a good-faith gesture that both sides are and will continue to take the process seriously. -Michael B.-

In just a few short hours, the 2011 NFL Lockout will officially be upon us. I can't pinpoint an exact date, but speculation about a potential lockout in March of 2011 began at least two years ago. That day is now here, barring a last-minute miracle that we all know ain't happening.

But that's okay. The NFL and it's Players Association need time to get this right. There's much more at stake than just how to divide a big old chunk of change. Agreeing on how to divide annual revenues estimated to be roughly $9 billion dollars may be the primary point of contention in the negotiations, but while the two sides are at the table, they might as well address other issues of critical significance.

While I too am disappointed that the two sides didn't take this more seriously months if not years ago, I as of last night now have faith in the process. And I'm actually quite confident that when we look back at this time in NFL history several years down the road, we'll be happy that this whole mess was addressed head on, and over the course of months not days or weeks.

Why? As humans, we hate change. It scares us and makes us ugly, unconfident people. Sports fans are particularly wary of change, probably because we fear that change might alter our foundation as fans -- memories. But change almost unequivocally brings more good to more people.

But if it ain't broke, don't fix it you might be saying. The NFL clearly was structured and operated in a way that was working. But that doesn't mean it can't be a more profitable, sustainable, better regulated, and more entertaining product. As a fan, I'd be thrilled if there were an 18-game season. I'd just expect there to be bigger rosters, OTAs and mini-camps to be reduced drastically, and more sophisticated and comprehensive resources invested in researching and implementing new ideas and innovations for monitoring and preventing head trauma issues.

I'd be open to new rule changes even, like say, shortening the distance between where kickoff return coverage units begin building up steam as they head-hunt return men. Or say, installing devices in helmets that track the number of head blows during games and practices, and putting a limit on how many an individual can suffer before being done for the day.

The sound of an 18-game schedule may on the surface sound terrible, but there are ways to account for and mitigate the undeniable fact that players assume all the risk -- both with their short-term and long-term health. But with so much at stake with that type of decision, I want it to take time before they come to an agreement. Particularly in the case of concussions and head injuries, the future of the game is very much at stake. There will be litigation in the future, even if there hadn't been a lockout. But again, while they're at the table talking money, now is the right time to finally get serious about agreeing on new innovative ways to make the game safer without altering the product and brand too much. That's tough. But it can be done. And we'll all be better off -- players, owners, and even us fans.

As for things like a rookie-wage scale, the structure of free agency, guaranteed vs. non-guaranteed contracts, a salary cap -- those will all get worked out inter-connectedly in due time. Again, I would hope that they take their time. If I had all the solutions, I would be at the table mediating this deal, but I would hope that there are ideas being thrown around that might on the surface sound blasphemous. Like for example, fattening their television contract by making games 20 minutes longer, but also limiting the number of snaps a player can participate in and then requiring reserves on expanded rosters to spell the starters throughout. That may be a poor example, but it's one where the argument can be made that all sides benefit: owners make more money, more players are given an opportunity to earn an NFL living, players are not exposed to more inherent risk, and us fans are treated to more football, and a game that now requires more in-game strategy, nuance and excitement.

I'm sure I'll ramble on more about the lockout throughout the spring and early summer. But for now, with just under eight hours remaining until the hour-glass is empty for the current CBA, I say fear not. We're at a crossroads for the moment, but this isn't the first time that there's been a long and ugly struggle over how to most equitably enact progress and change. This is one of the more exciting opportunities in the history of organized professional sports. I don't care if it takes time...well, I sure as hell hope this is resolved before the end of August. But even if it takes longer than that, just don't blow the opportunity to make the game even greater for the long haul.

[url="http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/2011/3/3/2027856/bring-on-the-lockout-a-belief-that-the-nfl-will-be-better-in-the-long#storyjump"]http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/20 ... #storyjump[/url]

[BradshawsHairdresser]

Re: Rick Reily lets owners have it

At some point, the players and owners will come to an agreement, and us fans will fork over even more money so that all of those rich folks will get even richer. They'll be laughing all the way to the bank while we squeeze our budgets to buy fuel and groceries.

[hawaiiansteel]

Re: Rick Reily lets owners have it

Prolonged lockout hurts undrafted rookies

March, 3, 2011
By Tim Graham


The NFL draft is stressful enough for prospects. They wait for their phones to light up, watch ESPN's ticker, repeatedly click refresh on their browsers or try to distract themselves by refusing to pay any attention at all.

A select few know they'll be drafted. A larger group wonders whether their names will be called before Mr. Irrelevant closes the show.

This year's draft will be even more worrisome for the latter group.

Absent a collective bargaining agreement, the draft still will take place April 28-30. But players who aren't selected in those seven rounds won't be allowed to sign with teams because free agency won't exist.

The moments immediately after the draft involve frenzied phone calls. Teams scurry to sign unattached prospects in hopes of landing the next Tony Romo, Arian Foster, LeGarrette Blount, Wes Welker, Antonio Gates or Bart Scott.

The AFC East is rife with undrafted starters. Two of the four team-leading rushers weren't drafted: New England Patriots running back BenJarvus Green-Ellis and Buffalo Bills running back Fred Jackson.

Rookie free agents are necessary to building a roster and maintaining a personnel budget. Although this year's undrafted rookies eventually will get opportunities to find work once there's a new CBA, a prolonged lockout will cripple their chances of making an immediate impact.

When a new CBA is struck, veteran free agents will overshadow the undrafted rookies. Under normal circumstances, the veterans have been picked over long before the draft begins. That allows front offices to concentrate solely on the newbies. We can expect a free-for-all this time.

Undrafted rookies also will face a tougher time when it comes to development. These are marginal pro prospects, long shots who must get into a team's offseason conditioning program as quickly as possible. It would be almost impossible to expect a rookie free agent to understand NFL schemes minus minicamps and voluntary workouts and with a compressed training camp.

These also are the kinds of players who make their way into the NFL on special teams. Imagine how many mistakes we'll see if teams insist on using their undrafted and late-round rookies on return and coverage units.

[url="http://espn.go.com/blog/afceast/post/_/id/26596/prolonged-lockout-hurts-undrafted-rookies"]http://espn.go.com/blog/afceast/post/_/ ... ed-rookies[/url]

[Crash]

Re: Rick Reily lets owners have it

Yeah, league survival. LOL A $9 billion a year business in these economic times and somehow the league is hurting for money.

[hawaiiansteel]

Re: Rick Reily lets owners have it

Mediator persuades union to agree to longer extension

Posted by Mike Florio on March 3, 2011


With a 24-hour extension aimed at laying the foundation for another extension, mediator George Cohen has accomplished half the battle.

Chris Mortensen of ESPN reports that Cohen has persuaded the union to agree to a 7-to-10-day extension. Now, the league needs to consent to a pushing of the deadline back by a week or more.

The disclosure means that someone has violated the vow of silence, and in turn has placed public pressure on ownership to agree to the extension. At this point, it will be difficult if not impossible for the league to not agree to extend the deadline and implement a lockout as of 12:00 a.m. Saturday.

That said, Mort reports that “major differences” between the two sides remain.

[url="http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/03/mediator-persuades-union-to-agree-to-longer-extension/"]http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... extension/[/url]

[feltdizz]

Re: Rick Reily lets owners have it

I meant rich from the profits of football since the last deal. Not rich in general.

Their profit margins have shrunk since the last deal was created.

The players aren't easily replaceable. It's not like they are putting bumpers on cars for 8 hours. If the owners have to start over with new players kiss all the profits goodbye.

Yes they are. Most of them will be out of the league in 4-5 years anyway. The down period of talent would be short.

The Peyton Manning's, Big Ben's etc... they helped make this league what it is today. People aren't showing up to watch the owners eat steak at the game. The players have leverage and they worked hard for it.

Would be replaced by the Gabberts, Newton's, Locker's, etc. You think Ben wants to sit at home and watch $11 million go away next year? He'd be begging to play. He knows he can't make anything similar anywhere else. It's not like he's smart enough for real world business that would make that much.

Players get cut/injured everyday in the NFL.. they know first hand how replaceable they are as individuals.. but as a collective they have power.

Absolutely. the league is the power entitity and the players union has been given too much power. I'd gladly take a year of no NFL to see the owners get a deal better suited for league and owner profits and league survival.

You think people want to see Peyton and Ben sit at home so Cam Newton can shine? I don't think so...

The high profile players aren't replaceable... listen to Steeler fans talk about 25 years since we had a franchise QB.

Players careers are short but the star athletes have 10+ year careers.

last time around this deal was better suited for the league and we watched it rise to the top of the TV ratings at a rate never seen before.

I doubt the owners are really hurting like you think they are... they are hurting like credit card companies and oil companies. Hurting all the way to the bank with all that cash in the bag.

[Blockhead]

Re: Rick Reily lets owners have it

You think people want to see Peyton and Ben sit at home so Cam Newton can shine? I don't think so...

The high profile players aren't replaceable... listen to Steeler fans talk about 25 years since we had a franchise QB.

Players careers are short but the star athletes have 10+ year careers.

last time around this deal was better suited for the league and we watched it rise to the top of the TV ratings at a rate never seen before.

I doubt the owners are really hurting like you think they are... they are hurting like credit card companies and oil companies. Hurting all the way to the bank with all that cash in the bag.

Every player is replaceable. Are you saying the NFL franchises that have star players will cease making money and go out of business when the star player leaves?

Who said they are hurting? They should make huge money and in many cases they are not, sometimes less than what their star player earns. That's just not right.