Latest on the 2011 Lockout

[CarolinaBlue34]

I know a few months ago DeMaurice Smith went on Mike and Mike in the morning, then someone from the NFL FO (maybe a owner) came on the next day to counter Smith's arguments. From what i got out of the conversations was, 1. Owners want more power against contracts (IE. can get rid of bonuses if you shoot yourself in the leg and go to prison or kill someone with your truck.) 2. The Players Union wants half the cut from the top, the way it is now is the NFL take off some % off the top to pay all the owners for stadium costs and then halves the money with the players. (i don't agree with this since the money is going to stadium upkeep costs and for staff for the fan experience) 3. Owners want a set-money limit on what they can pay draft picks ect. ect. ect.

That's about all i got from it, atleast what i can remember.

[Fiz]

lol reminder that if they lock out the players and reduce their operational costs to basically making sure the elevators in the stadiums run they'll still get their huge tv money

and people defend the owners

lol just lol

[Fiz]

1. Owners want more power against contracts (IE. can get rid of bonuses if you shoot yourself in the leg and go to prison or kill someone with your truck.)

lol they already can do this since both plaxico and vick had to return their signing bonuses

[CLTPanther]

There is no such thing as risk free, in anything. The only way to judge risk to ask "compared to what"?

[thefuzz]

The owners have the upper hand in this, as well as the largest financial risk.

I would be joining the lockout owners if I owned a team as well.

[HPPantherzfan]

Thank god we always have college football!

Oh wait! I'm a Duke fan!!!!

NO FOOTBALL?????

NOOOOOOOOO :cryin:

[Kurb]

:piggy:

There is no such thing as risk free, in anything. The only way to judge risk to ask "compared to what"?

Perhaps you don't understand how much money the NFL/Owners make...

What is really amusing is watching the networks skirt this issue as to not piss off the NFL bigwigs.:piggy::piggy::piggy:

[Fiz]

owners: we're losing money hand over fist here

smith: open your books then and prove it?

owners: absolutely not!

[jasonluckydog]

If the Panthers keep playing like poo taking a year off might be good for my health.

[Fiz]

The owners have the upper hand in this, as well as the largest financial risk.

I would be joining the lockout owners if I owned a team as well.

there is a 100% percent injury rate in the NFL, and the average career is four years long.

the owners are already multi millionaires, make more money than god during the season, and will continued to be paid through the holdout. after acquiring the capitol necessary to purchase a team through whichever means they choose to do it, they have literally no risk. none. whatsoever. the product sells itself.

who has more risk?

[CarolinaBlue34]

The owners should make alot more money then the players, they sell the product. If they have no money, then ticket prices will sky rocket, hotdogs will become $20, and the stadiums will look like a drug addicts living room.

[CLTPanther]

:piggy:

Perhaps you don't understand how much money the NFL/Owners make...

What is really amusing is watching the networks skirt this issue as to not piss off the NFL bigwigs.:piggy::piggy::piggy:

Perhaps you don't understand risk properly. There is risk in everything.

[thefuzz]

I have made the arguement before the owners can/should do this because they have all the finacial risk. But reading what brother Fiz has posted it has come to me that owning an NFL team really ISNT a risk. It's a no lose investment.

So basically the owners want to play less, perhaps force the players to help pay operational costs, and make more money. To do this, they are slashing deals all around the league, and threatening the players with not only loss of $$$ but loss in a chance to make additional money in the future through loss of conditioning, skill building, and the NFL support system in general.

Asking an employee to pay to have a better work place is a bit absurd when the company is one of the most profitable in the work and the owner is making money hand over fist.

some one google: Greed and see if some pictures show up...

I agree and disagree with you on this one. Owning an NFL team today, with the rabid desire for football is not a risk at all, but what happens when things change.

There is considerable risk for owning any business. Who would have thought that owning an internet based business in the late 90's could go bad, or a bank/financial institution in the mid 2000's could be bad????

[Catdaddy]

The bottom line is they are all greedy. I spend around $4000 a season in tix, food, drinks, and merchandise at BOA stadium, and if I spend that much and I'm not a high roller, think how much they are making off all the people in the club areas, boxes, and businesses with those things on the lawn. Those two special club sections require a $10000 per ticket deposit per seat,which they refund in 20 years, tix cost $4250 per seat a game, and they have a waiting list for them. Thats not counting boxes and club seats. Then Jerry won't buy free agents cause he's barely getting by, yeah right! So if Jerry is turning money like this, think what a winning team turns, or one in a established football city.