If Teddy Bruschi is right, this won't ever get done

[Happy Panther]

what are you talking about they made 20 mill in 2009 then 10 mill in 2010. Plz tell me what the graph shows their debt to be in 2013.

Not good at math i see. But nice use of bolding.

First off all we are arguing whether the NFL owners are losing hundreds of millions of dollars as they say they are. Your article proves they aren't since the smallest market team in all of the NFL, NBA and MLB made $10M last year. this also agrees with Forbes who says the Packers made 9.8M.

Two data points are not a trend.

If you compare team income over the past decade most teams are doing much much better. In 2007 5 teams lost money. The highest team made 66M

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/30/football-values-09_NFL-Team-Valuations_Income.html

In 2008 2teams lost money. And the highest team made 90M

In 2009 2 teams lost money and the highest made 143M with another over $100M

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/30/football-valuations-10_NFL-Team-Valuations_Value.html

The average income is skyrocketing.

Compare these to any other pro sports in the USA and the NFL is doing really really well.

and this does not include the appreciation of the asset. Exactly half the franchises are worth more than $1B.

So explain to me how the owners are suffering again? Or are they just lying.

Randomly boding meaningless words will not suffice.

[Montsta]

You guys are so funny. I love me some Panthers, almost sickeningly so. The outcome of a Panthers game affects my mood for days, even weeks. But this is a business, and in business you make concessions when necessary. Below is something I posted on PFT.

So on one side you have old white businessmen, many of whom come from "old money", who have net worth's in the billions along with liquid assets probably in the tens or hundreds of millions.

On the other side you have mostly uneducated athletes, who cruised through high school and college playing football without actually retaining most of what they learned, all the while buying designer clothes, luxury cars, throwing money at friends and family, paying (multiple) child support(s), and having 30 year mortgages on mansions that they simply won't be able to afford without a game check.

Now tell me who can outlast the other?

I mean honestly from a purely business standpoint, what motivation do the owners have to make any concessions during negotiations? The NFLPA has no cards to play, and they have zero leverage. I agree that both sides are being greedy, but the owners will continue to be paid in the event of a lockout and you'll see once all of the Cromartie's of the NFL realize that their 7 baby mama's still want that fat check every month, the players will buckle. I promise you that this will be the case.

As CatMan72 said, the owners can survive a lockout and the players can't. It's as simple as that.

I work for a real estate developer. In '04, '05, and '06 we sold the houses at price X and were given above asking because everybody was in line. Fast forward to today and we have to make concessions in price, make kitchen upgrades standard and give away free hardwood flooring. Why? Because we no longer have all of the leverage. Now if the market recovers and goes back to how it was, we will no longer do that, and that isn't because we are greedy it's because we run a business and the goal of business is to make a profit.

[countryboi]

Truth is, the owners are holding all the chips right now. According to Sports Illustrated, 78% of NFL players are bankrupt or in financial distress within 2 years of retirement. This is because most of these guys live lifestyles that are at or close to their max income. The owners know they can starve the players rather quickly by locking them out, that's why the player reps made a big deal of telling everyone to save their money towards the end of last year.

BINGO....the players a in a bad place and they know it....so why do we have to go though these games with we know the owners are going to get everything they want?

[pstall]

i mentioned this some time back. the owners typically have a longer view of things. case in point the 78% of players being broke in 2 years after leaving the game.

what is NOT being talked about is the cash cow known as public subsidies are a thing of the past.

i don't think there are as many teams in need of a new stadium with the following exceptions. Bills, KC(but recently upgraded). Every other team has a stadium that is 15 yrs or less old.

but they are looking down the road because they can't blackmail city/county officals for more funds because those funds are gone.

[Snake]

The problem with this whole "show us your books" idea is that when the NBA owners did that the players decided their books were phony...

If you know anything about accounting, you know that you can "cook the books" within the law to say just about anything you want them to, so I'm not sure why the players are that interested in seeing them anyways?

I think the idea of a 50/50 split of total revenue is absurd, the owners of these teams incur all the financial risk, so they should get a much bigger chunk of the reward than the players.

Truth is, the owners are holding all the chips right now. According to Sports Illustrated, 78% of NFL players are bankrupt or in financial distress within 2 years of retirement. This is because most of these guys live lifestyles that are at or close to their max income. The owners know they can starve the players rather quickly by locking them out, that's why the player reps made a big deal of telling everyone to save their money towards the end of last year.

I'm not necessarily taking sides here, but at the end of the day the NFLPA is in MUCH weaker position than the owners... and they will eventually have to start negotiating in good faith. The owners can survive a lockout, the players can't... that's why the owners were willing to play this card in the first place. The fans are the real losers in this, but the owners know the majority of the fan base will be back in droves once this is resolved.

This is it really. What happened at the meeting was the same thing that has been happening for a year now. The NFLPA is not budging from there stance where they expect to have just as much if not more revenue then the owners. The only problem with that is they lost all there power when D.Smiths motions to freeze there TV money was shot down. The leverage is on the side of the owners and I think they are making a statement now.

Still IMO I hope the owner learn from this that you dont just agree to some ludicrous CBA deal cause once you have given them some rope they dont want to give it back.

[Gazi]

You guys are so funny. I love me some Panthers, almost sickeningly so. The outcome of a Panthers game affects my mood for days, even weeks. But this is a business, and in business you make concessions when necessary. Below is something I posted on PFT.

As CatMan72 said, the owners can survive a lockout and the players can't. It's as simple as that.

I work for a real estate developer. In '04, '05, and '06 we sold the houses at price X and were given above asking because everybody was in line. Fast forward to today and we have to make concessions in price, make kitchen upgrades standard and give away free hardwood flooring. Why? Because we no longer have all of the leverage. Now if the market recovers and goes back to how it was, we will no longer do that, and that isn't because we are greedy it's because we run a business and the goal of business is to make a profit.

You're acting like NFLPA doesn't have smart reps and lawyers just as pricey as owners

[MHS831]

If you gave the players everything they wanted, they would bankrupt the team for their own personal bankrolls. If you say that these players are entertainers and not steelworkers, which is an obvious truth, you have to ask, "Then why do they need a union?" When Julius Peppers makes nearly a million per game and other DEs in the league make half that per season, there is reason to believe that the players' needs can be met from within, by the establishment of a class system with each level player having a cap. In other words, the players want to negotiate deals as independent contractors like entertainers but they want the security of a union, an idea that is fading as fast as the industrial reuvolution because it is nothing more than a parasite that eventually kills the host. If the players are given more money, it would go to the stars, for the most part, because they are the only players with real negotiating power. If Peyton Manning wants $20 million per season, they will find it by cutting million-dollar per year players and signing $500K players. THe rich get richer, and the poor get cut.

[tondi]

If the players win ticket, concession and cable TV prices will continue to soar. If the players lose all of these things will hopefully stop going up for a while. That's all the average fan needs to know.

[Montsta]

You're acting like NFLPA doesn't have smart reps and lawyers just as pricey as owners

I understand that, but at the end of the day the NFLPA lawyers represent the wants of the players. So when the players feel the financial pressure of no game checks, they'll cave.

[Highlandfire]

But this isn't, and shouldn't be viewed as, a normal employee/company relationship.

NFL players are unique in that they're rare. Not just anyone can come off the street and play at the same level as these guys.

Your analogy of a chef in a restaurant isn't really the same, seeing as if the chef did demand all sorts of money, the boss could fire him/her, and go out and find another fairly quickly.

Bull poo. Who says they are so unique? If we poo can every NFL player in the league right now and did nothing but draft and bring in scrubs from other leagues, in 3 years no one will know the difference.

That arguement is pure agent driven and NFLPA driven bull poo.

[Highlandfire]

apples and oranges.

I'm sure if they brought in replacements, like a civilian corporation would do, you would watch. I didn't think so

Bull poo, I WANT THEM TO! They are ALL overpaid, ALL over hyped and ALL are in it for money instead of the love of the game.

I am telling you right now you give those guys in college a chance that they will never get in the current system and you will see BETTER football played. they will be playing more for the game than the 13th house or 15th car they need to purchase!

[Highlandfire]

Bottom line for all of this, The employees make way too much of the money. Businesses don't survive running the business like that.

The owners have said they are the stuards of the game and they are. They can't think about just right now but more like 10-20 years from now and as another poster said, cities, counties and states can't afford to keep giving them breaks and putting money into pro teams when their states are going bankrupt.

What you are going to see in the next 3-5 years is when stadium leases come up or State budgets passed, they are going to cut out all the 'perks' given to all pro teams in every sport, and IMHO they should. I could honestly care less if tons of money is paid out to pro teams to help take care of stadium upkeep, etc when we have tons of normal Americans out of work, talks of cutting retirement benefits, pensions, forcing cuts in State education etc. The Owners know this is coming so they need that extra money to offset those cuts coming.

The owners will be able to outlast the players in a labor dispute. Cut the poo players, get your stupid assed lawyer Smith out of the picture and take the pay cut and still get paid stupid money to play a GAME. Sell off 5 of those houses you own, sell off that tons of bling, get rid of 5 of your cars you don't need and you will be just fine.

[OneBadassCat]

I think the star players make too much money, but the lunch pail mediocre guys deserve the money they get. Julius Peppers shouldn't get a $100 million dollar contract. The whole thing is fuged up. Guys like him already make a poo ton from endorsements. They play a game for a living. Yes I know they sacrifice for that game, but a 100 million dollars?

Give me a $10 million dollar deal and I would make that last a life time. Players need to get smart with their money. The owners are billionaires and are greedy as hell too. Why not take all that extra money and pay back the cities that built your gazillion dollar stadiums.

[Gazi]

The split right now amounts to 50/50 of all revenue, which is exactly what they offered. So it wasn't really much of a compromise.

Wrong. Players were getting 60-40. Owners wanted them to take 40-60. The Union offered 50-50 split and owners walked.