would still receive th
2015年2月25日The Complete Guide to Understanding the 2011 NFL Lockout
The stage has been set for a battle royal between NFL owners and players. The two sides are pulling no punches legally, politically, and financially against each other. Economic leveraging, legal battles, political round ups, and public awareness campaigns’ are just the tip of the ice burg for what’s to come. Understanding all of it can be very overwhelming and confusing. There are thousand of articles, summary’s, graphs and charts out there, explaining different aspects of the situation, however putting them all together is hard to comprehend. This is the simplest way to understand the NFL Lockout and its economic impact in its simple terms that are easy to understand.
There has been more talk about the perhaps unavoidable lockout than there has been about Sunday’s Super Bowl between the Packers and Steelers . Studies from the NFLPA already show that 30 to 40% of NFL fans have this looming drama on their minds and are going to monitor the situation closely. That number is expected to rise substantially as the deadline closes in. The idea that the NFL may not play a single game in 2011 is freighting to most fans. The lockout will prove disastrous to industry’s world wide. From ticket sellers to video games this clash of the titans could have a very severe financial impact on not just the league and the players, but most importantly the very fans that support it.
Collective bargaining is a process of voluntary negotiations between franchise owners and trade unions , specifically the Players Union NFLPA aimed at reaching agreements which regulate working and contract conditions. Collective agreements usually set out wage scales, working hours, training, health and safety, overtime , grievance mechanisms and rights to participate in team or NFL affairs. After the agreement is satisfactory to the parties involved they often refer to the result of the negotiation as a collective bargaining agreement (CBA)
The current Collective Bargaining Agreement, initially negotiated in 1993, has been extended on several occasions, most recently in March 2006. The 2006 extension, which could have continued through the 2012 season, gave both the NFL and the NFLPA an option to shorten the deal by one or two years.
The Parties Involved
First you have two sides. The first is the National Football League it self and the owners of the team franchises. The ring leader is NFL commissioner Roger "The Dodger" Goodell. His close shark like business associates and franchise owners Jerry Jones, Robert Kraft, Pat Bowlen and Jerry Richardson are the muscle behind the NFL. Those are Goodell’s confidants leading the way to insure that a new collective bargaining agreement or CBA pays them more money and increases the season to 18 games.
The other side of the side is the players, represented by the National Football League Players Association. The NFLPA’s executive director DeMaurice Smith is the ring leader on this side, and fighting with him are players such as Jeff Saturday and Drew Brees, who serve as executive committee members for the players union.
So What Are They Fighting About?
Well that’s the easy part. It all boils down to the root of all evil, money. That being said this Davante Adams Super Bowl XLIX Jersey is where it starts getting confusing. It all started back in 2006 when the owners of the football franchises accepted the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). They feel that that deal is inadequate in today’s economic times. At that time NFLPA’s executive director the late Gene Upshaw, accepted a plan together with NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue, which benefited the players substantially by giving them 59.6% of the total revenue. Why did he except the plan? Tagliabue was just about done serving his time after 17 years. It’s believed that Tagliabue accepted the deal to keep the labor peace and avoid any kind of work stoppage, such as a players strike.
At the time the leagues top owners such as Jerry Jones, were in the middle of expensive stadium plans. A work stoppage at that point would have packersauthenticofficialshop.com/JOHN_KUHN_SUPER_BOWL_JERSEY.html put a stop to building and stadium improvement plans, and he knew the owners would strongly reject the notion of any kind of work stoppage.
Also in that 2006 CBA deal, the league’s 15 highest earning money machines (Cowboys, Redskins, Patriots ECT.) would have to subsidize the 17 remaining teams that made considerably less money. This is called revenue sharing. The problem is this. Some teams make more then others, and some have very favorable stadium deals, that require less money from the owners for expenditures. On the other side of the coin, you have teams like the Dallas Cowboys, who took out massive loans for new Julius Peppers Super Bowl Jersey and renovated stadiums, thus driving the overhead and expenditures up. This benefits teams like the Cincinnati Bangles because they are making more of a profit, because there overhead and expenditures are concidebly lower.
Some of the lower 17 earning teams keep revenues down intentionally to ensure they’ll receive money from the top teams under the current system. The money they receive from revenue sharing makes them more profitable then some of the top 15 teams.
Team owners in the top 15 like Jerry Jones owner of the Dallas Cowboys want the new CBA to account for the high risk investments, such as forking out hundreds of millions dollars for new stadiums, and other cap expenditures. In simple terms, the team owners that spend the money on new stadiums or improve excising facilities want some of it back.
What The Owners The NFL Want From The Players
As far as the players are concerned the owners are asking for a longer season, and a heavy decrease in pay, which doesn’t stand well with the players. It’s been publicly stated that the cut would be around 18% overall. So how much money are we talking here? Under the current plan, owners receive a credit of around $1 billion for operating and investment expenses of the top of a $9 billion pool of annual revenue. The owners are seeking a $1.4 billion increase or about $2.4 billion total.
This increase is because the franchise owners claim that it compensates them in a more realistic economic era we are in. They claim stadiums were partly or wholly subsidized by tax payer’s years ago which was considered normal at the time. In today’s era, franchise owners are pouring in allot more money for high class stadiums, and state of the art facilities. As a result, they are occurring huge mortgage payments, on top of higher operational costs associated with new stadium operations. The owners who have improved or built new faculties stand fast behind there decisions to building there Tajma Hall’s and mausoleums citing it increases fan base, creates better fan experience which intern creates league growth.
So the players pay decrease would go to the owners pay increase out of the $9 billion pool. The owners stand point is this: They believe the players should account for this risk, because it will increase future revenue, thus paying them more money in the future. The problem is the players are not owners, stock holders or anything of the sort. The players are not a partnership with the franchise or the owner and will not receive any stake in the franchise for the cuts. Further more the players know that the value of the owners and the franchises have increased considerably in the past decade. The players are basically stating that the value of your franchise went up, that creates equity and money. The equity and money does reduce the owners overall financial risk.
What The Players Are Seeking
The players are not seeking any increase at all. They are happy with the current deal. They simply want the same amount of money, for the same amount of games played. At this point the players, the union and the NFLPA want team owners to provide further documentation to support the owner’s basis for the $1.4 Billion increase. They are asking the NFL and the Franchise owners to substantiate their claims and prove that the profits have gone down. The NFLPA has requested the owners to open the books to prove there claims of financial distress or uncertainties. The owners have adamantly refused to do that.
The leagues proposal is suspect according to the NFLPA. They are asking for a dramatic increase in credits right off the top. In the owners proposal they have categories such as "practice facility cost, travel, and professional fees". They feel the owners are asking the players or employee’s to pay for the teams overhead.
Time Davante Adams Super Bowl 49 Jersey Is The Problem
The time is winding down to get something done with both parties. The deadline is March 3rd 2011, when the league year ends, the owners can start the lockout process. On the other side the players could respond by decertifying as a union, and file anti trust http://www.packersauthenticofficialshop.com/RANDALL_COBB_SUPER_BOWL_JERSEY.html lawsuit followed by a strike.
Communication has and will continue to be a problem on both sides. It has been reported that there is improved communications between the players union and the NFL’s managing council, which is important to help speed along any kind of resolution. As for now though, there has been no sizable movement towards the resolve of a new CBA. Its no surprise both sides are playing hard ball.
The NFL players union has discussed a boycott of NFL draft activities including the scouting combine later this month with player agents.
When The Lockout Happens
The franchises will still receive the guaranteed TV revenue; however they can do nothing with players. No OTA’s, no team meetings, no training camp, no free agent signing, no contracts with players, ECT. If the lockout lasts into September, well that will be tragic because there would be no 2011 NFL season to speak off.
The owners are in a better position to withstand a lock out if one should occur financially. The reason is: a lockout would reduce the operating expenses by at least 50 55% (an estimated $4.5 billion) the elimination of player salaries, benefits, temporary layoffs, and salary cuts to various team employees would save them substantially. Thanks to a very lucrative television deal with several broadcasting networks, the owners would still receive the guaranteed money Julius Peppers Super Bowl 49 Jersey as stated above. That kind of cash flow would allow owners to shore up more then 50% of there total revenue in a normal season totally around $4 billion per team. That money would cover operating expenses and overhead through the entire season if needed.
Now that lucrative TV deal for the owners may not be the "insurance policy" they were looking for. Legally speaking the players have the upper hand because in June 2010 the NFLPA filled a legal complaint with the Special Master appointed to resolve CBA disputes. The reason is the NFLPA alleges the NFL structured that deal so the league and teams would receive guaranteed money in the event of a lock out. Because the were promised the guaranteed money the networks, DirecTV, FOX, CBS, and NBC received valuable benefits in 2009 and 2010 in exchange for the guaranteed money clause. T
The stage has been set for a battle royal between NFL owners and players. The two sides are pulling no punches legally, politically, and financially against each other. Economic leveraging, legal battles, political round ups, and public awareness campaigns’ are just the tip of the ice burg for what’s to come. Understanding all of it can be very overwhelming and confusing. There are thousand of articles, summary’s, graphs and charts out there, explaining different aspects of the situation, however putting them all together is hard to comprehend. This is the simplest way to understand the NFL Lockout and its economic impact in its simple terms that are easy to understand.
There has been more talk about the perhaps unavoidable lockout than there has been about Sunday’s Super Bowl between the Packers and Steelers . Studies from the NFLPA already show that 30 to 40% of NFL fans have this looming drama on their minds and are going to monitor the situation closely. That number is expected to rise substantially as the deadline closes in. The idea that the NFL may not play a single game in 2011 is freighting to most fans. The lockout will prove disastrous to industry’s world wide. From ticket sellers to video games this clash of the titans could have a very severe financial impact on not just the league and the players, but most importantly the very fans that support it.
Collective bargaining is a process of voluntary negotiations between franchise owners and trade unions , specifically the Players Union NFLPA aimed at reaching agreements which regulate working and contract conditions. Collective agreements usually set out wage scales, working hours, training, health and safety, overtime , grievance mechanisms and rights to participate in team or NFL affairs. After the agreement is satisfactory to the parties involved they often refer to the result of the negotiation as a collective bargaining agreement (CBA)
The current Collective Bargaining Agreement, initially negotiated in 1993, has been extended on several occasions, most recently in March 2006. The 2006 extension, which could have continued through the 2012 season, gave both the NFL and the NFLPA an option to shorten the deal by one or two years.
The Parties Involved
First you have two sides. The first is the National Football League it self and the owners of the team franchises. The ring leader is NFL commissioner Roger "The Dodger" Goodell. His close shark like business associates and franchise owners Jerry Jones, Robert Kraft, Pat Bowlen and Jerry Richardson are the muscle behind the NFL. Those are Goodell’s confidants leading the way to insure that a new collective bargaining agreement or CBA pays them more money and increases the season to 18 games.
The other side of the side is the players, represented by the National Football League Players Association. The NFLPA’s executive director DeMaurice Smith is the ring leader on this side, and fighting with him are players such as Jeff Saturday and Drew Brees, who serve as executive committee members for the players union.
So What Are They Fighting About?
Well that’s the easy part. It all boils down to the root of all evil, money. That being said this Davante Adams Super Bowl XLIX Jersey is where it starts getting confusing. It all started back in 2006 when the owners of the football franchises accepted the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). They feel that that deal is inadequate in today’s economic times. At that time NFLPA’s executive director the late Gene Upshaw, accepted a plan together with NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue, which benefited the players substantially by giving them 59.6% of the total revenue. Why did he except the plan? Tagliabue was just about done serving his time after 17 years. It’s believed that Tagliabue accepted the deal to keep the labor peace and avoid any kind of work stoppage, such as a players strike.
At the time the leagues top owners such as Jerry Jones, were in the middle of expensive stadium plans. A work stoppage at that point would have packersauthenticofficialshop.com/JOHN_KUHN_SUPER_BOWL_JERSEY.html put a stop to building and stadium improvement plans, and he knew the owners would strongly reject the notion of any kind of work stoppage.
Also in that 2006 CBA deal, the league’s 15 highest earning money machines (Cowboys, Redskins, Patriots ECT.) would have to subsidize the 17 remaining teams that made considerably less money. This is called revenue sharing. The problem is this. Some teams make more then others, and some have very favorable stadium deals, that require less money from the owners for expenditures. On the other side of the coin, you have teams like the Dallas Cowboys, who took out massive loans for new Julius Peppers Super Bowl Jersey and renovated stadiums, thus driving the overhead and expenditures up. This benefits teams like the Cincinnati Bangles because they are making more of a profit, because there overhead and expenditures are concidebly lower.
Some of the lower 17 earning teams keep revenues down intentionally to ensure they’ll receive money from the top teams under the current system. The money they receive from revenue sharing makes them more profitable then some of the top 15 teams.
Team owners in the top 15 like Jerry Jones owner of the Dallas Cowboys want the new CBA to account for the high risk investments, such as forking out hundreds of millions dollars for new stadiums, and other cap expenditures. In simple terms, the team owners that spend the money on new stadiums or improve excising facilities want some of it back.
What The Owners The NFL Want From The Players
As far as the players are concerned the owners are asking for a longer season, and a heavy decrease in pay, which doesn’t stand well with the players. It’s been publicly stated that the cut would be around 18% overall. So how much money are we talking here? Under the current plan, owners receive a credit of around $1 billion for operating and investment expenses of the top of a $9 billion pool of annual revenue. The owners are seeking a $1.4 billion increase or about $2.4 billion total.
This increase is because the franchise owners claim that it compensates them in a more realistic economic era we are in. They claim stadiums were partly or wholly subsidized by tax payer’s years ago which was considered normal at the time. In today’s era, franchise owners are pouring in allot more money for high class stadiums, and state of the art facilities. As a result, they are occurring huge mortgage payments, on top of higher operational costs associated with new stadium operations. The owners who have improved or built new faculties stand fast behind there decisions to building there Tajma Hall’s and mausoleums citing it increases fan base, creates better fan experience which intern creates league growth.
So the players pay decrease would go to the owners pay increase out of the $9 billion pool. The owners stand point is this: They believe the players should account for this risk, because it will increase future revenue, thus paying them more money in the future. The problem is the players are not owners, stock holders or anything of the sort. The players are not a partnership with the franchise or the owner and will not receive any stake in the franchise for the cuts. Further more the players know that the value of the owners and the franchises have increased considerably in the past decade. The players are basically stating that the value of your franchise went up, that creates equity and money. The equity and money does reduce the owners overall financial risk.
What The Players Are Seeking
The players are not seeking any increase at all. They are happy with the current deal. They simply want the same amount of money, for the same amount of games played. At this point the players, the union and the NFLPA want team owners to provide further documentation to support the owner’s basis for the $1.4 Billion increase. They are asking the NFL and the Franchise owners to substantiate their claims and prove that the profits have gone down. The NFLPA has requested the owners to open the books to prove there claims of financial distress or uncertainties. The owners have adamantly refused to do that.
The leagues proposal is suspect according to the NFLPA. They are asking for a dramatic increase in credits right off the top. In the owners proposal they have categories such as "practice facility cost, travel, and professional fees". They feel the owners are asking the players or employee’s to pay for the teams overhead.
Time Davante Adams Super Bowl 49 Jersey Is The Problem
The time is winding down to get something done with both parties. The deadline is March 3rd 2011, when the league year ends, the owners can start the lockout process. On the other side the players could respond by decertifying as a union, and file anti trust http://www.packersauthenticofficialshop.com/RANDALL_COBB_SUPER_BOWL_JERSEY.html lawsuit followed by a strike.
Communication has and will continue to be a problem on both sides. It has been reported that there is improved communications between the players union and the NFL’s managing council, which is important to help speed along any kind of resolution. As for now though, there has been no sizable movement towards the resolve of a new CBA. Its no surprise both sides are playing hard ball.
The NFL players union has discussed a boycott of NFL draft activities including the scouting combine later this month with player agents.
When The Lockout Happens
The franchises will still receive the guaranteed TV revenue; however they can do nothing with players. No OTA’s, no team meetings, no training camp, no free agent signing, no contracts with players, ECT. If the lockout lasts into September, well that will be tragic because there would be no 2011 NFL season to speak off.
The owners are in a better position to withstand a lock out if one should occur financially. The reason is: a lockout would reduce the operating expenses by at least 50 55% (an estimated $4.5 billion) the elimination of player salaries, benefits, temporary layoffs, and salary cuts to various team employees would save them substantially. Thanks to a very lucrative television deal with several broadcasting networks, the owners would still receive the guaranteed money Julius Peppers Super Bowl 49 Jersey as stated above. That kind of cash flow would allow owners to shore up more then 50% of there total revenue in a normal season totally around $4 billion per team. That money would cover operating expenses and overhead through the entire season if needed.
Now that lucrative TV deal for the owners may not be the "insurance policy" they were looking for. Legally speaking the players have the upper hand because in June 2010 the NFLPA filled a legal complaint with the Special Master appointed to resolve CBA disputes. The reason is the NFLPA alleges the NFL structured that deal so the league and teams would receive guaranteed money in the event of a lock out. Because the were promised the guaranteed money the networks, DirecTV, FOX, CBS, and NBC received valuable benefits in 2009 and 2010 in exchange for the guaranteed money clause. T
コメント