NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft

    In Response to Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft : If the revenue split holds, we all know that that money will be redistributed to the vets.  The agents lose nothing in that scenario.
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]

    Yeah they do.

    They lose guaranteed scaffolding of high paid contracts. They also lose whatever unspent potion of that cap, which would certainly increase, that goes to NFLPA benefits.

    Agents make 3% or less of the NFL's traffic in dollars to players. They play, if anything, the most marginal role here. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft

    If the current revenue split holds, which is what the players want and a rookie wage scale is implemented, the balance of the unspent salary cap will be consumed through veteran contracts. 

    Regardless of what the agents get paid, their livlihood is also in those contracts.  They are the advisors to and on behalf of the players.  I think its short sighted to assume their role is marginal.  
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft

    In Response to Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft:
    [QUOTE]If the current revenue split holds, which is what the players want and a rookie wage scale is implemented, the balance of the unspent salary cap will be consumed through veteran contracts.  Regardless of what the agents get paid, their livlihood is also in those contracts.  They are the advisors to and on behalf of the players.  I think its short sighted to assume their role is marginal.  
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]

    Short sighted? I think you are looking for another word there. 

    I think it's tin foil hat stuff. People here are looking (desperately) for a bogey-man other than their favorite players. When it's all said and done, in a conflict between 32 billionaires, and a host of millionaire players witha coterie of lawyers working (for their entire lives) in labor law, that act as year round retained NFLPA council, the guys who skim something like in the area of 2% from the bottom probably have nothing but an absolutely marginal role. 

    Athletes do not call their agents to ask if they should decertify, etc, and most agents are losing money the longer this goes into court.  

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft

    In Response to Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft:
    [QUOTE]They'll never get that far ....they'll cave.....they need the money.. Here's a cool Pats site  http://60maxpowero.com/
    Posted by RonMex2[/QUOTE]

    Whoops, there you go. Reported. 

    Have fun Ron. 
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft

    In Response to Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft : Yes, they care about their next contract, but I am willing to bet that many of them don't really think that the CBA deeply affects a majority of them significantly.   I am sure they don't expect the league minimums to be dropped substantially, if at all which is where many players reside.  It affects the top earners, mainly.  Further, I'd imagine that those 400 or so FA's and recently drafted rookies would rather get a deal done and get back on the payroll.  Its their agents as well as their union (er, assn) that are advising them to sit tight.  Its naive to think the NFLPA isn't taking advice from the players' attorney agents who negotiate deals every day and know better than the union (er, assn) their players' needs and wants including things like drug testing.
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]

    The owners want to take more revenue out of the equations used to calculate both the salary cap and the salary floor.  So yes, the CBA greatly affects the minimum salary as well as the maximum.  Many players may not understand all the details, but their interest is to get a good deal.  That's why they have agents and a trade association--so advisers who know more than they do can advise them on what the best deal is.  You're probably right that a number of players aren't all that smart about money and, without advisers, would agree to a bad deal just because it was better for them than working at Wal-Mart.  But fortunately for the players, they have advisers who do know better and won't let the players settle for a bad deal.  I guess that's unfortunate for owners and certain fans who think the players make enough money as it is and should just shut up and be happy with whatever they get, but personally I see nothing wrong with players hiring advisers and trying to get the best possible deal for themselves. That's the way negotiation works in the business world--and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. 



     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft

    In Response to Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft : Short sighted? I think you are looking for another word there.  I think it's tin foil hat stuff. People here are looking (desperately) for a bogey-man other than their favorite players. When it's all said and done, in a conflict between 32 billionaires, and a host of millionaire players witha coterie of lawyers working (for their entire lives) in labor law, that act as year round retained NFLPA council, the guys who skim something like in the area of 2% from the bottom probably have nothing but an absolutely marginal role.  Athletes do not call their agents to ask if they should decertify, etc, and most agents are losing money the longer this goes into court.  
    Posted by zbellino[/QUOTE]
    Do you mean like the trial (labor?) lawyer, DeMaurice Smith who actually runs the NFLPA?

    You and I will have to agree to disagree.  These attorney agents are constantly in the ears of the players, and given that the NFLPA regulates their certification, the NFLPA has their own direct relationship with the agents. 

    And, as you said, agents are probably losing money right now.  Do you really think the agents are going to sit idly by and let their own livlihood be dictated by others without working to put their own spin on things?  Do you think the players in the lawsuit didn't go to their agents and ask if they should do this?  The agents' influence is all over this negotiation.  They may not sit at the table, but they might as well. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft

    In Response to Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft : The owners want to take more revenue out of the equations used to calculate both the salary cap and the salary floor.  So yes, the CBA greatly affects the minimum salary as well as the maximum.  Many players may not understand all the details, but their interest is to get a good deal.  That's why they have agents and a trade association--so advisers who know more than they do can advise them on what the best deal is.  You're probably right that a number of players aren't all that smart about money and, without advisers, would agree to a bad deal just because it was better for them than working at Wal-Mart.  But fortunately for the players, they have advisers who do know better and won't let the players settle for a bad deal.  I guess that's unfortunate for owners and certain fans who think the players make enough money as it is and should just shut up and be happy with whatever they get, but personally I see nothing wrong with players hiring advisers and trying to get the best possible deal for themselves. That's the way negotiation works in the business world--and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. 
    Posted by prolate0spheroid[/QUOTE]

    Pro, I think you were essentially agreeing with me in your response.  The players agents are currently playing a significant role in this process.  And I am not judging one way or another as to whether or not they should be.  Frankly, if I were an agent, I'd do everything I could to be involved in the process, because my professional life depends on it. 

    As for the floor, I'll accept that the owners may want to lower that as it would go hand in hand with lowering the overall revenue to the players, but my point was that the minimum would not drop as substantially as the maximums would, and given that, a vast majority of the "unheard" players don't really care about the CBA.  They just want a deal done. 
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft

    In Response to Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft : Pro, I think you were essentially agreeing with me in your response.  The players agents are currently playing a significant role in this process.  And I am not judging one way or another as to whether or not they should be.  Frankly, if I were an agent, I'd do everything I could to be involved in the process, because my professional life depends on it.  As for the floor, I'll accept that the owners may want to lower that as it would go hand in hand with lowering the overall revenue to the players, but my point was that the minimum would not drop as substantially as the maximums would, and given that, a vast majority of the "unheard" players don't really care about the CBA.  They just want a deal done. 
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]

    I don't agree that the agents are driving the NFLPA agenda, which is what TexPat was saying.  Sure players listen to agents to get advice on their own personal situation and agents may very well share opinions about the CBA situation with their clients, but I really don't believe agents control the players' association or are the reason the owners' proposal was not accepted by the NFLPA, or even have much say in what specifically the players are asking for in the CBA negotiations or what they are claiming in their lawsuit. These are things that are driven by the NFLPA leadership and its legal team. Agents, at best, are only peripherally involved. I don't see their role as "significant" and I've yet to see any proof that it is.  As Z pointed out, I doubt the agents would have wanted a rookie pay scale, but the players association reportedly was ready to allow one.  The players association has also shown willingness to agree to many restrictions on free agency and other things agents might prefer to see go away.  The core of the dispute is the formula for calculating salary caps (and floors) and the fact that the owners want to greatly reduce the amount of future revenue that is included in the calculation of those limits on player pay.  The players have adequate incentives to attack proposals to limit their future pay potential even in the absence of agents. If agents were all to disappear from the earth, I'm not sure anything in the NFLPA's negotiating strategy would change. 

    _______________
    Also, as I understand the owners' proposal--and no one but the parties involved has the full details--their object was not to drop the current minimums and maximums, but merely to take a lot of future revenue out of the equation for calculating floors and caps.  What this would do was greatly slow the growth in both minimums and maximums and prevent players--whether high paid or low--from sharing in significant portions of future NFL revenue. The current formula links the salary cap and floor to most revenue earned by NFL teams, including a lot of the luxury box revenue.  The owners' goal (again, as I understand it from the incomplete information that has been released or reported) was to pull things like luxury box revenue out of the equation so they wouldn't have to count those in determining caps and floors. The reason they are doing this is because currently they don't share that revenue amongst the teams and they don't want to start sharing it.  But as long as that revenue isn't shared but still counts toward the salary cap and floor, it creates a problem for lower-revenue teams who are seeing their salary costs rise when Jerry Jones has big luxury box sales but aren't getting any portion of the revenue from Jerry Jones's luxury boxes to cover those rising salary costs. I can understand the owners position--but I think the players are absolutely right to say why should we agree to league-wide limits on our pay just so the owners don't have to agree to league-wide revenue sharing.  If the owners don't want to share revenues across teams, then they shouldn't expect the players to share pay limits across teams. With revenue sharing and pay caps, both owners and players share some of the "cost" of achieving competitive balance.  The owners, though, seem to want to transfer all that cost to the players. That, to me, seems unfair and I don't blame the players at all for refusing to sign that deal.   

     
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from UD6. Show UD6's posts

    Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft

    Pro, I don't think I went so far as to agree with Patty that the agents held the strings.  I did say he was generally right and I meant it.  I said it would be naive to think the NFLPA is not listening to the agents and that the agents aren't providing their thoughts.  I think their involvement is more than minor or marginal. 

    What do the agents care about a rookie wage scale.  By and large the signifcant money goes to about 10 players, right?  That money will now be spread to vets of which there are more and more agents (not necessarily super agents) may be able to benefit by getting a little more for their vet player and thus themselves. 
    Interesting how quiet it is been on the negotiation front.  Its a bit disconcerting.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft

    In Response to Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft:
    [QUOTE]  Interesting how quiet it is been on the negotiation front.  Its a bit disconcerting.
    Posted by UD6[/QUOTE]

    UD . . . the court-ordered mediation begins again Monday.  It was stopped a few weeks ago because the court-ordered mediator had prior obligations. The quiet period, I think, is mostly because of the mediator being away.  Still, the longer this runs on, the more skeptical I become.  A month ago, I was nearly sure a deal would be signed and the season would be unaffected.  At this point, I'm not nearly so certain. 

    Oh, and agents certainly don't want a rookie pay scale. They make a lot of money negotiating big contracts for top rookie draft picks. Plus, those big rookie contracts put upward pressure on wages and therefore drive up the prices for veterans too.  What the agents would really like to see is no rookie pay scale, no salary cap (a floor, though is fine!), no limits on free agency, no limits on roster size, and possibly no draft. Their interest is to have more contracts, larger contracts, more frequently re-negotiated contracts, and more competition between teams for contracts. I bet they'd also love to get rid of the limit the NFLPA places on their commissions!

    As for the players and players association, I think what they'd like first and foremost is a CBA similar to the one they had. As long as the salary cap is a generous one, they are willing to accept restrictions on free agency, a rookie salary scale, limits on rosters, drafts, etc. If, however, the owners want to insist on greatly limiting future growth in the salary cap, then I think the players and players association moves to a position more like the agents' position: just let the free market take over. That doesn't mean the agents are driving that position--it just means that interests converge. But give the players association a generous salary cap, and I think they revert to a position that is accepting of a number of restrictions that the agents would probably love to see permanently removed.

       
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft

    Bad news for the players. Real bad.

    The appeals court kept the lockout in place until a hearing decides the issue. And more, they again have undermined the order of Nelson to lift the lockout and look to do the same with their final decision. Meanwhile, the old and current foe of the owners, Doty, is looking at a player grab for $707 mil as damages regarding the TV money.

    Even if Doty gives them the bucks, assuming an appeal does not put an end to that nonsense, the owners will grind the players hard to get every penny back in a new CBA which they will likely dictate if the lockout prevails.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft

    A definite setback for the players, but there's still a long way to go in this fight.  The owners are likely to be able to keep their lockout as long as they want to, but there's nothing in today's ruling that stops the player's anti-trust suit from going forward.  I find it interesting that the Appeals Court did not show its hand on whether it thinks the decertification is a sham, preferring to argue that the law (Norris-LaGuardia) that limits the Court's ability to issue injunctions against lockouts applies regardless of whether the locked-out employees are unionized or not.   

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: NFLPA Wants To Eliminate the Draft

    I think you are aware that the players and the league agreed to a CBA in the wake of the 1993 class-action suit specifically because both sides feared what might be dictated from the bench if they didn't.

    There is no reason to believe they will be any less fearful this time around. It is not so much that the players are willing to open that Pandora's Box. It is more that it is a means of stopping the lockout that in the short term undermines the players more than the owners. After all, the players can drop the suit any time they want. So far, the bust the lockout strategy through the courts isn't working too well.

    As you also may be aware, the players could be construed as a cartel in the absence of a union. This is all tricky business.
     

Share