nfl owners to opt out?

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Aug 9, 2006
6,298
56
48
37
#1
However, by opting out of the agreement that was struck on March 9, 2006, the NFL would play 2010 without a salary cap, unrestricted free agency for players would be increased from four years to six years and the orderly selection of college players in the annual draft would not exist after 2011. These "poison pills" are designed to motivate both the owners and the union to work toward a new collective bargaining agreement.

When the current CBA was agreed upon amid much acrimony between high- and low-revenue clubs, the deal included options for both the owners and players' union to terminate the terms early in either 2008 or 2009. The deadline for opting out this year is Nov. 8 but league sources say many owners want to pull the trigger now.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3399645
----------------------------



bad feeling that the competitive balance in the NFL between the "rich" and the "poor" teams in the NFL is close to going away..........



if it happens........goodbye greatest big sport in the world.....hella baseball2....


cowboy fans will be happy.....maybe they will be able to win a playoff game after this happens
 
Aug 9, 2006
6,298
56
48
37
#3
things are going to change and thats certain....how much they change is up to them.....

what you mean "the death of the sport".....the current system has only been in place for like a decade...it use to be run just like the worst case scenairo states.....

buying a champ in the nfl use to be just as easy as baseball......
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
45
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#4
No it wasn't as easy as baseball back in the days either. If that were the case you wouldn't have had all time greats playing their entire careers for one team.

I don't know exactly how things worked in say, the 70's, compared to today, but I know that things worked out a lot better in the sense that teams couldn't just buy the best players and (great) players typically stayed with one team.
 

Chree

Medicated
Dec 7, 2005
32,404
13,935
113
40
#6
dumbest would go to the Raiders Al Davis lol


really though, if they opt out, itll be all bad, the Salary Cap is probably the most important thing for the league, to keep everything fair....
 

Chree

Medicated
Dec 7, 2005
32,404
13,935
113
40
#9
OWNERS VOTE 32-0 TO OPT OUT OF CBA
Posted by Mike Florio on May 20, 2008, 10:08 a.m.

What a difference two years make.

In March 2006, thirty of the league’s owners voted in favor of a Collective Bargaining Agreement that gives 59 percent of the total football revenues to the players. Now, all of them have voted to pull the plug on it two years early.

Per Adam Schefter of NFL Network, the owners voted unanimously on Tuesday morning not to extend the CBA through the 2012 season.

Only nine votes were necessary to kill the deal early. Presumably, the unanimous vote is the result of an effort by the owners to project a united front in their negotiations with the union. (We’d heard that Commissioner Roger Goodell was trying to get the owners to defer the decision. So much for that.)

It also makes us think that the owners aren’t yet serious about worst-case scenarios like an uncapped year or a work stoppage. Instead, the 32-0 vote tells us that they see no harm in trying to negotiate a better deal. The worst-case scenario would be agreeing to the same terms that they presently intend to honor for the next three seasons.
 

Chree

Medicated
Dec 7, 2005
32,404
13,935
113
40
#10
NFL owners vote unanimously to opt out of labor deal

By John Clayton
ESPN.com
(Archive)

Updated: May 20, 2008, 3:03 PM ET

* Comment
* Email
* Print

ATLANTA -- The NFL officially notified its players union on Tuesday that it will opt out of the current collective bargaining agreement, which could lead to a season without a salary cap in 2010 and a possible lockout in 2011.

Owners voted unanimously Tuesday morning to opt out of the deal, which was extended in March 2006. The NFL had until November to opt out, but decided to do it early instead of waiting for the deadline.

The league, however, emphasized that it will keep negotiating with the NFL Players Association and said games will be played "without threat of interruption for at least the next three seasons."

"We have guaranteed three more years of NFL football," commissioner Roger Goodell said after the owners used the opt-out clause built into the agreement signed more than two years ago. "We are not in dire straits. We've never said that. But the agreement isn't working, and we're looking to get a more fair and equitable deal."

The decision by the owners was anticipated, although not this early. The 2006 agreement allowed either side to negate the contract by Nov. 8. Goodell said the owners acted early "to get talks rolling."

NFLPA executive director Gene Upshaw had been anticipating the early termination of the agreement. He met with owners two weeks ago, and from that meeting he asked for audited financial reports from owners to document their economic problems.

Roger [Goodell] e-mailed me this morning [and] told me they had a unanimous agreement to terminate the deal. My response back to him? 'What a surprise.'

-- NFLPA president Gene Upshaw

"Roger [Goodell] e-mailed me this morning [and] told me they had a unanimous agreement to terminate the deal," Upshaw said. "My response back to him? 'What a surprise.'"

"All this means is that we will have football now until 2010 and not until 2012," Upshaw added during a conference call. "We will move ahead. This just starts the clock ticking. If we can't reach agreement by 2010, then we go to no man's land, which is 2011."

Upshaw said Goodell's e-mail listed three reasons for the early termination: high labor costs, problems with the rookie pool and the league's inability, through the interpretation of the courts, to recoup bonuses of players who subsequently breach their contract or refuse to perform.

The highest-profile example of the latter was a court decision allowing Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick to keep $16.5 million in bonus money, despite pleading guilty to federal dogfighting charges and being sentenced to 23 months in federal prison.

According to the NFL, clubs are obligated by the collective bargaining agreement to spend almost $4.5 billion on player costs in 2008. Players received around 60 percent of league revenues. Growing costs of stadium construction and operations also figured into Tuesday's decision.

The owners also want a change in the system to distribute the money more to veterans than to unproven rookies. Their argument is based on a disparity in salaries that leaves them spending far more on unproven rookies than on dependable veterans.

"The current labor agreement does not adequately recognize the cost of generating the revenues of which the players receive the largest shares; nor does the agreement recognize that those costs have increased substantially -- and at an ever increasing rate -- in recent years during a difficult economic climate in our country," the NFL said.

The agreement signed two years ago was to last until 2013 with the option to terminate in 2011, which is what the owners did Tuesday. League officials and owners, including several who helped push through the last deal, have been saying for almost a year that while the previous contract may have been too beneficial to the owners, the current one had swung too far toward the players.

SportsNation
Is the current collective bargaining agreement a good thing for the NFL?
Yes
No

NFLPA outside counsel Jeffrey Kessler told The Wall Street Journal prior to Tuesday's announcement that if the owners were to opt out, the union "plans to ask for a greater share of revenues."

Kessler added that "Every deal we've gotten with them, we've received another increase."

"We are resolved to do our best to achieve a fair agreement that will allow labor peace to continue through and beyond the 2011 season," the league said Tuesday.

The debate will continue in negotiations and through the media over a course of months and years. Both sides conceded there might be no agreement until the deadline, which Upshaw suggested might not happen until the winter of 2010. That would be a year without a salary cap under terms of the deal.

"We'd like to get things done," Goodell said. "But often it's not until you have a deadline that people realize the consequences of not reaching a deal."

Upshaw added: "March of 2010 -- that's what we see as the realistic deadline. I'm not going to sell the players on a cap again. Once we go through the cap, why should we agree to it again?"

In other business at the league meetings, NFL owners voted to play the 2012 Super Bowl in Indianapolis, beating out Glendale, Ariz., and Houston. The Colts, who are opening a brand-new stadium this fall, lost out last year to the Dallas Cowboys' new stadium in Arlington, Texas, for the 2011 game.

As part of its bid, Indianapolis has envisioned an "NFL Village" covering three downtown blocks, as well as a privately funded athletic facility that would be used for practices before the game and then turned over to a city high school.

John Clayton is a senior writer for ESPN.com. ESPN NFL reporter Chris Mortensen and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
 
Aug 9, 2006
6,298
56
48
37
#13
hopefully they can all work it out like they are spouse to...hopefully nothing big changes.....NFL is the greatest sport right now for a reason.....the level of play is extremly even for all teams