NFL gives financial info but Union wants more
 

According to league and union sources, the NFL offered the NFLPA top-line info -- an aggregate of profitability over a five-year period at the league level. The union pushed for more information at the individual club level, and the NFLPA's belief is having the numbers for each of the 32 teams is vital to justifying the additional cost credit the NFL is looking for, because that data contains financial information very specific like stadium and overhead costs.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d...fl-has-offered

It's my understanding that the NFL gave the union some fairly useless info to look like they're trying to play ball when in actuality they're still withholding the important stuff.

I'd say the players point should be well taken. Aggregate of profitability over a five-year period at the league level. What the hell is that?

Why is it every thread about the impending lockout falls right off the front page? Is everybody just tired of thinking about it? It's offseason! I'd think any kernel of football news would be like blood in the water.

A few reasons why the owners do not want the books leaked to the public, and it will happen. Herm Edwards, Josh MCDaniels, Tom Cable, Mike Singletary, JaMarcus Russell, owners relatives, The guys who blows the Jets owner, ect.

I'm not in the tank for the player's union. All things being equal, I'm somewhat anti-union and will usually side with ownership whether its the NFL, MLB, or an electric utility.

That said, the owners are starting to irritate me. They are asking the players to give up another 600 million per year. Yeah its not enormous in the context of a nearly 10 billion dollar pie, yeah its only a few percent, but its not irrelevant.

If we believe a union is necessary, and sports is so uniquely weird that you need a CBA so yeah they are necessary, then if the owners say "hey, we are hurting, you have to give up some money", at a bare minimum, ownership should have to prove it. I don't even think the owners should have to prove they are losing money, they deserve a fair profit, if they can show they are still profitable but those profits are declining, that also could be good enough for the players to need to make concessions.

It is not reasonable to expect the players to just take your word for it that you need more money. Explain why, and back it up with audited proof. Show the players everything. If they disagree with your conclusion based on the financial information, fine, start arguing over that, but to not be willing to open the books makes me wonder why not.

At this point, I think I'm now on the NFLPA's side until the owners show them everything.

Basically this. You want cuts and money back lets see that your margins are being squeezed to justify it.

At the end of the day on Friday, I expect that the sides will agree to another extension.

This isn't "football" or "news". It's a bunch of boring business blather.

I'm afraid for the next couple weeks that will be the only thing they agree upon. :doh!:

I want the baseball owners to bust the baseball union.

It's ridiculous that players need to see the books.

K tell me where I am wrong
the tv money share per teams covers the salary cap?
every thing else is gravy


most "owners" do not own their stadiums but lease the and
get major tax concessions for being there

and most of the stadiums are funded by city or state?


am I miss informed?


my thoughts are rookie caps
keep the season 16
and split the BILLION
that is 1000000000000
that is alot of ****ing zeroes that the TV rights and the psl and the local tax payers probably already are paying
\just my 2 cents
and we all know what 2 cent will get you

The owners allege that their stadium debt is so high that they are collecting an unacceptably low profit, or in some cases, losses.

If thats true, great. Prove it.

When your argreement calls for a sharing of a percentage of the monies, and you're arguing profit loss, you can't prove your position without showing the data. And, given that the owners are known for things like:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...54C0A964958260

and:

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/2...s-records-show

Why would you expect the union to just believe whatever the owners tell it?

Cause he's a dumbass.

Still, if you think the owners are going to open their books and show their salaries, I suspect you will be waiting a while. It won't happen. The last thing the owners want is players trouncing around talking about how much they make.

IDK. We all know they're billionaires. Hiding the truth can only lead to more resentment IMO.

It may be "boring", but it's the story that will determine whether or not our Sundays this fall really are "boring". I'll definitely be glad when this crap's over with, though.

You really are an epic dumb ass aren't you? How did Tom cash beat you out?

I'm not saying it's not important. But there's not really anything new that merits significant discussion.