Ranking the owners: JR #3

[bigcuz]

We aren't billed for tickets until sometime in April... about 6 weeks after an announcement would have been made.

I like your logic BUT ... for what it's worth, I got billed this year in early March. Could be even earlier next year ???

[Wither]

JR is a damned smart businessman.

If anyone is angry and feels that JR "swindled them" then all I can say is: he's smarter than you.

P.S. I don't think J.R. is trying to shaft anyone, especially the fans.

[mountainpantherfan]

NFL is an LLC. Do your homework on those. A game changer a couple of years ago if not sooner was a cirucuit court hearing about the NFL's structure. If I can find that link I will share.

And at this point is where a lot of my knowledge stops due to the legality and fine points of the matter.

From what I understand, but could be completely wrong, is that the ruling addressed the NFL, as a franshise, but that individually the teams were still all considered separet businesses.

This is actually what the NFLPA is hoping for. As of right now the teams themselves still hold individual power and should they collectively ever been seen as 32 owners of the NFL the players will then hold all the power, although I don't completely understand why that is so.

[CAVSS]

Im all for capping rookies and there should be penalties for holdouts. If you signed a contract stick to it or retire forever. IMHO Can you imagine if all of our stand out players that want new contracts because they had a good year in the middle of their current contract started holding out like Revis and Jackson....f*ck that. On the flip side players should be given better compensation for career ending injuries that happen on the field.

[pepaw]

1) He means that the owners gave in to a deal in the last CBA to keep football going but it was a bad deal and thus the reason for the escape clause they used that created this issue in the first place. That CBA would have never been approved or supported if they knew that the economy was going to tank the way it did but were smart enough to place a clause in the CBA that would allow them to get out of it in case it did.

2) No, the 60/40 scale is not fair as compared to every other company in the world and compared to every business model there is out there. A business is considered to be in good financial standing if they can keep their personel salaries under 52%. That number is generally suggested for non-profits as it allows a business to tread water. In order to be considered a successfully financial company personel salaries should be around 40%. But lets not forget that the players are not the only "personel" on staff for the NFL. There is the league office, officials, coaches, assistants, scouts, trainers, stadium employees and front office staff including the GM. Why did so many front office employees lose there jobs across the NFL over the last two years? Because the players had to be paid...

3) The Carolina Panthers nor any other team is a publicly traded company and thus do not have to disclose any of their financial records. They do however give a gereral report, which is more than they have to do. I'm sorry but how many companys to you know of that disclose their financials to the public or for that matter even the employees. Non-profit or publicly traded company, yes. But that is not what the Panthers are. In my opinion, team owners have been more than generous in allowing the NFLPA to see the amount they have. How would the players feel if the owners asked that every player disclose publicly their finances?

-Its pretty obvious that you know more about this then I do. I was aware that Green Bay disclosed their earnings which are down from earnings are down from 20.1 mil to around half of that in 2010. Which is reasonably poor for an NFL football team if I were guessing.

And you are right, the teams do no have to disclose to the public or NFLPA their earnings. However, with the ratings what they were in the NFL HOF preseason opener and football being the powerhouse that it currently is I think disclosing their books would go a long way in making a case for the payscale reduction.

Why wouldn't you show a piece of evidence that helps you? This argument has been rallied by NFLPA's president and several players union reps like Drew Brees who carry significant media pull right now.

You're arguments seem fine, but right now the owners are losing the public opinion battle. Last ESPN poll I saw was 60%blaming the owners and I only see this growing if they do not do something about it. And if America loses football during a recession I think we can all agree the USA is going to be biblically pissed off. We need our sports during hard times, and I feel this could jeopardize the NFL's spot at #1 (although slim) in sports which is something I would never want to see.

Also are these general reports for season ticket holders only? If not how can I get ahold of one?

[Cat'sGrowl]

Nobody has mentioned the fact that Jerry Jones is number 1 on this list.

I don't care how much money the man has, being a media-hungry clown doesn't make you great at your job.

[GRWatcher]

When the union called a strike, players refused to play but the facilities, etc were still open. So replacements were brought in and played without a legal battle. Although they did cross the picket line.

Somehow I'm thinking that if the owners call for a lockout there may not be any football at all. That means they close down the facilities, etc. Union can show up but not get in. If the owners then brought in replacements there then would be major legal battles that could take a long time to resolve.

The NHL called for a lockout, and although it involved 2 countries & 2 sets of laws, the question about replacements can be found here: http://proicehockey.about.com/od/collectivebargainingfaq/f/deadline.htm

The replacement player scenario would likely begin with the league declaring a negotiating impasse - a claim that its dispute with the players cannot be resolved through collective bargaining. It could then impose new terms of employment without consulting the NHL Players' Association.

The Players' Association would almost certainly challenge that move by filing a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board in the United States. That would begin a process of appeals and hearings that could take months, to determine whether the NHL has negotiated in good faith throughout the dispute.

I'm not saying, nor do I know, if it would work the same with the NFL. There were a few "what if's" in that article that were interesting.

I just do not think there will be any football if there is a lockout.

[Udogg]

Im all for capping rookies and there should be penalties for holdouts. If you signed a contract stick to it or retire forever. IMHO Can you imagine if all of our stand out players that want new contracts because they had a good year in the middle of their current contract started holding out like Revis and Jackson....f*ck that. On the flip side players should be given better compensation for career ending injuries that happen on the field.

Im sure you have got the see the other side of that argument?

1. It's not baseball, lots of the contracts are smoke and mirrors. 60 mill contracts turn out to be 15 million contracts with back loaded incentives that the team will never let you reach. Meaning the team can let you go. Thus not sticking to contract.

2. If you were paid to do a job, and you far exceed your job expectations you would want to be paid more. Especially if there is someone who is clearly not good as you making 2 to 5 times as much as you. Anyone who says they wouldn't feel the same way is a liar.

3. I also think rookie pay rates should be scaled back, but the players have to agree. As a player I would be very wary of doing so, because anyone has worked for a big company knows, if you let them take money off the table it's not automatically redistributed somewhere else.

4. Compensation for career ending injuries is also a slippery slope. What if I was a good player who just had a breakout year in the last year of my contract. I'm set up for a huge payday after the season. I blow out my knee in the playoffs or rupture an achilles (much more career threatening). How should I be compensated? Same the other way, if a player who was making a lot gets hurt in last year of contract, however he was clearly on decline. How should he be compensated?

I don't envy the CBA negotiators. I think JR is very smart businessman and is willing to make the tough decision for the long term benefit of both the league and the panthers. I think he is one of the few owners who is ahead of the curve on this. I also see the players a lot more involved and aware of the inner workings of negotiations. I don't see how there won't be a hold out to be honest. Look at just some of the issues, new NFLPA head looking to set his mark, new commissioner doing the same, 18 game schedule, rookie caps, reducing player salaries, revenue sharing, and new stadium funds are just some of the issues. Adding the recession to this only makes things more exaggerated. Make sure you record every game this year.

[mountainpantherfan]

When the union called a strike, players refused to play but the facilities, etc were still open. So replacements were brought in and played without a legal battle. Although they did cross the picket line.

Somehow I'm thinking that if the owners call for a lockout there may not be any football at all. That means they close down the facilities, etc. Union can show up but not get in. If the owners then brought in replacements there then would be major legal battles that could take a long time to resolve.

The NHL called for a lockout, and although it involved 2 countries & 2 sets of laws, the question about replacements can be found here: http://proicehockey.about.com/od/collectivebargainingfaq/f/deadline.htm

I'm not saying, nor do I know, if it would work the same with the NFL. There were a few "what if's" in that article that were interesting.

I just do not think there will be any football if there is a lockout.

If a new CBA isn't reached by March 1, 2011 then the league will continue to operate and the owners will ask for the players to report for work.

The NLFPA will then ask the players to vote on a lock-out due to the lack of a CBA.

The owners will not lock-out, the players will. I'm not sure how or why the owners locked-out in the NHL but in this situation only the players are able to stop play as there is nothing stopping the owners from moving forward without a new CBA.

With that being said, I have a feeling that this may actually be what the owners want in the first place, at least a majority of them, so that they can discountinue the profit sharing and force certain owners hands.

It's not all about the players, it's also an internal battle as well.

[gmonet]

does anyone know how JR is doing?? I haven't heard much since his heart transplant.

He is not only recovering, but he is better than they ever thought. I was with him at summer camp...you see him with me soon after surgery...you would not have believed his improvement.

[gmonet]

gmonet, You have it slightly wrong - the PSL sales only allowed JR to build the stadium without using tax money - that's all. PSLs had nothing to do with buying the franchise - he [and partners] paid for that and now he owns that, too. JR is a damned smart businessman.

Yes, I agree that we may suffer this year with the 'youth movement' but we WILL be competing for Superbowl again in near future - after CBA is settled. That is, if the Big Cat doesn't die before he can get us there.

Much better put than my usual enigma.. but that is what I meant...those PSL's made the team's field a reality, but the whole concept was to get cash input quick..ticket sales would never have done it IMHO. I do stand clarified, corrected and connected. Thanks bigcuz.