Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Details of the new CBA...48% to players no $1B off the top


Happy Panther

Recommended Posts

Sorry if posted already

http://ht.ly/5n4Qp

Details of a proposed collective bargaining agreement being pitched to NFL owners Tuesday, according to sources:

• Players get 48 percent of "all revenue," without extra $1-billion-plus off top that previously had been requested by owners.

• Players' share will never dip below 46.5 percent, under new formula being negotiated.

• Teams required to spend minimum 90-93 percent of the salary cap.

• Rookie wage scale part of deal but still being "tweaked."

• Four years needed for unrestricted free-agent status. Certain tags will be retained, but still being discussed.

• 18-game regular season designated only as negotiable item and at no point is mandated in deal.

• New 16-game Thursday night TV package beginning in 2012.

• Owners still will get some expense credits that will allow funding for new stadiums.

• Retirees to benefit from improved health care, pension benefits as revenue projected to double to $18 million by 2016.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 games on Thursday huh? Lemme guess... NFL Network? :mad:

Not exactly...

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/06/21/report-new-cba-would-include-16-game-thursday-night-tv-package/

Specifically, Mort reports that a 16-week Thursday night TV package will developed, starting in 2012. To maximize revenue, the package will be sold on the open market.

We’ve previously heard whispers that the eight-game NFLN package could have generated more than $500 million. A 16-game Thursday night package could be worth $1 billion.

If the network that gets the Thursday night package already has a TV deal in place with the NFL, don’t be surprised if the acquisition of the new asset includes an extension of the current arrangement.

The development is bad news for NFL Network, which will become far less attractive to cable operators without regular-season NFL football. That said, the NFL could reserve some late-season Saturday night games for NFLN.

Still, if the goal is to grow the pie, the players should want any and all nationally-televised games to be sold to networks that are willing to pay more for the rights than they ever will realize in advertising revenue and/or subscriber fees.

UPDATE: We’re already hearing scuttlebutt that perhaps NFLN would keep the late-season portion of the Thursday package, with only the first eight Thursdays being sold. Though more money can be realized via the sale of all games, the players need to realize that they have an interest in NFL Network becoming more and more viable and relevant. It’s a great vehicle for marketing the game and the individual players who routinely appear on Total Access. Actually, the best way to split the package would be on a bi-weekly basis, with NFLN getting a game every other Thursday. This would cause viewers who have easy access to the outside network to clamor for the in-house network, in order to fully enjoy their new Thursday night habit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48% without the 1 billion off the top is essentially the same deal for the players in 2011 as was in previous years. However, as revenues continue to escalate, the players will be getting much less than they would have under the old CBA.

This deal might just save the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can't wait to see what the final "tweaked" rookie wage scale looks like.

For the Panthers' sake, I hope it includes like a 15 million dollar cap on guaranteed money.

That way when they draft Andrew Luck next year, they won't have tons of money tied up in young QBs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • lol, that second part is quite literally one of the dumbest things ever. Having or not having guaranteed contracts has absolutely nothing to do with how much these billionaires have to pay.  Because there is a hard cap and a minimum cap spend requirement, and teams either use their cap or roll it over to use it all the next year, so the owners have to pay the same amount of money in the end no matter what. Having fully guaranteed contracts in the NFL would only hurt salary cap management, and thus would end up screwing over the team and its fan base when teams kiss on signings as they take up cap room that is needed to improve the roster. Look at the Browns with Watson, they gave him the fully guaranteed deal and all it’s doing is sucking up massive cap space now.  If they hadn’t done that, the owner would still be paying the same amount of money each year as that cap space would still be used elsewhere. If you want to argue for fully guaranteed contracts because the players deserve it, that’s an entirely different argument and a fair one to discuss.  But anyone against fully guaranteed deals isn’t doing it to argue for the billionaire owners.
    • Start posting in threads in the other forums instead of just creating threads. No one comes over here so you aren't starting conversations.  Get your ass up to 100 posts. It's not that hard. Don't create 100 posts. Contribute to conversations. 
    • Ryabkin could be the steal of the draft, he was a Top 10 pick heading into last season and had a rough year.  Lots of GMs passed on him because of that and his workouts. Pick has really high upside and Svech should be able to translate Rod tearing his arse a new one for making dumb plays since Svech has had several years of it.  🤣😂
×
×
  • Create New...