With the commencement of NFL training camp, it is safe to say this is my favorite time of the year. Unfortunately, this time of the year is double edged sword for me, being a student. I want August to finish for the regular season to start, but I go back to school at the end of August. With this said, it is difficult to even fathom that this time next year there might not be a NFL season to look forward to. This season is the final season under the current NFL collective bargaining agreement (CBA). This is an agreement between the owners and the NFL Players’ Association on such things like salary cap. If the owners and the Players’ Association (NFLPA) do not come to some sort of agreement, there will be not football next season. Without an agreement now, certain aspects of the NFL are different for this season. One of the most noticeable changes is the loss of the salary cap. Loss of a salary cap means teams can spend as much money as possible for players. The team that took the most advantage without a salary cap was the New York Jets. Over the previous offseason, the Jets signed Santonio Holmes, LaDanian Tomlinson, and Antonio Cromartie among others. Another less noticeable difference would be the uncertainty of what the future brings. As a result of this certainty, teams have become gun shy to sign new players to long term deals and/or re-sign existing players to new deals. Two prime examples would be New England Patriots quarterback, Tom Brady, and Indianapolis Colts quarterback, Peyton Manning. They are the last year on their deals. If there was a new CBA in place, Brady and Manning would been re-signed in about March. If teams are not re-signed such big names, what does that have to say about how organizations feel about the future. Now, let’s turn to the argument that causing trouble between the owners and the NFLPA. What are the sides to each argument? Who is right?
ISSUE 1: MONEY
This is no big shock here. In the previous CBA, about 60% of the NFL’s revenue went to players. Now, the NFL owners want more.
Owners: We gave the players a buttercup deal in the previous CBA. We took a hard hit when the economy went south in the last couple of years. Now, we need money.
Players: We like the previous deal. We do not want less money, because we are the ones putting our bodies on the line for the NFL, not the owners. We also can get cut at anytime by management. If we have problems after retirement as a result of our job, the NFL does not take care of us.
The Truth: Take into account how many players versus how many owners there are in NFL. There are 32 NFL owners and 1,696 players (MacGregor). The players had 60% of the NFL’s revenue in the previous CBA. The NFL’s revenue last year was about 4.5 billion dollars (“NFL Owners Opt out of CBA”). So, the players made $2.7 billion last year. Spread that out over its players and the average player made $1.6 million. Now, the owners made $1.8 billion last year. Over 32 owners, $56 million was made per owner. The owners made about 30 times what the players made last year. The owners claim they have lost their shirts. They have not. The players are right to keep this money.
ISSUE 2: EXTENDING THE NFL SEASON FROM 16 GAMES TO 18
Instead of playing four preseason games where there is no incentive to win or caring on the part of the fans, the owners want to take two of these games and insert them into the regular season.
Owners: More games will create more revenue, which will make everyone more money. With the recession of the past years, we really need more money (even though we make a lot).
Players: We are very concerned with an already brutal season and now the owners want to extend the season with the sole reason of making more money. On top of that, the owners want to take money away from us. If we play more, we expect to be paid more.
The Truth: As a fan of the NFL, I would love see more of it. But, I recognize that more games are more risk for the players. So, the owners have to give the money to players to play an 18 game regular season.
ISSUE 3: ROOKIE PAY SCALE
In the last decade, I have seen high draft picks be signed to crazy contracts on the order of 60 million dollars. These contracts give 20 to 30 million dollars guaranteed to people who have not even played one snap in the NFL.
Owners: We want a rookie pay scale because we want to avoid paying a lot of money to draft picks that will not pan out. Case and point: former Oakland Raiders quarterback, JaMarcus Russell! He signed a six year, 61 million dollar contract in 2007 (“JaMarcus Russell Officially Signs Richest NFL Rookie Contract”). $32 million of that contract were guaranteed (“JaMarcus Russell Officially Signs Richest NFL Rookie Contract”). He is one of the biggest busts in NFL history. He was released two months ago by the Raiders (Williamson). He is currently a free agent.
Players: The NFLPA agrees with the owners because the NFLPA is made up of the veterans. We do not like seeing rookies getting paid extreme amounts of money. We want that money to go to veterans that have proved themselves in the league.
The Truth: A rookie pay scale would be a great idea. I have always disliked the idea of rookies getting tons of money for being drafted.
In conclusion, I am pleading to the NFL owners and the NFLPA (even though they won’t read this). I am pleading to them to use their brains and stop being greedy. If you think you don’t have enough money, look in your driveway. If there is a Rolls-Royce and/or a boat, you can sell those.
Sincerely,
Rob (uconn2012)
References
"JaMarcus Russell Officially Signs Richest NFL Rookie Contract." SportsBusiness Daily. 12 Sept. 2007. Web. 28 July 2010. <http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/article/114872>.
MacGregor, Jeff. "NFL Lockout: How Much of Too Much Is Enough for Players and Owners? - ESPN." ESPN: The Worldwide Leader In Sports. 26 July 2010. Web. 28 July 2010. <http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?id=5410904>.
"NFL Owners Opt out of CBA." NFL.com - Official Site of the National Football League. Web. 28 July 2010. <http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d80868b78&template=without-video&confirm=true>.
