Current state of NFL.

[jeffrey]

Incidentally I've realized I actually know about half the owners in the NFL and Jerry Jones, Dan Snyder, Bob (?) Kraft, etc... are amusing and thus deserve something more than nothing... about slightly less than the mascots who do more work via putting on the costume before similarly pacing the sidelines. :dancemonkey:

Those guys spend hundreds of millions of their money (not the universe's money or the players parent's money, their money) to build stadiums, buy uniforms, etc. Why on earth would they not be entitled to a chunk of the money those things generate?

[jeffrey]

And that's today's America (world?). Someone who has the crazy altruistic thought to help others is branded a moron if it's not stemmed from selfishness.

Sigh. So glad I can toke and play video games to escape...

Why don't you give all of your money away then?

I don't expect someone who worked and gained wealth to give me everything I need. The drugs would not be developed if you expect them to be given away. Let's take the wealthy individual (or the many individuals who bought stock in the company) and what remains? You have hundreds of scientists who have to live and pay off the loans from their 10+ years of secondary education and you have thousands of administrative and support people who also need to live and then you need millions of dollars of equipment needed to develop the drug over 5 to 10 years. How in hell do you plan to cover those expenses to produce the drug; especially since you plan to take their discovery and give it away afterward?

Altruism is great, and many (including most of the owners) give away a great deal, but you can't expect them to give you everything they have.

[tarcone]

If everything was free, we wouldnt be having this discussion. What a wonderful world that would be.

[Mike17]

Yea, unfortunately you can't expect owners to invest money into a team without seeing some return. If they don't get money back from their investment, they'd invest their money somewhere else. But you can't expect the players to put their talents and health on the line without getting money out of it either. At the end of the day it's bickering about who gets how much, and it's unfortunate that greed on one side or the other is going to keep us from watching the game we love for at least this year.

[JesterBlaze]

Those guys spend hundreds of millions of their money (not the universe's money or the players parent's money, their money) to build stadiums, buy uniforms, etc. Why on earth would they not be entitled to a chunk of the money those things generate?

Because they haven't done any additional work. You speak of universe's money and players parent's money in what I guess is an attempt to make my argument sound ridiculous yet what's more ridiculous than the notion that "I have money so I'm entitled to purchase money making machines"?

If you have money (funneled from the masses NOT earned) then good for you. Now if you want to spend it, then do so, but why should spending equate to earning? Nothing can be more ridiculous.

Why don't you give all of your money away then?

I don't expect someone who worked and gained wealth to give me everything I need. The drugs would not be developed if you expect them to be given away. Let's take the wealthy individual (or the many individuals who bought stock in the company) and what remains? You have hundreds of scientists who have to live and pay off the loans from their 10+ years of secondary education and you have thousands of administrative and support people who also need to live and then you need millions of dollars of equipment needed to develop the drug over 5 to 10 years. How in hell do you plan to cover those expenses to produce the drug; especially since you plan to take their discovery and give it away afterward?

Altruism is great, and many (including most of the owners) give away a great deal, but you can't expect them to give you everything they have.

I don't have billions but give what I have. I also volunteer at the local animal shelter, food banks on occasion, and donate plasma twice per week.

I'm not saying give everything anyone has or everything I need. Drugs would be made a lot quicker - maybe even CURES - if we advertised doctors with groupies hanging over them all day to stem the majority of young minds in that direction while they're going through puberty. Student loans are yet another way to prey on others. I won't even get into that.

Take away the wealthy individual and you have all the running parts. Just as if you take away a new car owner you still have a perfect new car.

Here's a fact: A dollar has never done a damn thing on it's own. Take 10,000 Americans and put us on an island. Are we gonna die due to no $$$ or realize that it's exertion that gets things done?



This is twisting to many angles and I've gotten the answer to my original question: obviously there's a continuity that would be broken for many fans if things changed. I don't personally value that continuity but can see it.

[jeffrey]

If you have money (funneled from the masses NOT earned) then good for you. Now if you want to spend it, then do so, but why should spending equate to earning? Nothing can be more ridiculous.

[...]

Here's a fact: A dollar has never done a damn thing on it's own. Take 10,000 Americans and put us on an island. Are we gonna die due to no $$$ or realize that it's exertion that gets things done?

Spending equates to earning because people with ideas need money to make them work. If I have a great idea, then I need money to get the idea off the ground. That's where capital markets come in. I can get money from someone who has it and in return I give them a part of what I manage to create with their money.

A good example is the shipping expeditions of the 15th century. Someone says "there are these great spices in the far east that I bet people around here would like to have, I should go get some and bring them back," so they convince someone with money to give it to them to fund the expedition in exchange for part of the profits.

NFL games don't happen without a stadium or television contracts or advertising. The owners provide that. I don't know what you mean by they use money "funneled from the people." Nobody every came to my house and ordered me to hand over money to Dan Rooney or Bill Gates. However, if I hear that some guy named Steve Jobs had some ideas, got some people together, and made a kickass product like an ipod, I may go buy one.

And I wasn't trying to attack your altruism earlier when I asked why you don't give all your money away. I was just pointing out that you need your money and you earned it, so you keep at least some of it. You shouldn't be expected to give it all away so we can discover the next penicillin, and fortunately you don't have to because it is profitable to pay for researching new drugs.

Anyway, I've gotten rather far away from the thread topic, at this point. I think there will be a new CBA by the time the season starts, and I think that battles like this are good now and then between employees/unions and employers. They help keep the balance between what someone contributes and what someone earns.

[Argot]

I feel like I'm in sociology class again...answer the following.

"A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $1,000 which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife. Should Heinz have broken into the store to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?"

[jeffrey]

I feel like I'm in sociology class again...answer the following.

"A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $1,000 which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife. Should Heinz have broken into the store to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?"

"A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was no drug that the doctors thought might save her. This was because there was no way to devote one's time to researching such drugs, since nobody is allowed to profit from creating something useful. The woman dies whether Heinz breaks into the store or not and whether the pharmacists overcharges or not."

[Matt]

the players are painting this picture that the NFL owners are evil and greedy. the fact is that the NFL owners basically offered the exact same deal as they were working under but have a rookie wage scale. In addition to that they've given more (noted above). the NFLPA insists on seeing books saying, that they want more. they want a bigger piece of the pie. If NFL caliber players play a football game in some random place, does anyone know if it's not on TV or marketed? The players have no leverage whatsoever. Do research on the last NHL lockout. Over the players "deadbodies" would they agree to a salary cap..........

[Argot]

Hmmm...do you really think that money is the only motivation for work and that some people would not put themselves in personal debt to advance causes that are important to them?

[Mike17]

The players will give up the ruse eventually. Wait until it hits them that they won't get any money for this season, and they'll be calling up the union reps.

[Mike17]

Hmmm...do you really think that money is the only motivation for work and that some people would not put themselves in personal debt to advance causes that are important to them?

No, but I do think money is the biggest motivator to work, and that if we had to wait for altruistic people to do things for free, nothing of consequence would ever get done.

[Matt]

Hmmm...do you really think that money is the only motivation for work and that some people would not put themselves in personal debt to advance causes that are important to them?

no, however this discussion is pertaining to a CBA.
Google what Ralph Wilson has done.

[SteveBsFan]

I don't know where your getting all these changes from. I'm proposing one change: lose the current owners. EVERYTHING else other than team names/colors, such as players/rosters, locations, current draft picks, historical rivalries, etc... would remain the same. There's 100's of college fields to play on if the owners of the current NFL fields want to pay rent for an empty stadium instead of taking a nominal rental fee.

EVERY SINGLE worker in the NFL structure will still work - I guarantee they'll take a check from a different name.

All that stuff would require mega financing from more billionaires to get it going. Shit, payroll alone is $3.5 billion a year (not counting stadium rentals, travel, coaching, insurance, and other expenses), and with the major networks still under contract with the NFL, these new owners would likely take major losses early on.

Plus, getting new billionaire owners to run the league just brings us full circle eventually.

Of course if players were willing to take a massive pay cut and run the league themselves, they would have just signed the CBA and remained with a good thing.

[SteveBsFan]

Do research on the last NHL lockout. Over the players "deadbodies" would they agree to a salary cap..........

Haha yea, NHL players got the shaft with their lockout. What was learned from that, billionaires always beat millionaires.

On top of salary cap, they were forced to agree with a direct 25% slash in their contract values.. ouch.