At the time, the agreement was ratified by ownership 30-2. This move was unanimous.
Opting out forces both NFL Ownership and the NFL Players Association back to the bargaining table to renegotiate an extension to avoid a 2010 season without a salary cap and to determine how much money the NFLPA will receive from the league. Back in February, I suggested that ownership was more interested in maintaining the salary cap, than in pushing for a renegotiation and put that cap in jeopardy.
What I failed to consider was that the deal as originally struck was a last ditch effort to avoid a work stoppage, and had to be cobbled together by representatives of several teams. The union leadership was in a position that they grew stronger by virtue of the ownership weakening themselves with infighting. So rather than allow that to continue, the ownership reached an agreement they could live with for the time being while they got their own house in order outside of the spotlight of collective bargaining negotiations. Last month, I suggested that the Players Association had some of their own house in disorder, and it would seem this is a calculated move by ownership to capitalize on the situation.
Ownership is in really no worse a position than they would have been had they not reached an agreement at the time, and really, they're probably in a much better one in that they have had the time to recenter their positions.
What will be at play will be the definition of "qualified revenues" and the percentage of which the NFLPA receives a cut. I believe the owners are interested in a salary cap, so it will be interesting to see if the owners can come up with a creative way to address the demands of the NFLPA without breaking their solidarity.
The Players Association received some $4.5 BILLION from the NFL this year, so the league is healthy. The owners rationale for opting out is the increasing costs of generating revenues and the Union states that they will not agree to a salary cap if this one expires and will not accept a deal that gives them an "average of 60 percent of revenue." This means that the definition of revenue and the actual percentage will be at play, but will have to address the current amount the players are receiving. The challenge for the owners will be creating a system to which the Union can agree that would increase much more slowly than the one currently in place.
Published by Mo Morrissey
Mo has a lifetime of experience as a suffering Red Sox fan, but is a general jack of all trades. View profile
- NFL Draft 2007 Wide Receivers: A Hall-of-Famer Awaits
- How to Get Through Labor Without Drugs
- A Contract is a Contract
- How to Tell when Labor is Approaching
- Former NFL Lineman Roy Simmons Announces Turn from Homosexuality to Christ
- NFL Owners Considers Cancelling Agreement
- NFL Free Agency by the Numbers; 5 Days into Free Agency
- 2010 Would be last year of a salary cap
- 2011 may see work stoppage




6 Comments
Post a CommentThis article was really researched well, and how enlightening! It reminds me of my husband's article at Rams on Demand (I'm a Rams fan) at http://www.ramsondemand.com/blog/2010/07/nfl_owners/ This can truly be infuriating for fans and players alike, it seems.
Nice job Mo. The business side of sports are most frustrating to fans.
Gotta love how Dallas is signing players to 5-year+ contracts, just in case.
The business side of sports is just too much for me to understand. Nicely written article though.
I'm not sure I understand the move, nor do I think it will work out well for them in the end, but I guess we'll see.
I hate the business side of sports.