Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 44

Thread: NFLPA Executive Dir Smith asked agents to pass on any suspicions of collusion f

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by DDNYjets View Post
    Players got hosed. Until we see how much it goes up it is purely speculation. Right now the owners have "won" the first three years of a ten year deal.

    And we will never know exactly how much the owners make b.c they do not fully open their books. So in real percentages the players might only be getting something like 40% of the pie. Maybe less.
    I don't see how you can say they got hosed when they get half of everything. The real speculation at play here is your assumption that the owners are cooking the books and paying out less than 40%. THAT'S pure speculation. The owners don't show their net profits as is their right as private companies. But they are required to show the gross, which is what the player's pool is based on. They can't screw with those numbers. Players got more than their fair share.

  2. #22
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,289
    I figured that is where they were at with Rodgers. And the are reportedly going to pay Matthews $13 million/year.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by DDNYjets View Post
    I figured that is where they were at with Rodgers. And the are reportedly going to pay Matthews $13 million/year.
    Supposedly.

    Rapoport was told that the Packers' latest offer to Matthews already eclipses Dallas Cowboys pass rusher DeMarcus Ware's six-year, $78 million contract worth $13 million annually.

  4. #24
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,289
    Quote Originally Posted by GuidoYaztremski View Post
    I don't see how you can say they got hosed when they get half of everything. The real speculation at play here is your assumption that the owners are cooking the books and paying out less than 40%. THAT'S pure speculation. The owners don't show their net profits as is their right as private companies. But they are required to show the gross, which is what the player's pool is based on. They can't screw with those numbers. Players got more than their fair share.
    Owners aren't cooking the books. They just aren't divulging everything. It is their right. But it stands to reason that they are making more than they say they are. And the gross is controversial b.c they fought tooth and nail over what should and shouldn't be included in that amount. And isn't there also a designated amount that gets taken off the top before they even divvy things up?

    Personally, I don't care either way. I am not pro-player or pro-owner. But the proof is in the pudding. You have Smith whining about collusion and the salaries and contracts aren't what they players hoped they'd be. The premier players are unaffected but the rest of them are.

  5. #25
    Bewildered Beast
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    SF via Strong Island
    Posts
    30,857
    Quote Originally Posted by John_0515 View Post
    Nope
    LOL Mike Nolan must be hating himself

  6. #26
    Andrew Brandt ‏@adbrandt
    Understand NFLPA's concerns re collusion but tough to prove. NFL GMs, if pressed on inactivity, would say "we like our own guys."

  7. #27
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Madison, NJ
    Posts
    2,192
    Quote Originally Posted by WestCoastOffensive View Post
    You can have a one-day vacation.

    How's the handle on that concept?
    Try not to get too punch drunk on your incredible mod powers there. God forbid a guy uses some sarcasm in a post...OMG!

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by C Mart View Post
    Andrew Brandt ‏@adbrandt
    Understand NFLPA's concerns re collusion but tough to prove. NFL GMs, if pressed on inactivity, would say "we like our own guys."
    Too bad baseball Owners/Gm's don't take same approach.

  9. #29
    Bewildered Beast
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    SF via Strong Island
    Posts
    30,857
    Quote Originally Posted by BleedGreen314 View Post
    Try not to get too punch drunk on your incredible mod powers there. God forbid a guy uses some sarcasm in a post...OMG!
    So, when are you coming to see me in San Francisco?

  10. #30
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Madison, NJ
    Posts
    2,192
    Quote Originally Posted by WestCoastOffensive View Post
    So, when are you coming to see me in San Francisco?
    Sorry man, not into the old San Fran custom of meeting guys online and flying them out to visit. Let's keep this on the NYJ.

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by GuidoYaztremski View Post
    I don't see how you can say they got hosed when they get half of everything. The real speculation at play here is your assumption that the owners are cooking the books and paying out less than 40%. THAT'S pure speculation. The owners don't show their net profits as is their right as private companies. But they are required to show the gross, which is what the player's pool is based on. They can't screw with those numbers. Players got more than their fair share.
    What part of "The owners never fully opened up the books" do you not understand?

    Saying the players get 50% of the pie is 100% speculation. There is nothing to definitively back that up.

    And I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your stance that the players actually got a good deal. I tend to agree with that.

    But ALL of that depends purely on estimates from media people and NFLPA. There is nothing that can substantiate that claim short of the owners actually giving up the numbers.

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Mainejet View Post
    What part of "The owners never fully opened up the books" do you not understand?

    Saying the players get 50% of the pie is 100% speculation. There is nothing to definitively back that up.

    And I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your stance that the players actually got a good deal. I tend to agree with that.

    But ALL of that depends purely on estimates from media people and NFLPA. There is nothing that can substantiate that claim short of the owners actually giving up the numbers.
    Do youunderstand the distinction between 'revenues' and 'profits '? The owners have refused to open their books allowing the players, and the rest of the world, to see their level of each team's profitability, The owners must, however, show the players the true gross revenue numbers. Any attempt to fudge that number would nullify the CBA. There's no speculation in that number whatsoever.
    Last edited by GuidoYaztremski; 04-04-2013 at 03:44 PM.

  13. #33
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Super Insider Triple VIP Island
    Posts
    8,314
    Quote Originally Posted by GuidoYaztremski View Post
    The players get 50% of all revenues. In what other business model does that happen? Just because the cap is flat the first few years of the agreement doesn't mean they got screwed. The new TV revenues just haven't kicked in yet. When they do, the players are guaranteed to share in that wealth. A guaranteed raise when your company's revenues increase. We're talking revenues, not profitability mind you. Do you, or anybody you know, get that?
    Yeah, keep talking about fairy tale revenues that haven't kicked in yet, and never will, after the owners scrape the top 90% off and lie about it.

  14. #34
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Super Insider Triple VIP Island
    Posts
    8,314
    Quote Originally Posted by GuidoYaztremski View Post
    I don't see how you can say they got hosed when they get half of everything. The real speculation at play here is your assumption that the owners are cooking the books and paying out less than 40%. THAT'S pure speculation. The owners don't show their net profits as is their right as private companies. But they are required to show the gross, which is what the player's pool is based on. They can't screw with those numbers. Players got more than their fair share.
    "As is their right?" Panthers owner lies about team finances during 2011 lockout.

    http://www.tddaily.com/news/report-p...1-nfl-lockout/

  15. #35
    Bewildered Beast
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    SF via Strong Island
    Posts
    30,857
    Quote Originally Posted by BleedGreen314 View Post
    Sorry man, not into the old San Fran custom of meeting guys online and flying them out to visit. Let's keep this on the NYJ.
    I thought you dug sarcasm?


    Are we even, now?

  16. #36
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Madison, NJ
    Posts
    2,192
    Quote Originally Posted by WestCoastOffensive View Post
    I thought you dug sarcasm?


    Are we even, now?
    Don't touch me.


  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Vinny Testaverde's Niece View Post
    "As is their right?" Panthers owner lies about team finances during 2011 lockout.

    http://www.tddaily.com/news/report-p...1-nfl-lockout/
    OH......EM.......GEE..!!! The big bad businessman wasn't entirely truthful when he and the rest of the league were negotiating a new CBA. Stop the presses!

    But you go from that ''horror'' (pre-agreement) to the assumption they must skim 90% of the revenues before they split with the players (post agreement) even though what's done ''pre'' is negotiating, while doing it '' post'' probably voids the CBA or at the very least is highly actionable.

    While we're at it. Why don't YOU post your entire income and all your expenses here. Oh, it's private? ! EXACTLY.

  18. #38
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Super Insider Triple VIP Island
    Posts
    8,314
    Quote Originally Posted by GuidoYaztremski View Post

    While we're at it. Why don't YOU post your entire income and all your expenses here. Oh, it's private? ! EXACTLY.
    Oh yeah, that's exactly analogous.

    You're right, I was wrong about 90% it's probably closer to 99%.

    You're either naive, disingenuous, or agenda-based. Call me when this 'future' income becomes greater than zero.

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Vinny Testaverde's Niece View Post
    Oh yeah, that's exactly analogous.

    You're right, I was wrong about 90% it's probably closer to 99%.

    You're either naive, disingenuous, or agenda-based. Call me when this 'future' income becomes greater than zero.
    Oh right. The Nfl does roughly $9 billion in gross revenue but they tell the players that it's only 900 million (using your foolish 90% number. We'll leave the 99% number in your ass where it belongs) And the players union says,'' oh, okay.''

    And I'M the naive one here.

    While we're at it, why don't you explain how you know revenues should be increasing each and every year, instead of flattening out like they have the past few years?

  20. #40
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Super Insider Triple VIP Island
    Posts
    8,314
    Quote Originally Posted by GuidoYaztremski View Post
    Oh right. The Nfl does roughly $9 billion in gross revenue but they tell the players that it's only 900 million (using your foolish 90% number. We'll leave the 99% number in your ass where it belongs) And the players union says,'' oh, okay.''

    And I'M the naive one here.

    While we're at it, why don't you explain how you know revenues should be increasing each and every year, instead of flattening out like they have the past few years?
    50% of zero is still zero. Call me when a single dime of revenue materializes for the players.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us