Play Fantasy Use your Fantasy skills to win Cash Prizes. Join or start a league today. Play Now
Blog Entry

Owners can't agree on opening books

Posted on: March 10, 2011 11:40 am
 
There is just one day left before a possible NFL Armageddon and a crucial event has happened within the past 24 hours.

There are some NFL owners who want to completely open the league's financial books to the union, CBSSports.com has learned.

The problem is other NFL owners are refusing.

So the stalling in the talks has happened because one set of owners desires to open their books and others do not, a source explains. Thus ownership is stuck trying to find a way to mend these differences.

If ownership can, and the books are opened, a deal could likely be reached quite quickly.

That's where we are now. Ownership is arguing amongst itself.

Incredible, isn't it?

It's virtually impossible for ownership to reach a consensus on this issue by the Friday evening deadline so unless another extension is agreed upon, the lockout/decertification will happen then.

This is getting interesting. Right down to the wire.

Category: NFL
Tags: Labor
 
Comments

Since: Apr 27, 2007
Posted on: March 10, 2011 3:51 pm
 

Let's strike the NFL

The Fans should start striking at football games because the prices of all nfl goods are ridiculous. If "we the people" started giving our opinions, the players and owners would strike a deal immediately. LET'S STRIKE THE NFL! How bout they stop ripping off our children selling them foriegn made jerseys for $275. Come on people we can give up our fantasy football for awhile and let them hear how we feel. It's sickening hearing these people cry about making millions and billions. STRIKE THE NFL! we need to organize, does anybody have ideas?



Since: Aug 30, 2007
Posted on: March 10, 2011 3:39 pm
 

Owners can't agree on opening books

Bigrob808.  Obama has put us more in debt in 2 years than the previous presidents have. Your an idiot if you think obama has done or is doind a good job.  The guy only got voted in because he lied,lied,and lied somemore. He comes from one of the most corrupt cities there is and he has ties with some very bad people who want the united states to become the next russia or china.  I'll say it again your a dumbass to be saying obama inherited this.

Never thought I would see the handel for a town-hall-screamer/birther/truther/

foxnewsocrat be Bro'sB4Hoe's. It must be painful to be a Lions fan, but please spew your ignorance and hatred where it is accepted on Fox and Friends.



Since: Jan 6, 2010
Posted on: March 10, 2011 3:31 pm
 

Owners can't agree on opening books

  Bigrob808.  Obama has put us more in debt in 2 years than the previous presidents have. Your an idiot if you think obama has done or is doind a good job.  The guy only got voted in because he lied,lied,and lied somemore. He comes from one of the most corrupt cities there is and he has ties with some very bad people who want the united states to become the next russia or china.  I'll say it again your a dumbass to be saying obama inherited this.



Since: Apr 27, 2008
Posted on: March 10, 2011 3:27 pm
 

Owners can't agree on opening books

Just because..players salaries are "supposedly capped" does NOT mean..they aren't the fastest rising expense.

The Packers books are open..and here is what Mark Murphy had to say(pretty easy to call him on it..IF in fact it isn't true..since the books are open)




“Player costs continue to grow at a rate faster than our revenue,” Packers president and CEO Mark Murphy said, per the .

Player salararies are increase by an average of 11 percent annually while revenue is only growing at a 5 percent rate according to the team.




Operating profits declined for the fourth straight year, to $9.8 million, a decline of 51 percent compared with last year, the team said. At the same time, player salaries jumped 16 percent to $161 million, consuming almost all of the team’s growth in revenue, which rose 4 percent to a record $258 million in the fiscal year that ended in March.

“It’s not a sustainable model,” said Mark Murphy, the team’s chief executive.

In the four years since the last labor agreement was signed, player costs have risen 11.8 percent while revenue has grown 5.5 percent, Murphy said.




Since: Jan 15, 2007
Posted on: March 10, 2011 3:22 pm
 

Owners can't agree on opening books

WHO CARES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  IT'S ALL A BIG JOKE AND WE ARE THE FOOLS!!!!!!!!!!! THEY OWNERS LAUGH AT US...UNREAL WHAT A MESS.



Since: May 17, 2008
Posted on: March 10, 2011 2:58 pm
 

Owners can't agree on opening books

    • it is no one's business what the "company" makes
    When your salaries are a % of total revenue (like the NFL), it is.
    • asking for a % of the profits is fine
    • asking to know exactly what the profits are and then determining what % to ask for is not
    But the players have been shown what the revenue is, more than that actually.  If they were only asking for proof of revenue I would be more sympathetic.  The players are asking to see EVERYTHING however and the owners are showing somewhat less -- basically auditied P/L statements, Revenue/expense projections,etc. So, no, the players do not need all the information they are asking for to determine what % of the Revenue to ask for--they are in fact looking to determine which teams are making money (profits) and which teams are losing money.



Since: May 17, 2008
Posted on: March 10, 2011 2:52 pm
 

Owners can't agree on opening books

You claim that a football team is privately owned and therefore have no obligation to open books to the public or its employees.  Well then why are books kept in the first place.  The biggest problem with the negotiations is that the owners in the NFL have this little thing called profit shraring.  If you are going to share profits because your team is supposedley not making enough to compete than you are damb straight those numbers need to be shared. 
Hey genius -- ever hear of a little group called the Internal Revenue Service? State Department of Revenue?  You keep books for your accountants to prepare your tax returns that you file with these two fun groups of people NOT to show to the public or your employees.  You might also need some financial books and records for your bank to get the credit lines most big businesses have for stadium financing or just day to day operations.  Even publicly traded corporations do not have to disclose all of their financial records to the public or their employees, union or not.  Profit sharing is between the owners, not the players, so presumably the owners do share SOME financial information amongst themselves but I guarantee they do not show EVERYTHING like the players are wanting to see -- they get revenue numbers, end of story...the players want to see everything and, understandably in my opinion many owners feel it is unnecessary, especially with the by-product of every other owner knowing the minute details of your team's financial condition (which could be used against you in a number of ways, including determining offers for free agents, draft picks, or what you can or can't afford to pay in salary in trades). 



Since: Feb 12, 2011
Posted on: March 10, 2011 2:47 pm
 

Owners can't agree on opening books

There absolutely is a comparison - regardless if people pay to watch the employees "work" or not.

  • the players are employees  (regardless if people pay to see them perform)
Yes, they are the employees...but they are also the 'product' that people are 'buying'.   Their salaries are also based on total revenue, so they have more of a claim to know financial information than you or I at our jobs.   
  • the owners/NFL own the business
  • it is no one's business what the "company" makes
When your salaries are a % of total revenue (like the NFL), it is.
  • asking for a % of the profits is fine
  • asking to know exactly what the profits are and then determining what % to ask for is not
They are not asking for a % of profits, they are asking for a % of total revenue after a certain amount is taken away by the owners.  They are asking for financial information to substantiate the claims that the NFL is spending a lot to grow the game, and therefore needs a bigger slice of the pie.  
  • bottom line: without the owners/NFL, there isn't a job
And without the best/current players, the NFL's franchises are not worth as much.  The owners need these players to maximize their return on investment (buying the team), so without the players they are left with a worthless investment.  Yes they could hire other players, but these would be far worse than current NFL players and people would not pay nearly as much to see them play.  One of the main reason no one watched/watches the XFL, NFL Europe, CFL or UFL (other than the games aren't broadcast, no team to relate to, etc.) is the quality of play is far lower than the NFL.  



Since: Aug 17, 2006
Posted on: March 10, 2011 2:38 pm
 

Owners can't agree on opening books

That is right, 59.5% of revenue after the first Billion is the cap for the players.   That is 4.76B for the players based on the 9B total revenue number.    So by percentage that is not really true that the players salaries rise the largest amount.   Or if it is true that is a good sign for the players because that means all other expenses grew less than revenue.   I wish I knew the revenue numbers but I do know if general they have been going up.  

Since the owners say are not making enough money as reason to ask for another .8 Billion from what they made before I would want to see the numbers.  

I do hope the Billionaire Owners and the Millionaire Players can agree on a deal so this fan who is not a Billionaire or a Millionaire can watch the NFL for free with my basic cable in the comfort of my living room. 

PS I feel the most for all the part time workers who work security, cook food, deliver food and help parking for each NFL game.  They can probably afford this least of all.   



Since: Sep 13, 2007
Posted on: March 10, 2011 2:37 pm
 

Owners can't agree on opening books

"What subsidies are given to NFL franchises outside of public funded stadiums?"
Public funding of stadiums is significant on its own. However, other examples include tax relef. Some owners have thretened to move their teams unless they got tax relief and other benefits from local governments. It is one of the reasons that the Redskins built their stadium in Maryland rather than Washington DC.

Dont have the specifics off the top of my head but it should be easy to look these up.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com