Are Rookie Salaries the Reason for the Break in Negotiations?

[GodfatherofSoul]

AS for the NFLPA objection to rookie contracts, I heard this rationale a few years back. Agents have been sucking a lot of money out of the salary cap pool for untested rookies and getting them long contracts at that. When you drop $50 million on a first round pick (who might be a bust), that means more veterans (who have a higher minimum) lose roster slots. So, the front office has to fill in that roster gap with cheaper rookies, sophomores, and juniors. The NFLPA wants to push the contract balance back towards veterans and away from the Leinerts and Vince Youngs.

[Craic]

So, if your boss comes to you with a 30% paycut, you'll just "shut up and do your job"? We don't have 40 hr weeks, minimum wage, and overtime because industry just loves us so much. People in this country have a fundamental lack of understanding of how labor disputes work.

True, but sadly, labor unions have a fundamental lack of understanding in this country that it isn't 1890, children aren't getting their hands cut off in mining and factory accidents after working 14 hours a day while getting paid with company certificates to be spend at the company store.

The most poisonous, We Management, You Worker, lack of sick time and feeling unsafe at the workplace (from fellow employees screaming at others), was in a union job. NEVER, not ONCE did I see that kind of idiocy when I worked non-union jobs, and I was paid better, with better sick time as well. More often than not, unions today pollute the work place.

The NFLPA is a good example.

[GodfatherofSoul]

True, but sadly, labor unions have a fundamental lack of understanding in this country that it isn't 1890 and children aren't getting their hands cut off in mining and factory accidents after working 14 hours a day and getting paid with company certificates to be spend at the company store.

Not in *this* country, because our companies are moving labor to places that don't have the protections we do.

[Craic]

Not in *this* country, because our companies are moving labor to places that don't have the protections we do.

Yep, because the price of labor here is outrageous. Why SHOULD a company pay 3 times as much to have the same product made at the same quality here as somewhere else? Makes absolutely no sense. Then, that product must sell for three times as much, which means that the lower economic classes have much less buying power.

So when is the NFL going to move overseas? Oh wait-NFL europe Ok, not ALL the same quality

[NCSteeler]

Yep, because the price of labor here is outrageous. Why SHOULD a company pay 3 times as much to have the same product made at the same quality here as somewhere else? Makes absolutely no sense. Then, that product must sell for three times as much, which means that the lower economic classes have much less buying power.

So when is the NFL going to move overseas? Oh wait-NFL europe Ok, not ALL the same quality

I've been union and I'm currently not union, both ways have benefits. But Apple pays some chinese kid $6.18 to assemble an Iphone, the same thing would cost 28-30 dollars here, Apple's profit per Iphone is somewhere between 300-500 depending on what business journal you subscribe to. Now why is it so F'ing unreasonable for Apple to employ a thousand Americans building Iphones? Do these companies realize the more they outsource the less we can buy?

So what your saying is that as long as we send good jobs over seas which puts many here out of work or in lower paying jobs, it's all good because the chinese/pakistan/vietnam imports are now affordable to the guy that got put out of work in the first place?


Anyhow, back on topic, the rookie wage scale would basically prevent a 3rd year guy who get's cut from shopping his services to the highest bidder, he would be at a fixed salary till his fifth year, just doesn't sound right to me.

[LLT]

And on the 50% issue, that is exactly what it is,

the players are asking for either the books to be opened, or 50% BEFORE costs.
Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Go to your local grocery store, and as the worker if the corporation will open their books. No business I have EVER worked for, chooses to "open their books". The owners took the risk, they get the rewards. If the players don't like it, then quite, go start your own league, take all the risks, and then get the pay you want.

Until then, be happy with your million plus year contracts.

This isnt entirely accurate.

The NFL takes 1 Billion dollars off the top for operating expenses before the rest of the profit is shared between the owners and players. The NFL would now like to take an additional one Billion off the top for a total of 2 Billion dollars. The players want the NFL to open the books and prove that operating costs have gone up 100%. Its not the owners books they are questioning (in this case) but rather the NFL's books.

That being said...it IS the owners who are pushing for this 1 Billion dollar increase...probably as a means to off set the 15/17 revenue split that causes the top tier teams to pay the lower tier teams and not actually because of cost increases.

The underlying problem is that this scenerio shows the commisioner to be a puppet of a handful of owners, instead of being a representative of the owners/players/fans. The job of the commisioner has alsways been to do what is good for the league....not just the owners. Goodell fails miserably on 2 of the 3 responsibilities he was handed.

[Craic]

I've been union and I'm currently not union, both ways have benefits. But Apple pays some chinese kid $6.18 to assemble an Iphone, the same thing would cost 28-30 dollars here, Apple's profit per Iphone is somewhere between 300-500 depending on what business journal you subscribe to. Now why is it so F'ing unreasonable for Apple to employ a thousand Americans building Iphones? Do these companies realize the more they outsource the less we can buy?

So what your saying is that as long as we send good jobs over seas which puts many here out of work or in lower paying jobs, it's all good because the chinese/pakistan/vietnam imports are now affordable to the guy that got put out of work in the first place?


Anyhow, back on topic, the rookie wage scale would basically prevent a 3rd year guy who get's cut from shopping his services to the highest bidder, he would be at a fixed salary till his fifth year, just doesn't sound right to me.

Simple- Because the bottom line responsibility of a business, is to make money. Not to employ people. When that gets confused, the business as a whole suffers ends up failing. That is true not just of employment, but of ANYTHING that gets in the way of the bottom line. Now, there are different THEORIES about how to make money in such a way that the bottom line is more sustainable through the years-how you treat employees and thus, the quality of product put out, the reputation of the company, etc.

But the bottom line is the bottom line.
___________________________________________
But as you say, back on topic. I have no problem with a rookie wage scale. I do however, think, especially if they go to an 18 game schedule, that the rosters should increase by 5-8 players.

You know, I'd even be open to some kind of deal where every player drafted 4th round or higher MUST get paid for 5 years. Heck, up the roster to 80 players with 50 suited per game-with a rule that 4th round picks and higher must be paid for five years, whether cut or not. If cut and picked up from another team, the other team assumes the pay.

Rounds 5-7 may be cut, and if so, are free to negotiate contracts. OR, 5 draft pics of every draft must be signed, regardless of round. THEY then must be paid for five years, and those who are cut, can negotiate contracts-with a limit of 120% of what they came in for (to stop players from dogging it, getting cut, then moving to another team and performing for a much better contract).

[Craic]

This isnt entirely accurate.

The NFL takes 1 Billion dollars off the top for operating expenses before the rest of the profit is shared between the owners and players. The NFL would now like to take an additional one Billion off the top for a total of 2 Billion dollars. The players want the NFL to open the books and prove that operating costs have gone up 100%. Its not the owners books they are questioning (in this case) but rather the NFL's books.

That being said...it IS the owners who are pushing for this 1 Billion dollar increase...probably as a means to off set the 15/17 revenue split that causes the top tier teams to pay the lower tier teams and not actually because of cost increases.

The underlying problem is that this scenerio shows the commisioner to be a puppet of a handful of owners, instead of being a representative of the owners/players/fans. The job of the commisioner has alsways been to do what is good for the league....not just the owners. Goodell fails miserably on 2 of the 3 responsibilities he was handed.

You bring up a good point LLT. Is the NFL supposed to represent the Owners, or the players, or the sport itself between the owners and players? If the league was asking for a billion itself, not the owners, then I would fully agree with you. The league would have to produce it since it is the middle party between the owners and players, taking money from both. But it seems, that the money being taken, is for the owners. As a result, when it is all said and done, it is still the owners books that, IMO would have to be opened. Because the league itself, only has the money to spend which is given back to them from the owners. After all, all the TV contracts, etc. are split between the owners, with a portion taken to run the league-which the owners agreed upon, I believe, at a owners meeting. It is those meetings which control the league.

So it is still about the owners books.

Honestly, I do think it is a ploy by the union to dig their heals in, in such a way that the public can get behind it. Think about it, it is a nice 3 word slogan that can sit nicely in the brain. Easy to remember, and copied from politics (we heard it quite a bit in the California recall- Open the books!).

I also think that the owners are foolish if they take don't see that the league is much better off if they and the players are all "on the same team" no pun intended.

[GodfatherofSoul]

Yep, because the price of labor here is outrageous. Why SHOULD a company pay 3 times as much to have the same product made at the same quality here as somewhere else? Makes absolutely no sense. Then, that product must sell for three times as much, which means that the lower economic classes have much less buying power.

So when is the NFL going to move overseas? Oh wait-NFL europe Ok, not ALL the same quality

Slave labor is pretty cheap, too. Our country has taken a moral stand how we treat our workers. You know why everyone wants to sell their stuff here? Because we have 40 hr work weeks and time off that gives our workers time and energy to engage in recreation. We have infrastructure like roads, cable lines, mail, and power to every house that creates markets for our goods. Our country has made an investment in our people. China doesn't. We used to have trade laws protecting our markets from people who don't care about poisoning their environments, killing their workers, child labor, and 60-80 hour work weeks. Now, the Free Market means our country has to compete against indentured servants working in sweatshops.

The last 30 years of our economic history proves your comment is wrong. Are you paying less for anything (except your depreciated house)? The more we deregulate, the more workers get involved in a race to the bottom. Wages in this country have stagnated for about 10 years now. And, we're losing labor rights at the same time. Just remember, there's always a peasant somewhere willing to do your job half as good for 1/10 the price.

[86WARD]

http://www.steelersuniverse.com/foru...ht=rookie+wage

I've also read reports that they did not agree upon a wage scale...