Tuesday, March 07, 2006

NFL Labor Strife

There’s been a lot of doom and gloom the last week or so about the status of the NFL’s collective bargaining agreement (CBA). There really aren’t many analysts out there who understand what the real issues in the negotiation are. There are really two separate arguments in-play here. [This is an expandable post and if you don't care about football, you should probably just move on with the rest of the blog.]

The first dispute is between the owners of the wealthier teams (Cowboys, Patriots, Eagles, etc.) and the poorer teams (Cardinals, Vikings, etc.). The primary beef is over what money gets shared amongst all the franchises. The biggest chunk of change that is divvied in revenue sharing is the national TV contracts. Under the old agreement, money from stadium naming rights, “official sponsors”, and luxury boxes belonged to individual teams. This is a big deal because a lot of cash is at stake with those deals. The Colts just sold the naming rights of the old RCA Dome for about $180 million. Obviously, the poorer owners would love a piece of that action.

The second dispute is between all of the owners and the player association over what percentage of the shared revenue goes to the players (as reflect in the salary cap). This issue is closely tied to the first in that they don’t know what percentage to ask for because they don’t even know what pie they’re asking for a piece of. Under the old agreement, the players got around 54% of the revenue. Currently, they want something like 60%.

I’m not going to get into my own specific view on the deal now, but I do want to say a few things. The first is that the owners in wealthier markets do deserve some of the benefits of being in those markets (there is a flip side to that coin). There’s also the issue of owners who don’t, for instance, sell the naming rights to their stadiums. Why should they get the cash from another team that’s doing all they can to make their team profitable while they’re, in the case of Cincinnati, naming their stadium after the owner’s dad? As for the players, I think they should hold out for every last dime. Across professional sports, they are subjected to the most physical punishment and are rewarded with the shortest careers. It’s also patently absurd that Chad Pennington is making less than Doug Meyechart.

1 Comments:

At 3/07/2006 02:54:00 PM, Blogger Iconoclast said...

Point One -- Interesting note on the socialist aspect of football. The dark and dirty secret is that all of the Big Four are socialist in nature. There really aren't 32 different/distinct organizations in football. It's really one organization with 32 different offices/divisions.

Point Two -- I think that this is something that's largely being ignored by the media in lieu of the "players are greedy" angle.

Point Three -- Good question. The agreement officially expired on Thursday. There was a poison pill provision in the old agreement that stipulated that there would be changes in the computation of the salary cap for this coming season (and no cap the following season). Free agency was suppossed to start Friday morning, but in an effort to head off disaster, it won't start until Wednesday. Basically, if the owners can't come to an agreement today, I'll have something to write about for the next 2 years.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home