Report: Owners made “significant concession” on rookie wage scale

[Bonecrusher#31]

Report: Owners made “significant concession” on rookie wage scale


Posted by Mike Florio on July 14, 2011, 5:11 PM EDT


Earlier this afternoon, MDS shared a report on progress being made as to the contentious issue of the rookie wage scale.

Albert Breer of NFL Network describes it as “major progress.” Breer also points out that there aren’t many other remaining issues.

Mike Freeman of CBS Sports writes that the owners made a significant concession on the rookie wage scale, something we’ve been saying for days that the owners should do, especially since the players’ proposal as of Monday already represented a win for the league.

Our guess is that the league assumed the players would go the rest of the way to the owners’ position on the rookie wage scale. When the players made it clear they wouldn’t, then the owners finally decided to compromise.

Regardless, Cam Newton won’t be smiling when he realizes how much less money he’ll make than last year’s No. 1 overall pick, Sam Bradford, who used his windfall to buy a ping-pong table.

In an on-air update moments ago on NFLN, Breer (sporting the Michael Scott in lieu of the Jim Halpert) tiptoed around saying that a deal is close. But Breer made it clear that, once the rookie wage scale is worked out, there’s not much else standing in the way of getting this thing done.

In fact, Breer reports that, if the rookie wage scale can be put to bed on Thursday, there’s a “50/50 chance” that the parties will be presenting a handshake deal to Magistrate Judge Arthur Boylan on Tuesday.

And now stay tuned for the daily dose of cold water. Feel free to start a pool as to which player or reporter it will come from.

Today, I’ll go with Mort.

 

[sbk92]

I'll go with Schefter. He seems to love to bring the negative with these labor talks.

 

[sbk92]

Our guess is that the league assumed the players would go the rest of the way to the owners’ position on the rookie wage scale. When the players made it clear they wouldn’t, then the owners finally decided to compromise.

Nonsense. More imaginary leverage by the players.

They will agree to anything if you make them wait long enough. Because they're spare parts with a short shelf life.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Nonsense. More imaginary leverage by the players.

They will agree to anything if you make them wait long enough.

Actually, so far.. it looks like its the other way around.

 

[marionbarberthe4th]

No one wants to miss a game but the owners really dont want to miss pre-season games b/c thats all revenue.

They have to move a little more than the players b/c the motivation to get it done in the next few days is on them

 

[sbk92]

Actually, so far.. it looks like its the other way around.

You must not be paying attention to the negotiations.

Either that or you understand this one as well as the last one.

The owners broke the contract!!

lol

 

[sbk92]

Nothing's on the owners. They don't have to do anything. The players never ever have any leverage over them. Sure they'll lose preseason money, so will the players. Then they'll lose regular season money. Then they'll fold like bitches. Guaranteed. Every time. All the owners need to do is sit and wait it out if they feel strongly on an issue. What you gain in the long term justifies the losses in the short term. The owners can absorb those losses. The players can't. The owners own the teams we root for now, tomorrow and 20 years from now. These players won't be in the league in another 20 years. Somebody else will fill out their uniform and the league will move on without missing a beat. Spare parts. No leverage.

The players have already agreed to a percentage smaller than any they've gotten in the last 10 years or we wouldn't have gotten to this point.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

The owners are the ones making all the big concessions by all reports so far. The players at this point are getting pretty close to what they originally wanted anyway. D. Smith isn't such a huge idiot after all.. imagine that.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

You must not be paying attention to the negotiations.

Either that or you understand this one as well as the last one.

The owners broke the contract!!

Really tough to swallow when you thought something was going to work out one way, and it is working out the complete opposite way isn't it big guy? Don't cry.. the owners are doing what they should do and we're gonna have football!

lol

 

[sbk92]

The owners are the ones making all the big concessions by all reports so far. The players at this point are getting pretty close to what they originally wanted anyway. D. Smith isn't such a huge idiot after all.. imagine that.

There is simply no truth to what you just said.

If anybody is actually following these negotiations, they know differently.

I didn't realize the players wanted to cut their percentage of revenue. Or that they wanted a rookie wage scale.

 

[sbk92]

Really tough to swallow when you thought something was going to work out one way, and it is working out the complete opposite way isn't it big guy? Don't cry.. the owners are doing what they should do and we're gonna have football!

lol

Yes. It stings seeing the players win by getting the smallest percentage of revenue they've received in a decade.

Oh, sick burn right there. Make it stop.

 

[Cr122]

These owners are clearly in the drivers seat in these negotiations.

And as far as the rookie pay scale goes....lol @ Cam Fig Newton.

It's about time these rookies prove themselves before their big payday.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

These owners are clearly in the drivers seat in these negotiations.

.

The players wanted 50 percent to start with.

The owners wanted to give them much less than that PLUS take an extra billiion or two off the top of total revenues.

We ended up at the players getting 48 percent.

Win for players.

The players have also been saying since February that they would accept 141 million for each team in player costs.

That's what's reported that they'll be getting now. 120 million cap with 21 million in benefits for each team.

Win players.

The players wanted 4 year rookie contracts.. the owners wanted 5 years.

Deal is 5 years, but with team option for 5th year.

Win owners.

Owners just reportedly caved on their call for right to first refusal for free agency, and agreed to not include it in the free agency rules.

Win players.


...what am i missing?

With each passing day the demands of the owners have dropped. If you see it differently, show me some proof.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

There is simply no truth to what you just said.

It hurts, doesn't it? Mr. "Im never wrong"

lol

 

[Cr122]

Nah, I'm pretty sure the players wanted over 50%.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Nah, I'm pretty sure the players wanted over 50%.

Nope. They said from the beginning of this all they'd be fine with a 50/50 split.

 

[Cr122]

Nope. They said from the beginning of this all they'd be fine with a 50/50 split.

Correct me if I'm wrong again lol

Didn't the players receive 53 percent of revenues from 2006-2009? Plus any extra revenue went to the players which exceeded 70%?

I think the owners win on the revenue which was a big part of these negotiations.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Correct me if I'm wrong again lol

Didn't the players receive 53 percent of revenues from 2006-2009? .

Ok.. you're wrong again.

Actually, to be completely accurate the players have been ok with 49 percent of all revenues since friggin February.

Also, in 2006 the players received 52.74 percent of total revenues, in 2007, they received 51.84 percent total, and in 2009, they received 50.06 percent total.


So yea.. you're wrong.. and the players are getting pretty much what they wanted here. It was a huge concession by the owners from their original 53 percent PLUS 2-3 billion off the top for the infamous "expenditures" cost.

 

[Cr122]

Ok.. you're wrong again.

Actually, to be completely accurate the players have been ok with 49 percent of all revenues since friggin February.

Also, in 2006 the players received 52.74 percent of total revenues, in 2007, they received 51.84 percent total, and in 2009, they received 50.06 percent total.


So yea.. you're wrong.. and the players are getting pretty much what they wanted here. It was a huge concession by the owners from their original 53 percent PLUS 2-3 billion off the top for the infamous "expenditures" cost.

What I'm saying is the players are getting less now than in the past. Even with extra revenues the players were getting well over 70% of the owners revenue from 2006-2009.

 

[Cr122]

I'll try to find an old article on what I'm talking about.