When is the possible NFL Labor disruption?

MO Hawk

Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2009
Messages
311
Reaction score
0
I was thinking it was the 2019 season where the players union was telling players to save up because it could be a long holdout.

When is the current contract between the players union and owners up?
 

HawkGA

New member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
107,412
Reaction score
1
For the league, hopefully never. That would be stupid for both sides. I get the leverage gained by the players but the NFL isn't as secure in its popularity as it used to be. It doesn't want to go the way of baseball.
 

A.D.I.D.A.S.

Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2018
Messages
143
Reaction score
16
The current agreement runs through the 2020 season so in three more years this may be an issue, but not until then.
 

RolandDeschain

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
33,116
Reaction score
945
Location
Kissimmee, FL
A.D.I.D.A.S.":2wpmy9ee said:
The current agreement runs through the 2020 season so in three more years this may be an issue, but not until then.
Unless they decide to strike before then. Because, unions.
 

Sports Hernia

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
44,755
Reaction score
3,372
Location
The pit
RolandDeschain":1z8uc53i said:
A.D.I.D.A.S.":1z8uc53i said:
The current agreement runs through the 2020 season so in three more years this may be an issue, but not until then.
Unless they decide to strike before then. Because, unions.
Won’t happen. Almost all CBA’s have a “no strike - no lock out” clause for the life of the contract. Once the contract expires all bets are off however. Trust me on this issue. :)
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,530
Reaction score
1,527
Location
Roy Wa.
RolandDeschain":3qxkugd8 said:
A.D.I.D.A.S.":3qxkugd8 said:
The current agreement runs through the 2020 season so in three more years this may be an issue, but not until then.
Unless they decide to strike before then. Because, unions.

You know nothing about Unions obviously and have a bias, they would not strike unless there was a gross breach of the contract between the Company and the Union and negotiations were not happening or refused by the company.

In this instance for sake of argument withholding payment for games played or withholding payment after a player is injured based on a contract even then it would have to be a league wide situation say the Teams paying 25 percent of the weekly contract to all players. That's an extreme situation but it would take extreme for a league wide strike.
 

mrt144

New member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
4,065
Reaction score
0
HawkGA":zzqccws1 said:
For the league, hopefully never. That would be stupid for both sides. I get the leverage gained by the players but the NFL isn't as secure in its popularity as it used to be. It doesn't want to go the way of baseball.

I don't know, as much as missing a season would suck, and as much as baseball has squandered its pole position in the american consciousness, it's plausible that taking a season off could lead to a long term better outcome for the league itself.
 

brimsalabim

Active member
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Messages
4,509
Reaction score
3
If the players had any sense they would avoid this like the plague. Viewership is already dropping at record rate. A prolonged stoppage will seriously set back their paychecks for many seasons.

mrt144":ova75d9h said:
HawkGA":ova75d9h said:
For the league, hopefully never. That would be stupid for both sides. I get the leverage gained by the players but the NFL isn't as secure in its popularity as it used to be. It doesn't want to go the way of baseball.

I don't know, as much as missing a season would suck, and as much as baseball has squandered its pole position in the american consciousness, it's plausible that taking a season off could lead to a long term better outcome for the league itself.
Only in a sense that the contract money has gotten so out of control that the league needs to shut down and reset. Very few if any NFL players are actually worth anything near the money they are making at present. Maybe it's time for America to value it's military, police, first responders, and teachers more than it does professional game players and grifter career politicians too. Go ahead and strike players. Kill the golden goose.
 

mrt144

New member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
4,065
Reaction score
0
brimsalabim":1thxonc8 said:
If the players had any sense they would avoid this like the plague. Viewership is already dropping at record rate. A prolonged stoppage will seriously set back their paychecks for many seasons.

mrt144":1thxonc8 said:
HawkGA":1thxonc8 said:
For the league, hopefully never. That would be stupid for both sides. I get the leverage gained by the players but the NFL isn't as secure in its popularity as it used to be. It doesn't want to go the way of baseball.

I don't know, as much as missing a season would suck, and as much as baseball has squandered its pole position in the american consciousness, it's plausible that taking a season off could lead to a long term better outcome for the league itself.
Only in a sense that the contract money has gotten so out of control that the league needs to shut down and reset. Very few if any NFL players are actually worth anything near the money they are making at present. Maybe it's time for America to value it's military, police, first responders, and teachers more than it does professional game players and grifter career politicians too. Go ahead and strike players. Kill the golden goose.

I think you're woefully missing the mark here. The overall revenue the league generates is bananas and that money is put there by us, the fans. In what world would it make sense for owners to retain something like 80-90% of that revenue when the value of ownership is getting the public on board to pay infrastructure costs for venues to even play the game? I suppose that would be congruent with how the extremely wealthy reap the lionshare of benefits from our regulated market economy while pitting us against one another along cultural partisan lines. Why go after the extremely wealthy with almost total control of the enterprise when you can take a swing at the generously paid labor who should just be grateful that you and millions of fans can't help pouring money into the NFL coffers?

It boggles my mind that the principle of a fair days wage for a fair days work suddenly goes out the window of principle when the individual making the critique feels the wage is too high. Instead of dissecting a joint entertainment product that relies on the contribution of over 1600 players as an entity you want to start cross comparing the profession to ones provided almost entirely out of a tax base rather than discretionary consumer income? Money is fungible, sure, but not that fungible where you're lamenting the voluntary cost you pay as a fan to watch a game going to participants within the game in the same breadth as select civil servants not getting their due.

***Scrubbed for political content***

I simply do not see a situaton where NFL players are overpaid relative to the revenue they generate in their trade collectively nor do I see a comparable situation between paid atheltic entertainers and civil servants where the distinction of who pays their salary is one of the first and biggest characteristics of differentiation.

Purely from a design standpoint a year off could help them figure out what a catch is.
 

kidhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 7, 2009
Messages
22,925
Reaction score
2,703
Location
Anchorage, AK
Let's not wander off the topic here guys. This needs to stay on topic as it concerns with the NFL and a possible future labor issue.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
39,530
Reaction score
1,527
Location
Roy Wa.
If viewership and attendance has dropped then they have saturated the product or it has become stale or unattractive. The Salary cap will drop at some point if the revenue drops as well. There will be a big ass dispute when this happens, the Owners want their money and greed, the players don't want salaries going backwards, but the pie has shrunk, no whip cream anymore and reduced amount of filling to compensate for cost will start, maybe practice squad, or reduce roster back to 49 players.

When we start seeing these ideas thrown on the table we will know there is a blow up on the horizon.
 

RolandDeschain

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
33,116
Reaction score
945
Location
Kissimmee, FL
chris98251":2kz3kxac said:
RolandDeschain":2kz3kxac said:
A.D.I.D.A.S.":2kz3kxac said:
The current agreement runs through the 2020 season so in three more years this may be an issue, but not until then.
Unless they decide to strike before then. Because, unions.

You know nothing about Unions obviously and have a bias, they would not strike unless there was a gross breach of the contract between the Company and the Union and negotiations were not happening or refused by the company.
Haha, I know more about them than you think.

*MOD EDIT- stick to specific nfl union and labor issues*
 

RedAlice

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 24, 2012
Messages
5,277
Reaction score
953
Location
Dallas, Texas
chris98251":1ygit7ok said:
If viewership and attendance has dropped then they have saturated the product or it has become stale or unattractive. The Salary cap will drop at some point if the revenue drops as well. There will be a big ass dispute when this happens, the Owners want their money and greed, the players don't want salaries going backwards, but the pie has shrunk, no whip cream anymore and reduced amount of filling to compensate for cost will start, maybe practice squad, or reduce roster back to 49 players.

When we start seeing these ideas thrown on the table we will know there is a blow up on the horizon.

Has the revenue dropped?

I mean I know what is being reported on Info Wars, but has it really?

Salary cap keeps climbing.
 

Latest posts

Top