The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Orange Mane Discussion > Orange Mane Central Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-26-2011, 09:42 PM   #1
tnedator
Ring of Famer
 
tnedator's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,834

Adopt-a-Bronco:
He be gone..
Default Why do some defend the players as being victims here?

Why do some defend the players as being victims here?

Let's back up a bit and remember all of he player/player rep rhetoric about how the NFL owners/league were terrified of an uncapped year, and that they had leverage in getting what they wanted in a new CBA, once the owners opted out of the old one.

The players BADLY miscalculated that, because the uncapped year didn't turn into the out of control bidding war that players expected, but instead a chance for owners to dump bad contracts without worrying about salary cap hits and to have their restricted free agents locked up for another year or so.

During this time, De Smith and players were talking tough about how they weren't going to concede anything without big counter concessions from the league. For instance, they knew the owners wanted a rookie salary cap, so they let it be known that in return, the league would have to raise the minimum salary per team. Their ridiculous logic was that if you take x dollars from the rookies, you have to increase the salary minimum/floor by that amount to give the savings to the vets. That's the level of flawed logic and spin the league is dealing with. Simply implementing a rookie cap, while keeping the existing floor, would automatically funnel more dollars to the vets for those teams that hover around the floor in terms of salaries.

The Players and De Smith (a big time litigator from a big time lobbying firm -- Patton Boggs) believed they had great leverage points: The league not wanting an uncapped year and the league wanting a rookie salary cap. Therefore, by all accounts, they have not negotiated in good faith, but simply made outrageous demands and threats, like decertifying and suing, which is not conducive to healthy bargaining.

From the owners perspective, with the players threatening to decertify and sue, and some rumblings about a possible strike, when there was zero progress made in negotiations, the lockout made the most sense.

However, there was a LONG string of player/player rep actions that made the lockout about the only option for the league to take.
tnedator is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 05-26-2011, 09:48 PM   #2
DBroncos4life
Hey pic Mod!?!?! FU
 
DBroncos4life's Avatar
 
Bacon bits

Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: The wrong side of right.
Posts: 28,794

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Julius "Fluff"
Default

They all rich so F them. Without fans there wouldn't even be a NFL.
DBroncos4life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2011, 09:59 PM   #3
tnedator
Ring of Famer
 
tnedator's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,834

Adopt-a-Bronco:
He be gone..
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DBroncos4life View Post
They all rich so F them. Without fans there wouldn't even be a NFL.
Without drivers, there wouldn't be an automotive industry...
without bowlers, there wouldn't be a bowling industry...
without viewers, there wouldn't be a television industry...

The list could go on forever.
tnedator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2011, 10:04 PM   #4
Boss Man
Solid Starter
 

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 237

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tnedator View Post
Without drivers, there wouldn't be an automotive industry...
without bowlers, there wouldn't be a bowling industry...
without viewers, there wouldn't be a television industry...

The list could go on forever.
ignorant comeback is ignorant...

95% of "drivers" are not rich
95% of "bowlers" are not rich
95% of "tv viewers" are not rich

100% of NFL player are "rich" by our economical standards, and if there were no fans of the nfl there would be NO money....

IGNORANCE, pls go
Boss Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2011, 10:06 PM   #5
DBroncos4life
Hey pic Mod!?!?! FU
 
DBroncos4life's Avatar
 
Bacon bits

Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: The wrong side of right.
Posts: 28,794

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Julius "Fluff"
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tnedator View Post
Without drivers, there wouldn't be an automotive industry...
without bowlers, there wouldn't be a bowling industry...
without viewers, there wouldn't be a television industry...

The list could go on forever.
Sorry dude the fans are the bigger victims in all this BS.
DBroncos4life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2011, 10:21 PM   #6
tnedator
Ring of Famer
 
tnedator's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,834

Adopt-a-Bronco:
He be gone..
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss Man View Post
ignorant comeback is ignorant...

95% of "drivers" are not rich
95% of "bowlers" are not rich
95% of "tv viewers" are not rich

100% of NFL player are "rich" by our economical standards, and if there were no fans of the nfl there would be NO money....

IGNORANCE, pls go
It's not ignorant, but since you are slow on the uptake, I will explain the point to you.

He said that without fans there would be no NFL. I pointed out there are countless other industries that would not "be" if not for those people that buy, use or watch the product. There would be no movie industry if people didn't buy tickets and go to the theaters.

As to your, dare I say "ignorant" response, you missed it by a mile. I didn't say the bowlers, drivers or viewers were rich, so your statement to that effect was, well, again, "ignorant". In the analogy, they are the same as the fans.

Movie and TV viewers are what allows Sitcom stars to get $1 million an episode, and the co-stars hundreds of thousands an episode, with 13-22 episodes produced a year.

There is nothing unique about the NFL where it has a consumer without whom the industry wouldn't survive. With few exceptions, that's all industries/businesses. The only real separation is that some are recreational or discretionary, like watching TV, going to movies, watching/attending sports, bowling, etc., etc., etc., while others are more essential such as buying food, clothes, etc.

It always amazes me when some people can't have a discussion without being a total dillwad, but it amazes me more how often the total dillwad makes an idiotic post/point while being the dillwad.
tnedator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2011, 10:23 PM   #7
tnedator
Ring of Famer
 
tnedator's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,834

Adopt-a-Bronco:
He be gone..
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DBroncos4life View Post
Sorry dude the fans are the bigger victims in all this BS.
I don't doubt that, but we don't have a seat or say in the negotiations. My issue is trying to understand why so many treat the players as these down trodden victims as if they were making third world wages, and all they want to do is play football, and the mean owners aren't letting them play the game they love.
tnedator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2011, 10:36 PM   #8
maven
★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★
 
maven's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 9,574
Default

This is all about greed on both sides. The fans are the losers in this. And the fans can pick up and walk away and do something else.
maven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2011, 10:38 PM   #9
tnedator
Ring of Famer
 
tnedator's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,834

Adopt-a-Bronco:
He be gone..
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by maven View Post
This is all about greed on both sides. The fans are the losers in this. And the fans can pick up and walk away and do something else.
36 holes of golf instead of 18 on Sundays in the fall, or for the church goers, 18 holes after church, rather than rushing home to watch the game, or heading to the stadium.
tnedator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2011, 11:01 PM   #10
SonOfLe-loLang
Young Buck
 
SonOfLe-loLang's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 19,886

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Thunder (RIP)
Default

Youre forgetting a major point. The owners are locking out the players, the players would be fine with the status quo. Also, the owners did not negotiate the tv deal in good faith (something the CBA instructs them to do).
SonOfLe-loLang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 12:35 AM   #11
DivineBronco
Ring of Famer
 
if you like Cutler you are my enemy

Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,048
Default

right or wrong does not really matter in this here tussle. This stand off will not end until the owners get most of what they want. They could miss a year of football and be fine the players can not. That really is the end all be all of the story. We get football when the players give up
DivineBronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 01:00 AM   #12
ol#7
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

I think that most fans do see the danger in this if the players were to get there way. The NFL is king because every market can compete. Not so in other sports. Add to that teams can keep face of the franchise players and you have the best set-up for the fans. That doesnt necessarily translates to what would be best for the players, but I think they are already more than adequately compensated for the entertainment they provide. Much like Charlie Sheen, at some point your to big a pain in the ass and too big for your britches to be worth it. Wish the other leagues would follow suite, but in baseball the major markets would never give that much money/leverage back, think the NBA is probably headed that way in order to survive.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 05:20 AM   #13
TheElusiveKyleOrton
BOOM.
 
TheElusiveKyleOrton's Avatar
 
Touched By God

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Denver
Posts: 10,747
Default

II don't really see either side as the "victim." Neither side is.

Though I would question the brightness behind calling the players rich and discussing how indefensible they are and not doing likewise for the owners, but...
__________________
Nobody puts Jay-bee in the corner.
TheElusiveKyleOrton is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 05:23 AM   #14
Garcia Bronco
Hokie since 1993
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 46,919

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Tom Jackson
Default

For me...the owners own the business. It belongs to them, if the players don't like it...go do something else. Go be Anne Frank or something.
Garcia Bronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 05:58 AM   #15
cmhargrove
Is this thing on???
 
cmhargrove's Avatar
 
Travis Henry's love child...

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 6,723

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Hillis
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco View Post
For me...the owners own the business. It belongs to them, if the players don't like it...go do something else. Go be Anne Frank or something.
As a business owner, I approve this remark.

Seriously, I think that making a few hundred thousand (or several million) a year for playing a game is a pretty sweet gig. What they are being paid is definitely "fair."

The Rookie Cap makes sense, for the very reasons tdnator stated before. Same escalating cap system - less for the untested rookies = More left over for thhe proven veteran players.

Get r done fellas.
cmhargrove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 06:00 AM   #16
tnedator
Ring of Famer
 
tnedator's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,834

Adopt-a-Bronco:
He be gone..
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmhargrove View Post
As a business owner, I approve this remark.

Seriously, I think that making a few hundred thousand (or several million) a year for playing a game is a pretty sweet gig. What they are being paid is definitely "fair."

The Rookie Cap makes sense, for the very reasons tdnator stated before. Same escalating cap system - less for the untested rookies = More left over for thhe proven veteran players.

Get r done fellas.
I think the rookie minimum was in the $300k range, and veteran minimum in the $800-900k range. Obviously, these are the minimums and many players get far in excess of the "minimum wage" of $300-900k, depending on how long you've been in the league.
tnedator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 06:05 AM   #17
orinjkrush
...
 
orinjkrush's Avatar
 
Hey, no hurling on the shell, dude,

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: FrontRangeAbove8500ft
Posts: 5,185

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ben Garland
Default

billionaire owners and millionaire players arguing about how to scam thousands from fans and trillions from TV. where's Geithner when you need his butt?
orinjkrush is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 06:16 AM   #18
Rugby7
Solid Starter
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: SO CAL
Posts: 122
Default

There is no status quo. The owners and players agreed to a CBA that included an option for the owners to end the CBA after 2 years and they exercised that right. That deal is history so now the players and owners need to negotiate a new one. I think D. Smith blew it. If they would have continued to negotiate with the threat of litigation in their back pocket the players would of at least had some kind of leverage. Now the owners are pissed and if the players lose in court they are going to get *** ***** by the owners.
Rugby7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 06:39 AM   #19
gunns
I WANT DEFENSE!
 
gunns's Avatar
 
Defense, defense, defense

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Always Hoping
Posts: 12,583

Adopt-a-Bronco:
TJ Ward
Default

I don't believe people are defending the players for the reasons stated in the opening post, at least I'm not. I'm not defending either side. To me, with the amount of money being discussed, it's greed vs greed. My problem with the owners is they've known they were going to do this for 2 years. Don't tell me they didn't. The arrangements they made for this whole thing, with the TV deals and insurance, says that. They couldn't have ironed and fought over this long before this? To me this whole thing is a power play. Hey, we know they are the owners, no need for it.

The players, on the other hand, should realize who butters their bread. I don't believe givng up what wasn't theirs to begin with (yes I know it was in the CBA, but the Lord giveth and he taketh away) will hurt any of them in the long run. Their biggest mistake is Smith. He doesn't seem to have a clue except to pound his chest and attempt to play hard ball. Almost as if he drags this out as long as possible he's thinking how well he can line his own pocket. If the owners prevail it could now be worse than if they had merely accepted the deal. I doubt any of them would have starved had they done this.

Yes, it is the fans that will pay for this whole thing. They will pay with higher prices across the board for money lost in this whole thing. What gripes me is they do not seem to ever consider the fan such as when developing TV deals, putting games on TV channels that don't reach the entire viewing public. Personally I would love to help stabbed both groups in the pocketbooks by boycotting watching or going to games. But I just can't. My love is too deep. I have however boycotted their products. I'm sure my boycott will have little effect but makes me feel better.

Last edited by gunns; 05-27-2011 at 07:13 AM..
gunns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 06:45 AM   #20
tsiguy96
Ring of Famer
 
tsiguy96's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 12,723

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gunns View Post
I don't believe people are defending the players for the reasons stated in the opening post, at least I'm not. I'm not defending either side. To me, with the amount of money being discussed, it's greed vs greed. My problem with the owners is they've known they were going to do this for 2 years. Don't tell me they didn't. The arrangements they made for this whole thing, with the TV deals and insurance, says that. To me this whole thing is a power play. Hey, we know they are the owners, no need for it.

The players, on the other hand, should realize who butters their bread. I don't believe givng up what wasn't theirs to begin with (yes I know it was in the CBA, but the Lord giveth and he taketh away). Their biggest mistake is Smith. He doesn't seem to have a clue except to pound his chest and attempt to play hard ball. Almost as if he drags this out as long as possible he's thinking how well he can line his own pocket. If the owners prevail it could now be worse than if they had merely accepted the deal. I doubt any of them would have starved had they done this.

Yes, it is the fans that will pay for this whole thing. They will pay with higher prices across the board for money lost in this whole thing. What gripes me is they do not seem to ever consider the fan such as when developing TV deals, putting games on TV channels that don't reach the entire viewing public. Personally I would love to help stabbed both groups in the pocketbooks by boycotting watching or going to games. But I just can't. My love is too deep. I have however boycotted their products. I'm sure my boycott will have little effect but makes me feel better.
there is some perception that the owners are now offering the players absolutely nothing in return. they are offering a great deal including huge amounts of money and especially benefits for active and retired players that the last CBA did not have, but the players want a deal with tons of cash without realizing that there is costs associated with running a team, and those costs get more expensive over time. the last deal was not sustainable due to those costs, hence the reason it was voided unanimously, not just for fun.
tsiguy96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 06:47 AM   #21
Rock Chalk
Cheeky Bastards
 
Rock Chalk's Avatar
 
Laus Deo

Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: The Backside of the Internet
Posts: 29,750

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Chris Harris
Default

Ive been on the owners side from the beginning.

Throw out the rich comment, and disregard the fact that fans are the losers in this, both are true and neither is relevant.

Look at this objectively.

You are a hard working entrepeneur who spent many years of 18 hour days busting your ass to grow your business. Now you have a successful business and your employee's - who you pay far above the median income in this country and who have excessive benefits most people never see - are demanding a bigger share of your profits from the business YOU built.

Now I know that, in large part, owners didn't build their teams, they bought them and bought into a system. However, these rich ass owners did work hard and make a buttload of cash to buy into an investment which, is their right to try and maximize.

Players are, in effect, employees and they are extremely well compensated. Extremely well. Even the minimum wage of these employee's is far in excess of the average median income in the United States (behind just under 40K a year). If the Rookie Minimum is 300K a year as someone said, then rookies who are at the lower end of the pile are still making roughly 7.5 annual salaries of the median income in this country. Rookies that go on to work for 8 years in the NFL never making above the minimum will make about 600K a year or 4.8 million dollars.

The average person will not make 4.8 million dollars in their life time and the average dual income family it would take 60 years to make what the worst NFL player who managed to stay in the league for 8 years would make.

Do the owners make a crapload of money? Yes, but I bet the owner of the company you work for makes a crapload more than you too. Thats how the system works.
Rock Chalk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 07:24 AM   #22
TheElusiveKyleOrton
BOOM.
 
TheElusiveKyleOrton's Avatar
 
Touched By God

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Denver
Posts: 10,747
Default

Dan Snyder: Hard working entrepreneur.

Heard it on the Mane.
__________________
Nobody puts Jay-bee in the corner.
TheElusiveKyleOrton is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 07:31 AM   #23
jhns
Ring of Famer
 
but you still can't C me!

Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Omaha
Posts: 12,362

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Why wouldn't we side with the slaves? They have it so rough....

JK, the players can go **** themselves.
jhns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 07:58 AM   #24
Spider
Mr Diplomacy
 
Spider's Avatar
 
I survived Tebow Mania at the Mane

Join Date: May 2001
Location: Elway was just an arm =MacGruder
Posts: 84,163

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Von Miller
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheElusiveKyleOrton View Post
Dan Snyder: Hard working entrepreneur.

Heard it on the Mane.
Spider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 08:00 AM   #25
Spider
Mr Diplomacy
 
Spider's Avatar
 
I survived Tebow Mania at the Mane

Join Date: May 2001
Location: Elway was just an arm =MacGruder
Posts: 84,163

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Von Miller
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tnedator View Post
It's not ignorant, but since you are slow on the uptake, I will explain the point to you.
..... one of these days u will see that it isnt all of us that r clueless , and see you are
Spider is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:26 AM.


Denver Broncos