NFL's profitability data offer rejected
 

A person familiar with the negotiations tells The Associated Press that the NFL offered to turn over five years of profitability data to the players' union - an offer that was rejected.

The person spoke on condition of anonymity Wednesday because the mediator overseeing the labor talks has told participants to not discuss details publicly.

According to the person who spoke to the AP, the NFL's proposal to the union included:

• audited league-wide profitability data from 2005-09;
  
• the number of teams that have seen a shift in profitability in that span;
  
• an independent auditor to examine the data.

The NFL Players Association has long demanded that the league give it full access to financial data. The union didn't immediately respond to requests for comment.


"We've made more information available in the course of this negotiation than has ever been made available in decades of collective bargaining with the NFLPA," Pash said. "Far more information. And we've offered to make even more information (available), including information that we do not disclose to our own clubs."

The current collective bargaining agreement was set to expire last week, but two extensions now have pushed the cutoff to the end of Friday.

Although progress has been made, both sides have stuck to their stances when it comes to two central issues: The NFLPA has not agreed to any major economic concessions; the NFL has not agreed to the union's long-held demand that the league completely open its books.

READ FULL STORY AT NEWORLEANS.COM

Interesting. Very interesting indeed...

The owners are not required by law to justify why players salaries are going to be cut. End of story. The PA needs to let this issue go because they will never win. It doesn't matter what the owners make. They can do whatever they want. If they want more of the profits then it's their right.

It really seems as though neither side wants this to work.

To the Players;

You are EMPLOYEES, NOT EMPLOYERS. No employee is allowed to demand to see the "Books" of the company it works for. Stop dragging this out and work on what YOU as PLAYERS said you wanted fixed and quit digging up more and more BS.

Even if the NFL disclosed everything it would not matter. It would be like the employee at Taco Bell telling the owner hey, you make a lot more money than I thought. Give me some of that. The owner would simply tell him to leave his uniform and get out.

I agree with you guys. Thre are a ton of guys out there who would gladly take the place of the current players in the NFL, for half the price.

If the players don't watch out, the fans are going to turn them into the bad guys in this deal.

I already do that. Not that I don't think the players should get paid well, but they are paid well already. All of them.

I just want less commercials.

http://www.dailyhaha.com/_pics/drinking_smoking_cat.jpg

I wanna meet your Avatar, FF. And talk about CBA issues personally.

I agree with you Crusader. There are plenty of guys that would play for $20 an hour, just to have the opportunity to play again. I just really don't dig on all the money grubbing. On both sides.

I say raise the price for tickets, merchandise and anything else that that can bring more money to the millionaires and billionaires. WE NEED TRILLIONAIRES!

why would they decline 05-09 it has to show huge enough nos to evaluate , this could have pushed things forward a little. the players should watch there backs because its our wallets that fill theres

we have cameras in court rooms on murder trials etc, but zip on a national pastime. we all know why. its all about money and it would ensicken the general public on how greedy these rich owners and not so rich but well paid players are. and all wanting more more more. i worked hard for 30 yrs for 1 company slowly climbing the wage scale and then being let go after owners knowingly could hire college grads out of school for 1/2 what i was making . i could do nothing but pack my s--t and leave. i know nfl football won't be the same with scabs but it might be no other way to let the players know that employers will be employers and not there daddy's.

I've never been in that position but I understand your point. My postion on it is to never let myself get into that position. Find a niche on the side and never let one person or company decide your fate.

These players should focus on life after football since the average NFL career is 2 years. They make good money but it's not that much over the course of a lifetime if that's all you ever did. The only thing I'm with them on is the 18 game schedule and lingering medical concerns. Nobody wants the 18 games except for the owners and if they have lingering medical isssues the NFL needs to take care of them. If the owners want more of the profits then so be it, just take care of these guys when they are in pain after football. They have plenty of money to make that a reality.

If the NFLPA de-certifies, and the issue goes to court, the owners WILL open their books.

They can either open them now, or wait until the court orders them to. Their choice.

There is an article by a Tulane professor floating around here. He explains why the NFL does not have to open the books. It's not going to happen.

Yeah I have to agree that if the players don't watch out they will be he bad guys. Imagine yourself as an Owner of a business and being told/demanded by your employees to show them the books and to pay them more even though they make a hell of a lot more than the people packing the stadiums. The more I thik about It the more I'm starting to dislike unions or collective bargining. Owners cold just fire all the players and start over with fresh college grads and go with half of what the current players are asking for and come out winners.

Most everyone of the players has gotten a top-notch college education paid because of football. They should all be fine after their playing career. There can't be the owners responsibility to pay somebody money enough to last a lifetime?

Ditto P and I still can't believe that 5 years of data wasn't enough. Just makes the players look like real greedy SOB's.

theres more than a handfull of players that are at the end of there carreers and hoping to nail a year or 2 of good money in the bank. but if this thing drags they will lose that one last lick and there careers are over. watch out guys

The whole employer/employee opinion is based on a relative view point of looking at a business exchange as a 1 tiered street. Money is just a symbol of value, and the only thing that makes it special is the liquidity of it. Business exchange is always a 2 tiered street. Both entities are exchanging values with each other, the players bring their talents to the game; the owners bring their financial backing.

The reason that the players can ask for these things in collective bargaining is that they have leverage. They aren't just some employee off the street that is easily terminate-able. The leverage they have is created by the scarcity of the resource that they offer. If the NFL were to replace them with 2nd tier players at cheaper salaries, the profits of the NFL would drop drastically because a lot fewer people would be willing to watch them on a regular basis; which is exactly why they haven't done it.

Basically what the NFL has done is tell them that they are going to take money off the top of the split that they proposed; citing economic hardships. According to the NFLPA, this would have actually left them with less money then in the past. The logical step for anyone willing to consent to this would be able to see the economic data from the NFL to back up their claim(to make sure that they aren't lying about the economic decline).

I say don't show anyone anything and see what the second tier players have to offer and see how the fan base reacts. I'm sure there are a bunch of college players getting ready to enter a draft where they don't belong to any union and all they have is an agent working out salary negotiations.

Who says you should belong to a usnion to be able to play ball? That's just silly. If you like the money but not the benefits then make a choice. Play or sell cars.

Just wonder if we could use any similarities between the NFL and the teachers in Wisc. The teachers have a good union and still they have to give back a % of their pay. Would you rather be a teacher losing 20% of your pay or a QB losing 20% of your pay? Sure would suck losing 20% of an 8 million dollar contract but it would suck more losing 20% of a 40000 salary.

Wonder why that state would only pick the teachers to cut benefits for. Would be less of a cut if they cut everyones benefit that was a state employee. I wonder if the politicians ever considered cutting their own benefits along with the teachers.

they should have busted the unions years ago put limits on salarys years ago with yearly cost of living raises years ago. football would still be the same today, most popular sport. this is sucking royal pains in the butts

That is not true. I want 18 games. I could live with 16 if they cut out 2 preseason games, but they are never gonna do that. I just can't believe that the players are being such crybabies over 2 more games. Baseball players play 162 games. I know football is a rougher sport, but not by 146 games. I mean...seriously. Would you rather play 18 games of football for megabucks or 162 games of baseball. To me, it's a no-brainer.

Agreed. I wanted 18 games too, with other concessions like 2 bye weeks, 4 and 8 week IR's, increased roster sizes, more two-team training camps, less off-season OTA's, mandatory safety equipment, more safety equipment R&D etc...

This mess was created by Paul Tagliabue's inability to grow a pair...

Inmates have been running the asylum and now we are seeing the bill come due...

Oh, I want Iceshack to bring back his polarbear avatar and FFan to disclose who the avatar is along with a facebook link...

OK. I'll bring it back, JP.