Team Owners Opt out of Collective Barganing Agreement
Posted by jannelle on May 20, 2008
League owners voted unanimously today to end their labor agreement with the NFL Players Association in 2011. Both parties reassured football fans that the next three seasons won’t be interrupted by contract disputes.
According to NFL.com, this move was anticipated but not this early in negotiations.
Signed two years ago, the NFL’s collective bargaining agreement was to last for seven years (until 2013) with an option to terminate in five (2011). The owners voted to opt out now because they felt that the current CBA heavily favored the players.
The owners said that they are paying the players $4.5 billion. Currently, League revenues are estimated at around $8.5 billion.
With that said, there are many question and scenarios to ponder.
-Why did the owners agree to this deal anyway knowing that it is ’unfair’?
-The 2010 and 2011 seasons will operate without a salary cap. In what ways will this affect free agency?
-Will there be a strike or a lockout in the near future?
According to NFL.com Senior Analyst Pat Kirwan, this may happen in 2010 if both sides are unable to reach a new deal within two years.
- Free agency will require six years of service instead of four years for the 2010 year.
-Teams will have to use three restriction tags instead of one.
-Teams that go deep in the playoffs could have some spending restrictions.
The ending of the NFL Draft and the creation of a rival league are also some possibilities.
I don’t really feel sorry for the owners, and I disagree with most of their issues regarding the agreement. In 2006, two teams voted against the current CBA. Two years later, those two teams were right while the other 30 played themselves. It seems to me that the 30 teams that voted for the CBA were afraid of the NFLPA, so they agreed to whatever the union wanted.
The only issue that I agree with the owners on is the rookie contracts. These guys are way overpaid, and they don’t deserve those mega contracts because they are unproven. It is a damn shame that some of these guys act like that it is beneath them to actually prove themselves to the team that drafted them. Under this CBA, owners spent more on unproven rookies than dependable vets. The veterans suffered and paid their dues in the league, and they deserve a higher percentage of player salaries. Paying $70 million on a first round bust is beyond foolish; it is insane!
What do you all out there think? Do the owners have a legitimate beef? Will the NFLPA and team owners agree to a new deal before 2010?
