John Clayton perspective on the dispute

mmillman

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,153
Reaction score
35
"Something has bothered me about the stalled NFL labor talks for months.

The problem became crystal clear when full details of the NFL owners' last offer were revealed last Friday. Before the NFL Players Association decertified last Friday afternoon, owners increased their offer from $131 million in player costs in 2011 to $141 million, with hopes of getting a negotiating extension.

Although that was a move in the right direction and was a solid counter to the trade association's $151 million position, the number doesn't work. Because benefits count for $27 million of the $141 million offer, the salary cap number came to $114 million.

In that case, the salary cap would be a salary choke.

A pre-2008 salary cap simply doesn't work with 2011 salaries.

Low-revenue teams have complained about the $7 million yearly growth of the cap since 2006, which is one of the reasons low-revenue owners joined others in opting out of the collective bargaining agreement in 2008. The cap went from $109 million in 2007 to $116 million in 2008 to $123 million in 2009. The 2009 number was so high that NFL teams as a whole were $163 million below it -- roughly $5 million of cap room per team.

Owners can try to roll back the cap, but rolling back the increasing price of signing starters is impossible. It's especially impossible this year, as there are 450 unsigned free agents. At the same time owners were pushing for a lower cap, they were trying to re-sign starters at the higher numbers. Richard Seymour of the Raiders got $15 million a year. Champ Bailey of the Broncos got $10.75 million. A.J. Hawk of the Packers received $6.75 million.

What used to be $5 million deals are going for $10 million. To make it work in 2011 dollars, teams can't take the cap too far backward."

Read the rest: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=6232635
 
mmillman;3882428 said:
"Something has bothered me about the stalled NFL labor talks for months.
The problem became crystal clear when full details of the NFL owners' last offer were revealed last Friday. Before the NFL Players Association decertified last Friday afternoon, owners increased their offer from $131 million in player costs in 2011 to $141 million, with hopes of getting a negotiating extension.
Although that was a move in the right direction and was a solid counter to the trade association's $151 million position, the number doesn't work. Because benefits count for $27 million of the $141 million offer, the salary cap number came to $114 million.
In that case, the salary cap would be a salary choke.
A pre-2008 salary cap simply doesn't work with 2011 salaries.
Low-revenue teams have complained about the $7 million yearly growth of the cap since 2006, which is one of the reasons low-revenue owners joined others in opting out of the collective bargaining agreement in 2008. The cap went from $109 million in 2007 to $116 million in 2008 to $123 million in 2009. The 2009 number was so high that NFL teams as a whole were $163 million below it -- roughly $5 million of cap room per team.
Owners can try to roll back the cap, but rolling back the increasing price of signing starters is impossible. It's especially impossible this year, as there are 450 unsigned free agents. At the same time owners were pushing for a lower cap, they were trying to re-sign starters at the higher numbers. Richard Seymour of the Raiders got $15 million a year. Champ Bailey of the Broncos got $10.75 million. A.J. Hawk of the Packers received $6.75 million.
What used to be $5 million deals are going for $10 million. To make it work in 2011 dollars, teams can't take the cap too far backward."

The owners should have never let the salaries get that high.
 
Beast_from_East;3882447 said:
The owners should have never let the salaries get that high.

Imagine if they said that about your job.

Interesting take from you.
 
Beast_from_East;3882447 said:
The owners should have never let the salaries get that high.

They didn't; market forces did. And it's not like salaries grew but revenue didn't. The NFL has shown miraculous grouwth during one of hte country's greatest recessions. As its revenues grew so did the proice of player-labor.

Also, why is Clayton figuring benefits into his calculatins? Benfits are always seperate compensation measures from slaries. clayton's numbers don't add up because he's adding up the wrong numbers.
 
I thought there were rumors that some teams dropped their total player expenses in 2010.

Spending what one doesn't have can end badly.
 
SkinsandTerps;3882451 said:
Imagine if they said that about your job.

Interesting take from you.

You can't compare the NFL players with regular folks. There's a huge difference between people that make tens of thousands and tens of millions.

I think the owners have some foresight here. They realize that if player salaries continue to rise that there's a chance they'll start losing money quickly.

When I first puchased the NFL Sunday Ticket, it was $169...today it's nearly twice the price. I'm probably good for one more year. I've heard of many other fans that have to make the difficult choice to get rid of it. Ticket prices will soon be too high for the regular fan to buy. The economy is tough, and signs still point to it being tough for a while.

NFL stadiums are having a tough time filling their seats now. Owners realize they have to get salaries under control or there may be even more difficult times ahead.
 
Richard Seymour of the Raiders got $15 million a year
lol :laugh2:

Not really funny given the context...but that number just makes me giggle.
 
John Clayton is clueless about how to work the cap. Teams could easily reduce a lot of cap numbers if they needed to, just like they've always done.

By the way, he's wrong about the cap in 2009. It was $127.997 million, not $123 million.
 
Did any accumulating obligations to pay more to players get wiped off the books during the uncapped 2010 season, or am I not understanding the system?

Kent
 
Bizwah;3882458 said:
When I first puchased the NFL Sunday Ticket, it was $169...today it's nearly twice the price. I'm probably good for one more year. I've heard of many other fans that have to make the difficult choice to get rid of it. Ticket prices will soon be too high for the regular fan to buy. The economy is tough, and signs still point to it being tough for a while.

Only idiot fans. Hell, if you suggest to Directv you're going to drop Sunday Ticket, there's a good chance you'll get it for less than $169.
 
mmillman;3882428 said:
The 2009 number was so high that NFL teams as a whole were $163 million below it -- roughly $5 million of cap room per team.

That’s what kindof gets me. I hear, “ole well we will become like baseball and teams will try to buy a Super Bowl’. That is so stupid. Many teams don’t even max out their cap space (Minnesota, Eagles). Besides, teams can spend as much as they want (as posted by Adam) just work around the cap. Also, hasn’t it been proven that spending the most in free agency doesn’t guarantee a winning team much less a Super Bowl team. Just agenda driven crap. People just can’t think without a bias.
 
What it really means is that teams could HOLD onto what they already have.
Imagine if we could have kept all the guys that were on the 92 team for 7 years without losing any of them to FA or because of a cap? Instead we started to lose them in 93 (Norton) and so on.
 
AdamJT13;3882504 said:
John Clayton is clueless about how to work the cap. Teams could easily reduce a lot of cap numbers if they needed to, just like they've always done.

By the way, he's wrong about the cap in 2009. It was $127.997 million, not $123 million.

You could have just stopped there. :D
 
I think if we ever uncover the financials from the owners, we'll see something very similar to what happened when ******** uncovered the MLB owners financials.




YR
 
Yakuza Rich;3882644 said:
I think if we ever uncover the financials from the owners, we'll see something very similar to what happened when ******** uncovered the MLB owners financials.




YR

absolutely

It is amazing to me that there are so many who side with the owners on this. They are a tax payer subsidized group of billionaires that are trying to squeeze as much as they can from the fans and the players.
 
Yakuza Rich;3882644 said:
I think if we ever uncover the financials from the owners, we'll see something very similar to what happened when ******** uncovered the MLB owners financials.




YR
I suspect the NFL teams' financials would make MLB owners blush.
 
Yakuza Rich;3882644 said:
I think if we ever uncover the financials from the owners, we'll see something very similar to what happened when ******** uncovered the MLB owners financials.

Yup.. and the Florida Marlins are a prime example..

Just ask the politicians who approved their new tax payers funded stadium without putting the issue up for a vote ( fairly ) what happened to their jobs after parts of their hidden books were leaked out. Here's a hint:

88%, biggest margin in the history of the United States.
 
AdamJT13;3882504 said:
John Clayton is clueless about how to work the cap.

I knew this before I clicked on this thread.

But it's always nice to see verification from a trusted source and expert on the subject.
 
Look, this works too.

mmillman;3882645 said:
absolutely

It is amazing to me that there are so many who side with the players on this. They are a tax payer subsidized group of millionaires that are trying to squeeze as much as they can from the fans and the owners.
 
AdamJT13;3882504 said:
John Clayton is clueless about how to work the cap. Teams could easily reduce a lot of cap numbers if they needed to, just like they've always done.

By the way, he's wrong about the cap in 2009. It was $127.997 million, not $123 million.

Very true. However, from what you have read, isn't he correct about the owners proposal (them adding all player benefits into that cap number)? You know I ask you this because you are our cap "guru".........................
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
474,003
Messages
14,505,693
Members
24,207
Latest member
TomGiantsfan
Back
Top