Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
The place for news, information and discussion about anything related to pro sports.
Moderators: rtb, kmax, SonomaCat
-
whitetrashgriz
- BobcatNation Hall of Famer
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 7:00 pm
Post
by whitetrashgriz » Wed Dec 30, 2009 2:27 pm
...me being the idiot.

and no, this doesn't have anything to do with my once fun-to-watch vikings
i admit i have next to no knowledge on the business aspect of sports teams and leagues. but everyone is saying that fans should pretty much plan on no football in 2012. i also heard this morning that next season looks like it will be played without a salary cap. i'm assuming these two are related. could someone with more knowledge than i attempt to explain what is going on? try an really dumb it down for me!

do you have to know everything to post here? or just think you do?
-
jagur1
- Member # Retired
- Posts: 2015
- Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 3:53 pm
- Location: Billings
Post
by jagur1 » Wed Dec 30, 2009 3:06 pm
Collective bargaining agreement is coming to an end. Players want to keep 60% of the revenue the owners want to lower that amount. Problem is the owners are in 2 camps. The free market guys (cowboys, redskins, Denver) and the socialist guys (Tampa, KC, Pittsburg) 1st the owners need to agree on what to bring to the table then they have to agree with the players union. Some say a lock out is coming. Since there will be no agreement for next year teams can spend what ever on contracts. Except the top 4 seeds (NO, INdy, SD and MN or Philly) they are locked in for some crazy reason.
Never mistake activity for accomplishment.
I'm sick of the man because the man is a thief.
Four
-
SonomaCat
- Moderator
- Posts: 23976
- Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
- Location: Sonoma County, CA
-
Contact:
Post
by SonomaCat » Wed Dec 30, 2009 3:32 pm
jagur1 wrote:Collective bargaining agreement is coming to an end. Players want to keep 60% of the revenue the owners want to lower that amount. Problem is the owners are in 2 camps. The free market guys (cowboys, redskins, Denver) and the socialist guys (Tampa, KC, Pittsburg) 1st the owners need to agree on what to bring to the table then they have to agree with the players union. Some say a lock out is coming. Since there will be no agreement for next year teams can spend what ever on contracts. Except the top 4 seeds (NO, INdy, SD and MN or Philly) they are locked in for some crazy reason.
It would be kind of fun to see the league go to a "free market" approach for awhile. The parity would disappear and it would just turn into a matter of which team could buy the most Super Bowls (see MLB), but it would create some good discussion, anyway.
Of course, I say that as a person that doesn't really care about the NFL, so it would probably suck for anybody that actually wants to see a competitive NFL each Sunday.
-
whitetrashgriz
- BobcatNation Hall of Famer
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 7:00 pm
Post
by whitetrashgriz » Wed Dec 30, 2009 4:30 pm
jagur1 wrote:Collective bargaining agreement is coming to an end. Players want to keep 60% of the revenue the owners want to lower that amount. Problem is the owners are in 2 camps. The free market guys (cowboys, redskins, Denver) and the socialist guys (Tampa, KC, Pittsburg) 1st the owners need to agree on what to bring to the table then they have to agree with the players union. Some say a lock out is coming. Since there will be no agreement for next year teams can spend what ever on contracts. Except the top 4 seeds (NO, INdy, SD and MN or Philly) they are locked in for some crazy reason.
wow. interesting. thanks. so what are the odds that there will be no football, and how long would something like this potentially need to be fixed? pretty scary stuff. i can't imagine life without fantasy football, and sunday morning football with buddies.

do you have to know everything to post here? or just think you do?
-
Bleedinbluengold
- BobcatNation Hall of Famer
- Posts: 3427
- Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 10:24 am
- Location: Belly of the Beast
Post
by Bleedinbluengold » Fri Jan 01, 2010 10:42 am
I heard some commentator once say that the NFL might contract as part of this, perhaps eliminating as many as 2-4 franchises. So, there would be substantially fewer players in the league to share the revenue, even if the players are successful at getting a higher percentage. In such a case, the total revenue to the players might not actually be any more than they get now; just fewer players to share it.
Montana State IS what "they" think Montana is.