Denver Broncos blog, news and rumors


[hype it up!]
[Share with Yardbarker]

Published on 03/17/2011 at Thu Mar 17 10:56.

A lot has been thrown around about whose fault this whole lockout thing is really is. So let’s get down the chase and start pointing fingers. Who is responsible for endangering our precious Sunday├é┬ápastime?

Who is responsible for the lockout?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • herc_rock

    If you voted “players” you haven't been paying attention.

  • Ghj

    It has to be the owners considering this is a lockout and not a strike.

  • Cyberspread

    Not wanting to really point fingers, but if the players had even considered the last deal from the owners, we may not be having this lockout…

  • MrEast

    I've been paying very close attention, and I don't completely fault the owners.

  • Cyberspread

    There should be a choice for both parties. They are both at fault!!!

  • jimbo

    not entirely true. actions of the players certainly caused the owners to need to lock the players out in the absence of a cba.

    think about it like this… you have a teenage kid who drives a car. they get caught drinking, or get bad grades, or break some rule, whatever… you take their car away. is it your fault the kid doesnt have a car- i guess it is technically… but the real reason is the actions of your kid.

  • Ghj

    The owners are the driving force behind this entire situation. The reason the cba was in jeopardy in the first place.

  • jimbo

    the players unionizing was the reason for the cba. without those there would be no issue.

  • MrEast

    That's not entirely true. There is a different commissioner and NFLPA executive director than the last CBA and the conditions have changed. The owners fear that they are creating an unstable environment for growth. How they are going about fixing this, isn't exactly perfect.

    The players shouldn't have walked away from the table. DeMaurice Smith is a pitbull of a lawyer and he is not shy to duke it out in court.

  • Ghj

    And why would players feel the need to unionize in the first place?

  • herc_rock

    The owners are the ones who 1) opted out of the last CBA, 2) are demanding another billion in revenues off the top 3) are demanding a 60-40 split on the rest 4) are looking for an 18 game schedule w/no recompense 5) looking for a hard rookie-cap and 6) refusing to hand over their books to prove their baseless and inane cries of poverty.

    The players want what? Better health care?

    Seems to me that it's a straight-up and fairly obvious money grab by the owners. I find it hard to fault the NFLPA on this.

  • areferee

    Exactly. They are both culpable. The question is, who will take the lead toward a resolution? They are merely wasting time blaming each other.

  • flbronc

    the players wanted 50/50 split with nothing off the top. that is a huge shift in what the payout was prior. it wasnt that they just wanted better healthcare. to categorize it as such dramatically simplifies a complex situation.

  • mikebirty

    Ok let's see the owners have an NFL without the players. They can't?

    Then the owners should pay them everything and be greatful that they can get rich off the back of some very talented football players.

    Sorry Herc, reading that back makes it sound like its trolling, its not meant to be. Labour relations just get the socialist in me excited

  • Josh Temple

    The players also have no real concept of operating or business costs. It's all speculation until they're forced to open their books but I've heard it put that 60% of the revenue is going to the players before any operating costs or team employees are even paid. Something is very wrong with that picture. It's been reported that the owners have backed off of the 18 game schedule and knew it wasn't going to stick.

    I think there are owners like Bowlen and Richardson (even though Richardson is not putting himself in the best light lately) that see their profit margin shrinking to keep with the modern league and then you have idiots like Snyder and Jones who pay out the nose for everything and complain that it's become too expensive to operate.

    I agreed with the players the last time around, they were paid far less than NBA and MLB, but they also have to understand that those profits have to pay a full roster which is much larger in the NFL and the stadiums being much larger cost more to build, upkeep, and take more employees to run.

  • MrEast

    1) It was an unreasonable situation. 2) A billion is too greedy, but they do deserve money back due to the billion dollar stadiums the NFL is encouraging/demanding owners to build. 3) 60-40 should be negotiated, but the Owners should come out on top of that regardless. 4) The 18 game schedule was never really a reality, it was more of a tool for the owners to act like they were giving something up. 5) Rookie cap needs to happen 6) They are private companies, the players have no right to the books. The owners also highly compromised by agreeing to a mutually selected third party auditor. Try asking your boss to open the books of the company to see if you're getting a fair deal, let alone get him to agree on a mutually selected third party auditor, and tell me how that goes.

    The players want a continued increase in payment and all the benefits on top. For how much money they're making they can cover their own benefits easily. There has to be a compromise on what the NFL covers and what the players get paid.

    The owners extended a decent offer to the players who walked away without any consideration. DeMaurice Smith wanted to take this one to court. You can't act like the owners are the only ones treating this as a “money grab”.

    Now due to piss poor leadership on both sides we have to listen to bickering between the spokesmen and players acting as if they're are victims (e.g. Adrian Peterson comparing this situation to modern day slavery).

    I do not believe that this is any one side's fault, I believe the share is about 50/50. The owners were shafted under the last CBA so they're not going to going to let it happen again. This will last until the players give in.

  • MrEast

    I thought about that, but it would be a landslide and that would be no fun.

  • herc_rock


    You guys are kicking my face in on this one.

  • Josh Temple

    LOL, at least you're honest. The realistic way to look at is certain players (mainly 3rd string type guys and underpaid vets) should have gripes against the NFLPA and the majority of owners should have gripes against the top 10% owners. The only thing the NFLPA will win is overpaid rookie contracts (maybe) and keep the roof raised up for the top 20% of players. The bubble guys will keep being screwed and the lower end owners will make salary cap and a tidy profit but not rake in the dough.

  • JackfnBurton

    I think we should fight and bicker about it in here, because that will probably solve everything. I can see it now: “Fans solve NFL Lockout on little known sports blog by typing in all caps.”

    In the mean time, I say Blame Canada!!!

  • Puluke

    Let's see, you and your family risk everything, acquire a business (like an NFL Owner), pay employees right out of college $millions of dollars to play and now have no right to profit for themselves…the same way these employees are! Most NFL players earn in the millions personally, some like Haynesworth received $100 million and he chooses to not play unless he feels like it….humm!
    Mr. Bowlen should have a right to earn as much as his highest paid payer on an annual basis…shouldn't he?

  • herc_rock

    Yeah, I was on vacation last week and not paying attention to any of this stuff. I didn't know the PA turned down an offer other than the initial demands.

    I will say a couple of things though:

    Owners typically pay a pretty small percentage of stadium construction costs. A lot of them didn't even pay one thin dime for their sparkly new stadia.

    As far as the owners not opening up their books, there are cases out there where federal judges have sided w/ the union on that issue. Obviously I couldn't make those demands of my employer, but my co-workers and I aren't collectively bargaining w/ them.

    A rookie cap is a must.

  • herc_rock

    The players should be grateful that the owners have NFL teams that they can play football on and get rich while doing so.

    tee hee hee.

  • Jon

    Took the comment out of my mouth. Both.

  • Jon
  • 5280

    WOW! this makes the 4th conversation about this on this site that EVERYONE completely ignors the fact that the owners went behind the players backs and restructure their tv contracts and put specific lockout clauses in them 2 years ago to make sure that they could lock the players out and still be financially comfortable. there is a specific rule in the CBA that just expired that said that ANY decisions the league makes regarding revenue has to be made in the best interests of both the players and the league, and 2 years ago the league broke that rule and deliberately made plans to lockout the players. how on earth can anyone see that as right? the league has been planning this whole thing for 2 years. direct TV said they'd pay the league MORE if they did lockout (why, i have no idea). espn tryed to get out of the lockout clause in their contract but the league told them if they did they'd be subject to a fine. I think herc is right. if you voted “players” you havn't been paying attention, or your a big wig owner of a million dollar company yourself. So of course the league should be made to open ALL of their books because they cant be trusted to hold up their end of a legally binding contract. the 60-40 split was in favor of the league and the players only want an extra 10% of a $9 FREAKIN BILLION DOLLAR INDUSTRY WHICH THEY HELPED CREATE!! I mean, lets be honest, both partys are being extremely greedy, but at least the players are being honest about their end of things. pat bowlen is no different. hes been one of the main speakers at the mediation in favor of the league. i know he's OUR owner but he's just as untrust worthy as the rest of them. the league made $4 BILLION off of those tv contracts. thats mor then half of the total $9 billion revenue. and a federal judge ruled in the players favor over those contracts. that same judge ruled in the players favor in the last lockout with started the CBA. the players have requested that same judge for the antitrust trial coming up on april 6th and if they get him, the league is in for a big awakening. and of course if you go to your emplyer and ask to see their books they'd laugh in your face because your not reponsible for the majority of what your employer makes, first of all. second of all, with your employer your talkin about a mere couple of hundred dollars. in the NFL's situation, your talkin about millions and billions of lost revenue. thats a huge difference. the league told the owners that if they went into lockout, not to worry because they'll each recieve a check for $113 million because of those tv contracts. dirty dirty dirty!!! i dont see how you could see it any other way.

  • Danno

    Everybody is focused on the income statement…What about the balance sheet? Remember, we have many very very old owners who will potentially need to sell their teams in the not too distant future. Every concession the owners can get not only helps their income during the season, but drastically raises the resale value of their team. If the owners get what they want, many of them know they will be knocking on $1 billion + franchises…That's some serious scratch!

  • Glendeeclifton

    The players are a bunch of greedy multi-millionaires (or with that potential). They know nothing about business are negotiations. Dr. G.

  • stav

    Wow, what an incredible level of stupidity. Who opted out of the agreement because they wanted more money? The owners. Did anyone put a gun to their heads in signing the previous CBA agreement? No. In a league where the average career length is 3.5 years, and where you accept the possibility of one potential play tragically affecting the rest of your life, you better get paid as much as you can. Whose taking more of a risk, the owners running the team, or the players who are one hit away from never walking again? Come on, how can anyone blame the players here, they wanted to maintain the status quo, the owners who weren't happy enough by RIPPING off fans with the f*cking insult of PSL's have the gall to put the game on hold because they DIDNT LIKE THE AGREEMENT THEY SIGNED OFF on? Is someone putting a gun to their heads when they agree to pay the players what they pay them? No. Gimme a break, we find issue with the players in this labor issue, but excuse the owners who have instilled a ticketing system where you have to pay an exorbitant fee just to have THE RIGHT TO BUY A TICKET FOR A GAME? In a league comprised of non-guaranteed contracts, long-term physical ailments, and record levels of revenue in which both players and owners profit tremendously, some of you need to reassess and get a reality check.

  • Str8 Knightmare

    Mr.East, your post was well written and the point is clear. I do think it is a little off the mark. NFL teams are private companies but the players aren't workers, they are highly paid “rainmakers” or even, partners, like in a law firm. When your talent is a big reason people show up in the first place, you do have a right to revenue sharing and benefits. If the elder partners say there is no money, the talent would hold out or walk knowing that they have leverage. this is exactly what the players are doing. The owners want a billion EXTRA off the top which is amounting to a pay-cut. The healthcare benefits offered weren't bad and the rookies do need a wage scale. A rookie wage scale would drastically reduce inflation in player prices which would make it less likely that there is a labor stoppage in the future. The NBA has it right. A 3 year contract that rookies have to play through to earn the big bucks if they are indeed stars. But the owners are being greedy.

  • Sbbronco1

    i'd still like to know why the owners refuse to show the players the financial info they are requesting. sounds suspiciously like they are hiding something.

  • Sbbronco1

    i'd still like to know why the owners refuse to show the players the financial info they are requesting. sounds suspiciously like they are hiding something.