1. Welcome to San Diego Chargers NFL Football Podcast and Forum!

    Bolt Talk is one of the largest online communities for the San Diego Chargers. We host a regular Chargers podcast during the season. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Create an Account or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

NFL, union dispute TV money

Discussion in 'Chargers Fan Forum' started by Concudan, Feb 24, 2011.

  1. Concudan

    Concudan Caffeinated Commando

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    53,044
    Ratings:
    +4,979
    Associated Press


    MINNEAPOLIS -- The NFL and the players' union took their fight over $4 billion in TV and wireless revenue before a federal judge in Minnesota on Thursday, a potentially critical issue just one week before their current labor pact expires.

    U.S. District Court judge David Doty in Minneapolis, who has jurisdiction over NFL labor matters since a 1993 settlement that paved the way for unrestricted free agency, unsealed some details in the case.

    He did not immediately rule on the NFL Players' Association appeal of a special master's decision earlier this month that lets the league keep $4 billion in broadcast rights fees. The union contends that money was carved out as a financial cushion -- leverage -- if NFL owners impose a lockout and the 2011 season is lost. The NFLPA argues that money should be escrowed.

    Doty said he didn't want to put his "thumb on the scale of the collective bargaining" process, as NFL attorney Gregg Levy contended union lawyers are asking. Levy said "it would be repugnant to federal labor law" for Doty to intervene in this issue.

    NFLPA attorney Jeffrey Kessler countered that it's the league's "thumb on the scale" in the labor talks, saying the billions in leverage was part of a long-devised lockout plan.

    "We'd like the thumb removed," Kessler said.

    The collective bargaining agreement expires next Thursday. Lawyers for both sides, citing a gag order, declined to comment on the negotiations as well as how the case could affect the talks.

    The union contends the NFL failed to secure "maximum" revenue, as it is required to do, in both 2009 and 2010 when it re-negotiated broadcast contracts with Fox, NBC, ESPN, CBS and DirecTV that included revised "work stoppage" plans. The NFLPA said the work stoppage clauses in particular were struck to guarantee income for the NFL, giving it unfair leverage in the labor talks.

    "Leverage, leverage, leverage. They said it to themselves over and over again. And why? To inflict economic harm on the players," said Tom Heiden, another attorney for the NFLPA.

    The league contends seeking more revenue for 2009-10 deals would have been unsuccessful and angered the broadcast partners in a "depressed advertising market." Levy said the league believes it followed sound business principles that brought in "hundreds of millions of dollars in additional revenues."

    That argument was backed by the special master, Stephen Burbank.

    In his decision, released for the first time Thursday, he said he couldn't believe the NFL had a duty to the union to "throw budgets and business plans in the wastebasket" even as he acknowledged the sharp disagreement between the two sides over how much the NFL can pursue its own business interests while following requirements of the labor pact.

    NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell testified that the work stoppage fees "could be used to meet" NFL debt obligations and cover operating costs, the decision said.

    The decision also confirmed that Burbank had awarded the NFLPA $6.9 million to settle a dispute over revenue from an "extra" game granted by the NFL to NBC last season. The Oct. 31 game, between the Saints and Steelers, drew better ratings on a Sunday night than a competing World Series game between Texas and San Francisco.


    Copyright 2011 by The Associated Press
     
  2. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,994
    Ratings:
    +1,394
    So it's either a preexisting bias on the part of the media outlets or a complete lack of knowledge on proper public relations, but every time I read or hear something out of a non-player Player's Association representative (be it DeMaurice Smith or one of many lawyers or whoever) does nothing to make the players look like anything but greedy bastards with this sense of entitlement for their own earnings that precludes anything else including the economic viability of the industry the work in.

    It just seems ludicrous to me to suggest that ownership shouldn't be able to enact safeguards to ensure that they remain profitable - that's smart business. Does that give "management" leverage in the collective bargaining process? Yes, yes it does. But that levergae is one of the perks of being the guys putting up the big bucks to fund, establish, and effectively create the medium for the business to even exist. Whether the PA reps want to acknowledge it or not (which seems ironic since a number of the players themselves seem to grasp this concept), the players need ownership just as much - if not more - than ownership needs the players.
     
  3. Nomad

    Nomad Very Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2006
    Messages:
    634
    Ratings:
    +155
    And both groups of greedy bastards need fans, and I am moving further away from NFL fandom.
     
  4. HEXEDBOLT

    HEXEDBOLT Don't like it, lump it!!!

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Messages:
    14,284
    Ratings:
    +1,887
    UFL UFL UFL UFL.
     
  5. Scott the Rock

    Scott the Rock BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    795
    Ratings:
    +130
    You nailed it in a nut shell. This is not only the NFL but unfortunately what our countries mentality is sadly becoming.
     
  6. The LBC

    The LBC I'm a Real Prick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,994
    Ratings:
    +1,394
    I don't know that they're quite to the point of where the country is headed politically - where it seems that a number of politicians and people that claim a particular affiliation take a stance simply because it is contrary to what the other side is saying. At least the League and the PA are clinging to citing the same tired old rhetoric that really is misleading and as the great philosopher Indigo Montoya once said, "I don't think it means what you think it means".
     

Share This Page