Jump to content
Want to remove all ads? ×

Get your hat handed to you in a labor negotiation? Cry collusion!

Scott Dierking

By Scott Dierking
in NY Jets Forum

Recommended Posts

Bugg

Bugg

Posted
Posted

It really depresses me that I will never see this sport collapse in on itself. 

With Goodell and DeMaurice (is that not a ridiculous name?) Smith, it's a fact that it's idiot-proof. But both try awfully hard to eff it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pedro55

pedro55

Posted
Posted

The owners may very well have colluded. But free agency is basically for less than a third of players who have careers over 3 or 4 years-those who vest in the pension and health care plans for that length. Smith had a winning hand if he fought hard for earlier vesting(vesting with fewer games on the actiive roster and possibly some credit for practice squad time) and earlier vesting for health care. Also, the failure of almost any contracts to be guranteed is a joke, along with the annual ridiculous and untrue contract announcements. Unfortunately the membership so far is impressed with such nonsense and too shortsighted to recognize their football careers are very likely a very short aprt of their work life and one that will cause them health problems later in life.

 

 You could say the same thing about a lot of careers that don't give out $20 million up front bonuses.    Nobody says collusion then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bugg

Bugg

Posted
Posted

 You could say the same thing about a lot of careers that don't give out $20 million up front bonuses.    Nobody says collusion then.

Mathematicaly that's rough guess 3% of the roster? The NFLPA is the only union that caters to it's best-paid members at the expense of it's rank and file. And the owners are overjoyed to see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pedro55

pedro55

Posted
Posted

Mathematicaly that's rough guess 3% of the roster? The NFLPA is the only union that caters to it's best-paid members at the expense of it's rank and file. And the owners are overjoyed to see it.

 

 You mean like most fortune 500 companies that give CEOs and executives $20 million bonuses while the company lays off employees or offshores most of the work?   Like I said, the NFL isn't the only one with these kinds of issues.  At least a guy like Revis or Rodgers can be said to be worth the money.  A company like Wellpoint giving a CEO being forced to resign $20 million plus a severance package is far worse than the NFL.

 

 You could say they weren't union shops.   But if you used the auto manufacturing industry, same concept exists.   Except it's not about the top 'players' getting paid.  It's more like a couple of people getting all the money and everybody else getting dumped on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kelticwizard

kelticwizard

Posted
Posted

1500+ players colluded to try to screw the NFL.  They are pissed because they were out-colluded by 32 owners.

 

So collective bargaining-which is responsible for the greatest jump in average living standard in history-is now supposed to be "collusion"?

 

Don't think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
flgreen

flgreen

Posted
Posted

So collective bargaining-which is responsible for the greatest jump in average living standard in history-is now supposed to be "collusion"?

 

Don't think so.

I'll meet you at the Huffington Post in 5 minutes  If I'm not there start without me

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aec4

aec4

Posted
Posted

So collective bargaining-which is responsible for the greatest jump in average living standard in history-is now supposed to be "collusion"?

 

Don't think so.

 

Basically, they are complaining for getting beat at their own game.  Somehow, the players are allowed to talk with a common voice, but the owners aren't?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kelticwizard

kelticwizard

Posted
Posted

Do we have to review the entire legal history where collective bargaining is legally recognized?

 

What you seem to be saying is that it is all right for the owners to break the law by colluding because you disagree with the laws which allow collective bargaining.  Unfortunately it doesn't work that way.  If the owners are colluding then they should be subject to whatever penalties exist for that.  And the people who cheer the owners on for doing it are applauding dishonesty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scott Dierking

Scott Dierking

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Do we have to review the entire legal history where collective bargaining is legally recognized?

 

What you seem to be saying is that it is all right for the owners to break the law by colluding because you disagree with the laws which allow collective bargaining.  Unfortunately it doesn't work that way.  If the owners are colluding then they should be subject to whatever penalties exist for that.  And the people who cheer the owners on for doing it are applauding dishonesty.

Propriety is such a noble concept. Non-realistic in this case, but noble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kelticwizard

kelticwizard

Posted
Posted

If you want to say that it is non-realistic because the owners have mostly gotten away with it in the past, okay, fair enough.

 

But as any number of well-educated financial and executive folks doing time in Federal and State penitentiaries can attest, getting away with something over and over for years is no guarantee that you'll get away with it this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pedro55

pedro55

Posted
Posted

If you want to say that it is non-realistic because the owners have mostly gotten away with it in the past, okay, fair enough.

 

But as any number of well-educated financial and executive folks doing time in Federal and State penitentiaries can attest, getting away with something over and over for years is no guarantee that you'll get away with it this time.

 

   Most of the people who wound up in the slammer weren't the 'leaders' of those misfortunes.  They were the fall guys.   

I don't like most of these greedy selfish owners who make taxpayers pay for stadiums, make the same taxpayers buy tickets to said games and dont give same taxpayers any ROI for it,  and if said taxpayers and politicians don't agree to build a stadium to their liking they threaten to move or just move the team.   

 

 But saying all that, is it really colluding if suddenly teams and GMs start to think paying a CB $15 million isn't worth it.   It's a copy cat world. So a couple of teams do one thing, everybody else follows.  If the market for a CB becomes under $10 million,  that seems to be how it works.  It's not always people in some hidden room looking up at a whiteboard coming up with some secret plan to screw people.     They just follow the 'leader' who might've won some games or a super bowl.  

 

  And when QBs suddenly are getting $20 million per year and that becomes the defacto number everybody must pay after the fact,  that's not colluding?  

 

It's funny how it's only colluding if somebody tries to figure a way to save money, but at the other spectrum if some team pays a QB $20 million and every other team is forced to pay a QB $20 million or close to it, it's not colluding.  Must be colluding if your cheap, not if your overpaying.  Seems people only like to see it from one side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aec4

aec4

Posted
Posted

Do we have to review the entire legal history where collective bargaining is legally recognized?

 

What you seem to be saying is that it is all right for the owners to break the law by colluding because you disagree with the laws which allow collective bargaining.  Unfortunately it doesn't work that way.  If the owners are colluding then they should be subject to whatever penalties exist for that.  And the people who cheer the owners on for doing it are applauding dishonesty.

 

What I am saying is the owners are allowed to play by the rules of the CBA as well.  They don't have to give in to every player demand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kelticwizard

kelticwizard

Posted
Posted

With that I agree.  The owners are perfectly free to decide, individually and on their own, not to offer contracts or big money to any number of players they choose.

 

What they cannot do is agree together not to offer contracts to hold the money amounts down.

 

Since the contracts for certain positions is not what is normally expected, the union suspects collusion and is making efforts to gather evidence to prove it.  Whether collusion is actually going on, or if the union will be able to prove anything if it is, remains to be seen.

 

My objection was to some posters saying that sure, collusion is going on but the union is wrong to try to prove it.  That is what I disagree with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

MILE-Social - NJ Social Media & SEO company

Site Sponsor

MetLife Stadium Tailgate

NY Jets Podcast

NY Jets Podcast

DMCA Page

  • -- DMCA Page
    • ×
    ×
    • Create New...