Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 118

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    34,393

    Owners want to hold back 35% of player salary in escrow

    https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/49...scrow-proposal

    Of course the players would rather be paid their full contract amount but that contract also includes the possibility that their pay can be altered based on catastrophic events. I think them getting paid and then having to pay back from their pockets to the owners would be worse for everyone involved. It sounds like the players don't get what "escrow" is.

    Also, the NBA players already went through this.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    8,558
    I thought the NFLPA rejected this yesterday?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    34,393
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.B View Post
    I thought the NFLPA rejected this yesterday?
    That would be pretty quick to discuss it and vote on it. But maybe.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    [emoji288]
    Posts
    17,823
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Of course the players would rather be paid their full contract amount [...]
    Wouldn't you?

    I'd first wait and see that the owners take their losses as well, not just use player salaries to offset theirs.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    34,393
    Quote Originally Posted by QB_Eagles View Post
    Wouldn't you?

    I'd first wait and see that the owners take their losses as well, not just use player salaries to offset theirs.
    The CBA requires them to be partners, in increasing profits as well as when they decrease. The way people talk they think every owner has unlimited money and are just being greedy. Yes the owners are wealthy, but I don't get how players think that there is never going to be any reduction in their pay if the company they work for loses money. Do the players think they can keep all their money if the cap goes through the floor? Do they think the accountants will screw them?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    [emoji288]
    Posts
    17,823
    Actually I just checked and the NFL CBA does not contain provisions about force majeure or unforeseen emergencies.

    So there is no basis at all for owners putting player salaries into escrow.

    I have no idea why fans would choose to side with the owners over stuff like. I root for players not ****ing owners.

    If the NFL loses revenue then the salary cap gets adjusted; that's how it works.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    34,393
    Quote Originally Posted by QB_Eagles View Post
    Actually I just checked and the NFL CBA does not contain provisions about force majeure or unforeseen emergencies.

    So there is no basis at all for owners putting player salaries into escrow.

    I have no idea why fans would choose to side with the owners over stuff like. I root for players not ****ing owners.

    If the NFL loses revenue then the salary cap gets adjusted; that's how it works.
    There is no part of the CBA on a revenue split?

    I don't care about either side's rich people. I want the league to be healthy, and I don't want a work stoppage.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    [emoji288]
    Posts
    17,823
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    There is no part of the CBA on a revenue split?

    I don't care about either side's rich people. I want the league to be healthy, and I don't want a work stoppage.
    Revenue split, yes. If a loss in revenue happens this season, the salary cap will get adjusted next season.

    But there's nothing about emergency or unforeseen circumstances. So there's no reason whatsoever for the players to allow the owners to withhold salaries.

    If an owner can't pay the bills he can sell the team -- but of course the natural instinct is to simply not pay the employees.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Metroplex
    Posts
    2,799
    Quote Originally Posted by QB_Eagles View Post
    Wouldn't you?

    I'd first wait and see that the owners take their losses as well, not just use player salaries to offset theirs.
    Remember what we call losses is likely just a reduction in expected profits not actual cash cost losses. The ****ing greedy owners want the certainty of guaranteed profits

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    12,223
    My assumption is that it would work something like how the nba does their escrow system. The nba has a collectively bargained amount of revenue that the players earn. But because there's no hard cap, the players put a small percentage of their earnings in escrow. If the owners spend more many than the players are entitled to, the owners can get money back out of the escrow account (if it's close they usually don't touch it). IF the players make their fair share, then nothing happens. If the players under earn, an equal check is cut to every player. My assumption is that any escrow account would work on those principles.

    And I do think that's absolutely the way to go. Sucks for guys this year for sure, but if the league hurts for revenue this year and players make their full contracts, the cap will almost certainly have to drop for the following year. That's going to lead to mass cuts for vets and virtually no free agent market outside of the top players.

    No matter what, over the length of the current CBA, the players will earn whatever percentage of the revenue they are entitled to. But with Covid clearly being a hindrance to revenue, the discussion should be partially around how do we smooth out the revenue loss so we don't see a massive drop in cap for a season or two. To me, it makes sense for the players as a whole to sacrifice this year and the owners can make some consessions next year to try to offset that drop at least a little.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    [emoji288]
    Posts
    17,823
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    And I do think that's absolutely the way to go. Sucks for guys this year for sure, but if the league hurts for revenue this year and players make their full contracts, the cap will almost certainly have to drop for the following year. That's going to lead to mass cuts for vets and virtually no free agent market outside of the top players.
    That's going to happen no matter what...

    You think the owners will chip in some of their private wealth to make up for COVID-related losses in revenue so the cap doesn't go down? lmao

    And the NBA CBA actually has a "force majeure" provision that allows this move. The NFL CBA does not, so there is no reason for the NFLPA to agree to it.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    5,085
    it amazes me that anyone could ever side with the owners in situations like these.

    for most owners, they literally do absolutely nothing, they pay people money to run the organization.

    the players in turn, are what people pay to see, and these owners make hundreds of millions of dollars, if not outright billions off their backs, again, while typically doing absolutely nothing.

    a professional sports team is basically just a way for a billionaire to print more billions of dollars without putting any actual work in
    Quote Originally Posted by NormSizedMidget View Post
    It's different now than it was.

    When he won the second one, Giants fans are here we're outside of their minds.
    That quote always cracks me up.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    14,074
    Quote Originally Posted by basch152 View Post
    it amazes me that anyone could ever side with the owners in situations like these.

    for most owners, they literally do absolutely nothing, they pay people money to run the organization.

    the players in turn, are what people pay to see, and these owners make hundreds of millions of dollars, if not outright billions off their backs, again, while typically doing absolutely nothing.

    a professional sports team is basically just a way for a billionaire to print more billions of dollars without putting any actual work in
    because they didn't do any actual work in GETTING those billions?
    I get it, some did more than others, some were born into it....but they didn't get drafted into the billionaires club and if they did, where do I go to sign up?

    I realize the obvious differences here, but in the typical business, the owners hire people to do the work they need done in order to run their business and the employees agree to a wage scale to do that work. In this case, employees literally have contracts to follow as to what that entails and what they're paid for that work.

    What we don't know here is what the actual losses are for the owners and were they came up with 35%. If it were to come out they stand to lose 50% and are only asking to withhold 35%, does that change things? And again, they're not asking for 35% pay cuts, they're asking 35% be held out for the time being.
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    60,427
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    because they didn't do any actual work in GETTING those billions?
    I get it, some did more than others, some were born into it....but they didn't get drafted into the billionaires club and if they did, where do I go to sign up?

    I realize the obvious differences here, but in the typical business, the owners hire people to do the work they need done in order to run their business and the employees agree to a wage scale to do that work. In this case, employees literally have contracts to follow as to what that entails and what they're paid for that work.

    What we don't know here is what the actual losses are for the owners and were they came up with 35%. If it were to come out they stand to lose 50% and are only asking to withhold 35%, does that change things? And again, they're not asking for 35% pay cuts, they're asking 35% be held out for the time being.
    I think what gets forgotten in this is, yes people want to be paid, but the people "siding" with owners still understand that it's a business and can't bleed money and expect to still operate the same.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    [emoji288]
    Posts
    17,823
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    I think what gets forgotten in this is, yes people want to be paid, but the people "siding" with owners still understand that it's a business and can't bleed money and expect to still operate the same.
    You know how easy it is to get a loan as an NFL owner?

    Heck, some of them probably already received relief money from the federal government.

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •