It seems to me that having complete control of how you run your business (or as much as possible) is one of the primary reasons people have for running their own businesses. That means not having to justify every expense to your employees and getting into philosophical debates about why earning an 8% profit is okay but earning a 10% profit is unethical. I understand why the players want the books open, but I also see that as counter to what most any owner of most any business would want to do. I would guess that a substantial portion of business owners (even if everything they're doing is legit) would rather close up shop than have to justify how they run their business to anybody who isn't a partner.

 

As an owner they don't have to show their "books" to anyone, including their employee's.

The problem with this entire mess is that players want to act like "partners" and as such want all of the thingss a business partner is entitled to. However, they don't want to risk their own hard earned money on this partnership.

The owners, as well as the players, should be free to make as much money as they want. The owners have the right to offer payment for player services and the players have the right to refuse or negotiate that payment further. If neither are happy with the other then they can part ways.

 

Why aren't the players considered partners? Its their partnership that allows the owners to avoid being sued for their anti-competitive business practices.

And the expenses the owners need covered now are the expenses of building new stadiums. The taxpayer is no longer willing to do it, so the owners want the players to.

 

For the same reasons the guy pouring the fries into the grease down at the local McDonalds is not considered a partner. He hasn't risked any of his own money for the sake of the business.

 

Horrible analogy. You ignored the second sentence that put his question in context. The fry cook at McDonalds doesn't have to deal with a Draft, a salary cap, restricted free agency, etc... The only way the NFL is legal is as partnership and with a CBA.

 

No business can operate without their employees. However, without the owner there is no business.

 

Being a partner does not necessarily entail risking your own money. There are many different forms of partnership. In this case, they aren't risking their money, but they are essentially giving up some of the rights they have as Americans.

If this wasn't a partnership, the owners would just employ the players without a CBA. But they need the players to agree to it.

 

Non sequitur and I ignored nothing. I didn't bother to respond to the rest of his post not because I didn't read it, but I didn't feel like expalaining how a business runs.

There is most certainly a hiring process involved for McDonalds. It may differ from the hiring practices of the NFL, but then again, that fry person isn't making at least $250K per year.


You talk about the legality of the NFL as if the courts have decided, with certainity, about the CBA, anti-trust issues et. al. These types of debates have been going on for decades. However, the NFL, at this time, is 100% legal and unless you know something that the courts don't, it most likely will still be legal be in the near future.

 

lol...They are not giving up any of their rights as Americans.

 

Do you think a draft is legal? A salary cap? Why do you think the NFLPA is so eager to let this be handled in court?

 

How is a draft not legal? Of course it's legal.

Why is a salary cap not legal? As a business owner would you not be within your rights to decide how much you paid your employee's? I see what you're trying to do. You think that because (at this time) the courts consider the NFL 32 seperate businesses that they can't get together and decide what's best for their business, right?

 

What makes this illegal though?

The NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL etc. etc., are, due to their unique nature, bound by certain laws that other businesses aren't and are free to practice certain things that other businesses aren't. The courts have even said as much.

 

The courts have decided. I don't think you understand what they are arguing about now. The NFL is saying that it has the right to temporarily go out of business until a new CBA is negotiated, not that they can operate without one.

Look at your analogy. The fry cook would have had to be drafted by McDonalds, maybe he wanted to work at Wendy’s out of fry college, but he cannot because McDonalds drafted him. So he is stuck at McDonalds working as a fry cook, but he is the best fry cook ever! Now his contract is up, he can finally fulfill his childhood dream and go work for Wendy’s! Only, McDonalds doesn’t want him to, so they franchise tag him. Now he has to work for McDonalds or no one. His salary is set too. He cannot negotiate it for the season he is franchised. You really think any of that is legal with out a CBA?

 

LOL! You clearly have no idea what antitrust means. Yes, 32 seperate businesses cannot get together and fix prices, salaries, or any number of other things.

 

That's not a partnership. Generally a partnership entails the sharing of both profits and losses.

 

No, that is incorrect. MLB has an antitrust exemption. NFL does not. The only thing the NFL has special privileges for is in regards to TV contracts.

 

Thats false. Let me know when Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc. all get together to draft computer programmers.

32 businesses can't collude to arbitrarily restrain salaries. As a business owner, I would be within my rights to decide how much I pay. I would be breaking the law by getting together with other business owners and deciding we would all institute a cap accordingly.

 

What's really frustrating, is that its been explained over and over how the NFL is a completely different kind of business with completely different rules, and yet people want to keep applying the normal rules to them.

 

The NFLPA actually did dispute that.

$1 billion comes out to $31,250,000 per team. I’d presume just under half that pays for coaching staff salaries, with another big chunk going to the GM and personnel department (scouts and their traveling expenses, video editors, etc). Then you have hundreds of employees working at both the team facilities (office staff, doctors, medical trainers) and the stadium (concession contracts, maintenance and upkeep, groundskeepers, crew).

Considering the scale of operations, $31,250,000 is not a whole lot of money.

The owners did offer to open their books. The NFLPA claimed it wasn’t enough.

 

Is not a partnership at all, we have a bunch of guys that are drafted out of College ( which is legal ) and a 20 years old of age and are making 10,000,000 per year, expressing no gratitude for the opportunity given by business men, gambling their money. Sure the Owners are making money, is nothing wrong to make money and try to get back what has been invested. I'm still of the opinion that this super inflated players, ego maniacs, should go and work at McDonalds and see how much bargianing power they are going to have....at least would put them back to reality and see the real life in the right prospective....I'm disgusted by all this.

 

Well one reason is that they hired a trial lawyer to be their union head, as opposed to a former player who to my knowledge was never a lawyer. He was a good man, but I don't think he was a lawyer. Tagliabue was.

Lawyers tend to like court. I know what you're saying but thats probably not the best way to phrase it.

 

Most employees if not ALL employees at stadiums are not salaried by any football team. Many are employed by vendors who contact with the stadiums to do ALL events, not just football games. The football team gets a % of the sales from those events (could be just football but may be all events, depends on their contracts). They bare little if none of the costs of those vendors & their employees.

This one is one of the pure money makers for the owners, and everytime you pay $ 10 for a beer remember that.

 

Wow.....I'm incredulous at this post. But this is the mentality of the masses.

 

Tell that to Sparano...Partnership, schmartnership, just open the books already, level the playing field. If they're basing their stance on monetary purposes, why is it illogical to investigate the truth in this manner. It's not like any Joe couldn't google an athlete an instantly find out how much he makes.

I'm basing this logic on an old religious quote that says, "If you have lost wealth, you have lost little or nothing. If you have lost health, then you have lost something. If you have lost character, then you have lost everything." I just think the players should at least have the right to know that the owners are on the up and up.

 

I think you're the one who is confused.

Look, the player can decide who he wants to play for just like I can decide that I want to be an astronaut. Will either of those things happen? Probably not. So...who should I be mad at? The facts are, if a person wants to play for the NFL they must do so according to NFL rules. McDonalds and Wendys haven't decided to have a "draft". Why? Well, once more the unique nature of professional sports requires certain things to happen in order to stay competative. A draft, according to the NFL, is a great way to stay competative.

Working for the NFL is not a right, no matter what you may think.

 

Who said anything about anti-trust laws? I've already been over that, and I believe you were involved, and I was the one who informed most that the NFL doesn't have anti-trust laws like MLB. However, the NFL still has special privileges due to their unique nature. You just named one in this last post of yours.

 

lol..And yet everything that you say they can't do...they do. Looks like one of us is wrong and the proof says it's you.

Once more, even though the courts have deemed that the 32 teams are all seperate entities, the NFL is in fact, a franchise and those 32 teams are a part of that franchise. As a franchise they can decide to have a salary cap, draft, et. al. Kinda like how McDonalds, as a franchise, tells each individual restaurant how much they may or may not pay their employees, what foods they must serve, how they must serve it, and for what price they must charge for that food.

However, and once more, due to the unique nature of professional sports they get to run things a little differently in order to keep a competative nature because without this competative nature between teams there would be no NFL.

 

Exactly!

People try and attach the "monopoly" tag onto the NFL, but they couldn't be more wrong. The NFL is allowed to operate the way they do in order to keep a certain amount of parity between the teams. By definition the NFL is NOT a monoply.

 

What are you talking about?

The owners are the owners and the players are the employees. The employee (player) has certain rights, of course, but they don't get to dictate how an owner runs his business or how much money that owner is allowed to make or how much money that owner "needs" to pay their employee. Sure, the employee has the right to refuse an offer, and even negotiate, but their rights stop there in terms of the monetary aspects of the business.

In other words, it's none of their damn business how much the owners make. If the player doesn't want to play football for $5 million a season he doesn't have to play football. If the owner doesn't want to pay the player $5 mil per season he doesn't have to.

 

If I rent out one of my homes is it a "pure money maker"? lol...Of course not.

Without the OWNERS football team those vendors don't make money and the employees of that vendor don't make any money and on and on.

 

I think you are refusing to understand simple concepts on purpose. No matter what you think there is a right to work. Look it up if you like. I'm all together done trying to communicate with you. Good day.

Sent from my SGH-T959V using Tapatalk

 

They do it because the players let them. Once the players aren't complicit its a different story. Collusion between businesses is only illegal when it inhibits trade.

The court said the NFL is 32 separate business entities. Period.

 

The NFL has one special privilege, and thats the TV contracts. Thats it. Nothing more. The 32 teams are bound by the same laws, statutes, and rules as any other business in this country.