Why nfl lockout

Collective bargaining is aimed at reaching agreements that regulate working and contract conditions, and it usually sets out wage scales, working hours, training, health and safety, overtime, grievance mechanisms and rights to participate in team or NFL affairs. After the agreement is satisfactory to the parties involved, they often refer to the result of the negotiation as a collective bargaining agreement CBA.

The current CBA, initially negotiated in , has been extended on several occasions, most recently in March It all boils down to the root of all evil—money. That being said this is where it starts getting confusing. It all started back in when the football franchise owners accepted the CBA.

Tagliabue was just about done serving his time after 17 years. At the time, the league's top owners such as Jerry Jones, were in the middle of expensive stadium plans. A work stoppage would have put a stop to building and stadium improvement, and Tagliabue knew the owners would strongly reject the notion of any kind of work stoppage.

The problem is though, some teams make more than others, and some have very favorable stadium deals that require less money from the owners for expenditures. On the other side of the coin, you have teams like the Dallas Cowboys, who took out massive loans for new and renovated stadiums, thus driving the overhead and expenditures up.

This benefits teams like the Cincinnati Bengals because they are making more of a profit since their overhead and expenditures are considerably lower. Some of the lower 17 earning teams keep revenues down intentionally to ensure they'll receive money from the top teams under the current system.

The money they receive from revenue sharing makes them more profitable than some of the top 15 teams. Team owners in the top 15 want the new CBA to account for the high-risk investments, such as forking over hundreds of millions of dollars for new stadiums and other cap expenditures. In simpler terms, team owners that spend the money on new stadiums or improve existing facilities want some of it back.

It's been publicly stated that the cut would be around 18 percent overall. This increase is because the franchise owners claim that it compensates them in a more realistic economic era we are in.

They claim stadiums were partly or wholly subsidized by taxpayers years ago, which was considered normal at the time. In fact Major League Baseball had such a hard time regaining fans after the season that some think that steroid use did not get the attention it should have had, because it fueled the home run surge that brought fans back to the stadiums.

So there can be risks to the sports product down this path. How substantial are the concessions the players and owners are arguing over? Do they really make a big difference in the overall financial scheme of things? The NFL is a big business, and the last collective bargaining agreement provided for a division of the revenue pie between owners and players. But the pie has grown a lot in the past few years, and the sides are arguing over how it should now be split.

Should the same percent division continue to apply? Should the owners get fair compensation and the rest go to the players? Or should the owners get somewhat more in order to fund stadium and other improvements? What is your take on the NFL Players Association becoming a trade association and no longer identifying itself as a union? This is the case that will be heard early next month in Minnesota.

Interestingly, the Players Association did pretty much the same thing in The NFL and the NFLPA have generally agreed to shorten the maximum length of rookie contracts to four years for a first- to third-round pick and three years for a fourth- to seventh.

Now, as a fan, this whole labor dispute may seem boring you as you are probably not well-versed in labor law. You may be thinking: How does an offseason lockout actually affect your favorite team and your favorite players?

The answer is An offseason lockout will have no real effect until the free-agency period begins, where it will stop teams from signing free agents. The only issue with an offseason lockout is the fear of what it may lead to: the lack of an NFL season in But as we near the end of the current CBA , there are warning signs the next round of negotiations in will be just as heated, as they should be.

I was old enough — entering my fourth season — to remember and most importantly, understand it all. We are now nearing the time for a new round of bargaining. In order for players to get more, the owners need to give more to them, either in the form of dollars, benefits, or possibly more control of player punishment.

The leverage players have in the next round of negotiations is the same as always: sitting out games. Plain and simple. If they lose money, players gain leverage.

Money is also the issue with sitting out games. Just as owners lose money, so do the players. Rightfully so, owners believe they can outlast the players, at least early on, if no money is being made on either side.