NFLPA President Kevin Mawae Admits 49ers Offered Him A Contract Last August

You can't compare it to an "everyday business." The NFL is a partnership between the owners and NFLPA. If you are working at McDonald's or Burger King or on a construction site, they aren't sharing the revenue. They are paying you whatever they want (within reason...sometimes not.)

If the owners are paying themselves $5M a year, then paying their wife, kids, nephews, putting money into other businesses, company cars for the family...that's foolishly...that all needs to be added into the bottom line profits to get the true profitability of the team.

 

Both sides are wrong in one way or another...bottom line, they all have to man up and get the crap straightened out...

 

Agreed, I just support the Players more than the Owners this time around.

 

where did i say owners are 'losing' money .......... ? I said they aren't making as much NET PROFIT as their investments justify. It's simple Business 101. If I invest $800 million in a business opportunity which is at its' peak popularity, I expect a roi that will pay me back for that investment in a rather short period of time. The reason I expect a rapid roi on that investment is due to the inherent risk in this type of investment. The overall value of the investment could decline (which is happening with many franchises right now) or the annual profitability could disappear completely and I could end up losing money each year just to keep paying my employees.

 

Their "NET PROFITS" could be skewed big time depending on how the money is being spent. How the money is being used to pay the owners and "employees." Any money that may be going towards other businesses the owners have. It's the main reason why the owners need to open the books.

Again...this was the major problem with the Eagles in the 90's during the Reggie White "saga." The Eagles "profits" were skewed because Braman was paying himself $5M a year.

 

there is no doubt the owners may be 'cooking' the books by moving money around to other businesses. However, I have no problem with an owner paying himself WAY MORE than the highest paid player on his team (in many cases, that player is now making $15-$20 mill/yr) AND for him to expect a lot of profits to be leftover to either invest back into the organization or to build up reserves in case of a business/economic collapse..... and if the owner is 'hiding' that reserve money in another business, then more power to him. There may be tax advantages to doing it.

What happens if FOX and CBS go bankrupt at the same time in a bad economy and stop making payments to the league? The owners are still on the hook for all of the salaries, debt payments, rent, etc. The owners SHOULD have a few hundred million in liquid assets built up with extra team profits to cover that.

 

They can pay themselves what ever they want, but that has to be added into the profits of the team. Which is a good bet that it's not being added into the profits some teams submit. There's a lot more that needs to be added on as well.

No where does it say the players have to make concessions and take less money b/c the current deal ended. They have no obligation to do anything but say they are happy with the current deal.

The owners are trying to make players believe they are telling the truth. Why would they blindly accept a deal? That's just dumb business.

 

and lest we forget that when times are good, many sports franchise owners buy these sports teams for a hobby/toy and don't look to make a lot off of it because they're making money in their regular businesses. In fact, many owners actually prop up their sports franchise with money they make in their regular businesses. However, since the economy has been so poor for a while now, these owners may not be making as much in their regular businesses so they are looking to make a better profit with their nfl team (treating them more like a 'business').

 

...and the money they're taking from the NFL team and dumping into their other businesses...profitability that possibly isn't being accounted for.

 

eh, it could possibly be going that way but it also goes the other way sometimes.

and, I win the debate because I used the word 'lest' ........... boom, roasted