Owners' vote sets up possibility of lockout in 2011

By Lee Rasizer, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Matt McClain/Rocky Mountain News

Foxworth says "real numbers" are the key.

Here come the labor pains.

In a unanimous vote Tuesday, NFL owners opted out of the current collective-bargaining agreement, setting up a potential lockout scenario in 2011.

The league had until November but expedited the process.

"The agreement isn't working," NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said in Atlanta at the spring owners meetings, where the vote was held. "And we're looking to get a more fair and equitable deal."

The announcement was expected. There was grumbling even immediately after averting a work stoppage two years ago that the CBA was too heavily weighted toward the players' side.

For months, the union has been bracing its players for the possibility of labor unrest, while the Broncos and other teams are scrutinizing contract negotiations more closely. The current scenario impacts prorations and incentives in future deals.

"You just have to understand we're playing under a new rule book," Broncos assistant general manager Jeff Goodman said.

While three years of games are guaranteed before a potential lockout, the possibility of a season without a salary cap in 2010 might be a more realistic target date for forging a new agreement.

Union head Gene Upshaw has stated publicly multiple times there will be no turning back if the financial handcuffs are removed.

"March of 2010, that's what we see as the realistic deadline," Upshaw said Tuesday.

High labor costs, issues with a rookie pool that inordinately rewards unproven players and the league's inability through the court system to recoup money from players who breach their contracts or don't perform appear to be at the heart of the NFL's dissatisfaction.

Players received between 59 percent and 60 percent of league revenues, or $4.5 billion last season, according to NFL ownership. Some owners have claimed they are losing money, but league revenues aren't completely known. Only the Green Bay Packers publicly disclose figures.

"What's important is we look at the real numbers," said Broncos cornerback Domonique Foxworth, a member of the NFLPA's executive board. "I know we've talked about getting a real audit from each team. If they're going to opt out, we need to know. We don't want them losing money like hockey was a few years ago. So if they can prove they're losing money, then we would look at it.

"But if you look at the history of the league, the values of the teams have gone up hundreds of millions of dollars in the last 10 years. While I can't look at their books, I still find it hard to believe that they're in dire straits, financially."

Even Goodell admits that, while there's time to work out a new deal, it will be surprising if things don't reach critical mass before anything comes to pass.

Broncos owner Pat Bowlen is the head of the negotiating committee for his peers.

Said Foxworth: "The most important thing is nobody benefits from not having a season, so I think that, in time, we'll find a way to make it happen."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

• May 20, 2008

  11:54 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  MileHigh_in_TO writes:

  All I want from all this is a rookie cap! 30 mill guaranteed when you haven't played a down is ridiculous! Cap means no holdouts either...

• May 20, 2008

  1:26 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  sorensen_sykes writes:

  I'm just getting tired of the players union saying that "how can we survive only making 5 million a year" and worst yet the owners saying "oh man, the pendulum has swung to the players, how are we supposed to make it now that the economy has slowed" They only make hundreds of millions of dollars. The only effect that these players or owners are feeling from the downward trend of the economy is that they have to pay more insurance premium on their new corvettes or their 30 million dollar mansions. If all these ads they run are for real that they are here for the kids, then why don't both sides man up and start putting 30% of their revenue that they both keep fighting over to good use.....for instance.....oh i don't know...... THE STARVING CHILDREN OF THE UNITED STATES, or War Veterans that because of them they are able to play football for money. To all the players that are out there doing illegal activities, how about you really do appreciate the opportunity for making millions playing football and not out of the street fighting for you life. I think there should be a one strike and your out, think about it, if you are I were caught doing heroin, or cocaine, or smoking pot, do you think we would be suspended four games and then let to go back to our lifes? That is ridiculous, we would be in prison for 10-20 years, we would have a felony judged against us and we would never work a good job ever again. Now the players are griping about not making what they are worth and the owners are saying that they are struggling in the economy......THINK ABOUT IT!!!!!!!!

• May 20, 2008

  3:24 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  ghostmaes writes:

  sorensen sykes- you're not really a football fan are you? Plus you don't seem like you ever studied economics. Also, and most sadly, you don't know anything about labor.
  So the real question is- why post a comment on a group of subjects you know nothing about?

• May 20, 2008

  3:39 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  ghostmaes writes:

  Now to the real business.
  The NFL pie seems to be sliced 60/40 towards the owners. Yet, it was the owners who opted out early. What is their intention? Are they angling for that non-capped year?
  The Dallas Cowboys would love to be the NY Yankees of the NFL in 2010 and buy a Super Bowl win.
  But, are the other 31 owners going to let Jerry Jones do that?
  Is this an experiment to get rid of the salary cap?
  That would hurt cities like Jacksonville and of course Green Bay.
  But, would give some owners a perfect reason to move to LA.
  What are the owners really going for by opting out? Like Upshaw said, "Greed".