Team owners have a point

The team owners have a viable gripe on this one. The players don't have to pay for insurance, travel/room/board, stadiums, advertising, etc. But they collect 60% of the profit. I know they are the ones out on the field doing the work but they are getting payed millions of dollars for playing a GAME! The owners are the ones supplying the jobs. Maybe the players should think about this: If they didn't have an NFL career, what would they be doing? Washing cars, accounting, local sportscaster. I don't think they would be making millions of dollars a year with that B.A. in Communications.

The NFL (owners, commissioner) are very good businessmen. That is how most of them were able to afford an NFL team. If they say that the league is going to start going downhill because the players are taking too much out of the pot, then I would tend to believe them over a bunch of pampered athletes who are pretty much just in it for the money.

Solution: switch the earnings to 60% for the teams and 40% for the players, put a cap on rookie's salaries, and make the players pay back the money when they aren't playing for it.

Stadiums are funded by the public or the owner take the team to another town.

Without the players the owners have nothing.

Players play the game and give the public a product, OWNERS are just in it for the money.

Solution: If you don't like the profit your team has provided or you are unable to make a profit; sell your team and move on. There is a long line of people who will take your place.

You've spent too much time listening to the campus marxists tarheelguy124.  I'm sure most of us will be just fine with someone limiting our income because tarheelguy124 said we are rich enough.  No need to ask what the limit is, as tarheelguy124 will let you know.

Is there no tipping point where the workers actually abuse the employers, instead of the other way around?  This isn't a steelworker union with average 50K salaries against a multi billion corp that exploits them.  I'll save my outrage for real abuse. 

GOBYU  --

just playing devils advocate here, but you mention the players are getting paid millions to play a GAME and the owners are the ones supplying the JOBS.

arent you talking about the same position?  If the owners supply a job then players are being paid for a job right?

we can all argue semantics until we are blue in the face... but since everyone is giving an opinion, i'll jump right in.

why not base all salaries for athletes that have been in the league for three years or less on performance. develop a minimum salary based on position and how attained (whether it be draft order, undrafted free agent or trade). 

the salary will be increased based on games/downs played and statistics. Obviously offensive and defensive lineman should receive more for games/downs played because they are not likely to get the ball for incentives based on stats.

once established as a player that will be around for a while and not just another overpayed bust...then get in line after year 3 and see if a team wants to fork over a big money deal.

either that or keep the 60/40 scale, just make it after net earnings and not gross. that way the Bills get paid and the players are still getting rich. they like to make the argument that their salaries aren't guranteed, but here recently, neither is their skill level or production.

 Stadiums are funded by the public or the owner take the team to another town.

Not all stadiums or the full amounts. Just ask Jerry Jones how much his new stadium cost him.

Without the players the owners have nothing.

And visa versa. Without the owners supplying the job, most of those players would be working construction, desk jobs, or selling crack. And not making $110k's or millions (except the crack dealers).

Players play the game and give the public a product, OWNERS are just in it for the money.

If you believe the players are playing pro football because they love the sport then T.O. has some land in Florida he would like to sell you.

Solution: If you don't like the profit your team has provided or you are unable to make a profit; sell your team and move on. There is a long line of people who will take your place.

I believe they all should and are making lots of money. More than I will ever see. But the owners are in pro football to make money. That is their business. If they just love football they can watch it for free or buy tickets to games. Someone else said to leave it a 60/40 split but after the expenses have been taken out for running the team. I agree. See how much the salaries of players will drop if they only get a portion of the profit and not the gross income.

gobyu

If you want anybody to embrace your point then give an example like giving back 33.3% of what you make to the owner where you work. I dare you to practice what you preach.