|
|
Post by pikemojo on Sept 27, 2012 23:35:30 GMT -5
Just a little For The Record here:
I am not in favor of the referees' union or any billionaire owner who is receiving free stadiums or tax breaks because the team supposedly bring money to a market (or any players union for that matter but that doesn't really matter here).
No one deserves a handout - billionaire or otherwise. No one is irreplaceable. No one should need a collective unit to represent them. Man up and represent yourself. I am self employed now but when I had a boss and either one of us had a problem with the other we talked (or yelled) it out like men. Now, I was working for a dysfunctional company (probably not often a good idea to get in yelling matches with your boss) but my point remains. If someone asks you why you deserve more money YOU should be able to back it up with facts not "I have been here X years and all of my buddies will strike if you don't give me a raise". And if your boss doesn't pay you what you feel you deserve, you can go elsewhere. Just like I did.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Sept 27, 2012 23:48:26 GMT -5
On the other hand, with the new TV deals just signed in effect for 2013, the NFL doubled its broadcast rights fees (nearly doubled--from $20.4 billion to $39.6 billion).
That's for CBS, NBC, FOX, and ESPN game broadcasts only. That number isn't accounting any other revenue stream (online, merch, etc.) or ticket sales. Those are all doubtlessly big moneymakers as well. In the past 7 years, the player salary cap (which is tied directly to league revenues) has increased from about $80 million per team to over $120 million.
The objective facts are, the NFL is a high-demand product and one generally believed to be of high quality. The league's skyrocketing revenues bear that out. If the officials are a major factor in the quality of product being what it is--and the vast majority consensus after 3 weeks of replacement officiating is that they are--then don't the officials deserve a fair piece of the new, larger pie?
If there were no referees' association or unions, and thus no collective bargaining, then the independent contractors would be free to negotiate with the teams individually to work their games. The NFL would be in violation of anti-trust and interstate commerce laws and regulations otherwise. The draft, the salary cap, OTAs, training camp, and myriad other aspects of the game that are taken for granted would all be out the window.
Some might argue that the loss of those aspects would be a good thing, or at least not a bad thing. Still, the NFL is not a free market, private sector enterprise. It is a communist entity, given anti-trust exemptions by Congress, where revenue is shared and its workers (players & officials) are restricted to where and when they can work. So if there is any type of business in need of a union for its employees, it is most definitely the professional sports world.
|
|
|
|
Post by pikemojo on Sept 28, 2012 8:42:54 GMT -5
Well certainly the NCAA would be happy to have an NFL level ref if their own refs are so bad. I imagine they could also go to Canada. The NFL isn't a monopoly. Anyone is free to start up their own professional football league as evidenced by the XFL, Arena Football League, etc.
I appreciate what you are saying though. By choosing to work with the NFL you know that you are pretty well limited in what your future option are outside of the NFL. But you already know that going into it. That is no secret. Doesn't mean they should rake you over the coals but it also means that you are going to pretty much have to abide by their rules.
Here is my deal, if the cities/states stop giving money/stadiums to the owners, the owners will not be able to pay the players as much and everything should temper down a bit. Not that the NFL will be in any less demand but we won't be over inflating what it is truly worth.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Sept 28, 2012 17:57:19 GMT -5
Doesn't mean they should rake you over the coals Without unions in this case, that's exactly what would happen. |
|
|
|
Post by swarm on Sept 29, 2012 8:11:00 GMT -5
Doesn't mean they should rake you over the coals Without unions in this case, that's exactly what would happen. Based on what? |
|
