Leaderboard

It's still an estimate. Regardless of the veracity of the number, comparing a single year of profit to the price you'd have to pay to buy the team doesn't mean anything. At least not anything relevant to this discussion. (Even using $250M value, the actual % would be 1.79. For reference, MLB is 2.38%, NFL is 3.71%, and NBA is 1.48%. All that really means is that as a rule, sports teams are considered more valuable than what might be indicated by profitability.) Yearly profit (or actually, it's operating income, net profit would be less) has been around 5% of revenue. If you want to stick your fingers in your ears and close your eyes like a 5 year-old, that's your problem. Yes, the owners can and should pay every contract. That is what I, the PA, and others that support the PA have been saying all along. The problem is that the owners aren't willing to do that. They want to pay 50%, and make future players pay the difference. Players want the owners to pay the difference. You can say it "works", but that's just a word. Anything can "work" if the two sides agree to it. First off, the cap doesn't mean anything. The cap could be an octopus with a dollar sign in front of it and it wouldn't do anything but confuse people. What matters is the players' share. That is the amount of money that players actually get, regardless of what the cap numbers are, regardless of what contracts are...the players get the players' share. Let's try an example: Say we use an applicable % of 50%. Assume full season revenue of $3.4B. The players' share is $1.7B From that share, you subtract benefits; league is estimating $95M. That leaves $1.605B for player salaries. Current contracts are valued at $1.74B according to Capgeek, with most roster spots full. Capgeek shows around another $53M in potential bonuses. Fehr says player contracts are $1.776B. Seems close enough to use in an example. Using that we're left with $171M that someone has to pay. If the owners pay it, then for all practical purposes, the players' share is $1.871B, and the true % is ~55%. If we defer that payment instead... Move on to year two: Assume full season revenue of $3.57B. The players' share is $1.785B. If you use a part of that to pay the year 1 shortfall, the amount actually earned by the players that year is only $1.614B (since $171M was earned the prior year), which gives a true % of ~45.2%. If the owners pay out of pocket, then the share is $1.956B and the % is ~54.8%. And so on. It will never "even out". Either the owners pay more than 50%, or the players earn less. That is a mathematical fact. One or the other has to happen. The one and only possible way to avoid that is if revenues next year are $3.742B or more. Anything less and it is absolutely impossible to have a "true" 50/50 split, whether you go 2 years, or 5, or 500. Someone has to pay the difference. Neither side is willing to at this point. I, the PA, and those who support the PA, say the owners should pay it. You say the owners should pay, but either you don't really mean it or you don't know what you're talking about.

Observing the words in bold above, combined with other posts you made... I notice a general theme of class envy and jealousy towards those more successful than you. You should leave the class envy (bolded) out of your posts... it will lend your words more weight in the eyes of those not brainwashed into thinking success is a bad thing. The wealth of the owners (or players) is not the issue here...

Alot of us agree that they did very well this offseason despite missing out on the TOP free agents... I really wanted Suter and was neither here nor there with Parise....but oh well... Holland tired and made it pubically known that he tried for all the "top" targeted guys...Suter, Parise, Shultz...which in years past he either didn't try or didn't make it known that he tried...he would just say "we kicked the tires and liked what we had..." Well I said it before and I will say it again, he kicked the s*** out of those tires this year, I give him an A for trying... The guys he did get address thier needs, the guys they already had will play a huge role this season and for pete's sake we finally have no Hudler on this team!!!! Besides there is always the post lockout fire sale that may go on too...you never know who Franzen is gonna get us when that starts!

I felt the same way about Jimmy Devellano.

You don't have to read it if you don't like it. He has every right to be pissed so do the other players, usually both sides are signing contracts in good faith. Blindsiding people is the exact opposite... Sent from my BlackBerry

That's what he gets for choosing a not-so-good team for more money over a team that many hold in the highest regard.

He has been floating around Detroit

Translation: I agree with the players so they are right and should keep talking. esteef

Why are the owners wrong for not wanting 18 of their franchises to lose money? We can blame the owners of those teams for handing out huge stupid contracts (And I really do) but in the end it has to be fixed or the league will lose franchises which in turn equals less revenue, less jobs for players and no big TV conract. This is why this lock-out makes me so mad. The owners were stupid and the players are greedy and have lost touch with reality.