Let Us Play! (Superbowl Ad)

[Bmore]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jl9BpUgYljQ[/ame]

NFLPA's Commercial to appear during the Superbowl.


Comments?​

 

[tigstah]

this is bad. when you have to resort to this, i have a feeling we wont be seeing football this fall. if so, with replacement players (again). hey on the flip side, the skins won the superbowl the last time.....so...hmmmmm

 

[Bmore]

I'm waiting for the NFL's reply :smug:

 

[packersfan4eva]

They better have the NFL next year is all I know...I don't wanna have to watch the UFL

 

[steeljake]

this whole thing is about the owners garbbing for money. the players are doing this cuz they know they will have to just give in to what jerry jones wants anyways. the public doesnt give a fuck, they (we) just want to see football.

 

[Maize]

No NFL next year, I'll make sure to run a few UFL fantasy leagues. This commercial shows me there is a pretty realistic chance there won't be a full season.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

As in just about every labor dispute, fuck the labor side.

The owners are only seeing $.40 of every dollar the league brings in. That's criminal. Players need to give back. And if they don't want to play 18 games, nobody is forcing them. Go use those fancy college degrees from upstanding institutions like Miami and LSU and go get jobs.

 

[SuperKevin]

Zak DeOssie should use his Ivy League education instead of resorting to commercials like this

 

[Raidersabc123]

LeBron James method

 

[ram29jackson]

the ad's a joke anyway because the stadiums wont be empty. They will have replacement games.

 

[Rayman]

No way in hell this runs during the Super Bowl.

 

[Rush]

My understanding is they have a fuck load of money coming in. It's either the owners are going to be richer faggots or the players will be richer faggots.

Either way we're all still working 9-5 jobs and looking forward to that 1 day where football is on.

Is that right?

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

the ad's a joke anyway because the stadiums wont be empty. They will have replacement games.

Not a chance. That was an utter disaster the last time they tried that, and that was almost 25 years ago. It would be an even bigger disaster now, in a far more fickle internet/blog based society that thrives on instant gratification, short attention spans, and non-stop complaining about shit. Replacement games would get shit on and fail miserably.

 

[killgod]

Not a chance. That was an utter disaster the last time they tried that, and that was almost 25 years ago. It would be an even bigger disaster now, in a far more fickle internet/blog based society that thrives on instant gratification, short attention spans, and non-stop complaining about shit. Replacement games would get shit on and fail miserably.

Aye, they would likely give the players union additional leverage so I don't see the owners allowing this.

 

[Senser81]

The commercial reminds me of that other super-lame football related commercial where a young Jimmy Clausen and his dad are trying to go to a football game but they see the game is sold out...but the dad luckily downloaded tickets to his phone! This is important, because when the young Jimmy Clausen is at the game, the real QB tosses the ball to young Jimmy in the crowd, which inspires young Jimmy to become a real QB himself!

Great stuff!

 

[Rayman]

The commercial reminds me of that other super-lame football related commercial where a young Jimmy Clausen and his dad are trying to go to a football game but they see the game is sold out...but the dad luckily downloaded tickets to his phone! This is important, because when the young Jimmy Clausen is at the game, the real QB tosses the ball to young Jimmy in the crowd, which inspires young Jimmy to become a real QB himself!

Great stuff!

Is that who it was supposed to be?

meh.

 

[Senser81]

Is that who it was supposed to be?

meh.

Don't know but who else could it be? What other person could be so lame? Tate Forcier?

 

[Blade]

So how much money is that 30 sec costing the NFLPA? Or are they allowed to air it for free........cuz well they coulda used that money to help the retired players medical bills.

 

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

As in just about every labor dispute, fuck the labor side.

The owners are only seeing $.40 of every dollar the league brings in. That's criminal. Players need to give back. And if they don't want to play 18 games, nobody is forcing them. Go use those fancy college degrees from upstanding institutions like Miami and LSU and go get jobs.

As in most labor disputes Ownership is full of shit and will spin what they can to fatten there already swollen wallets.

The NFL's current proposal would keep the player's percentage of Total Revenue at 58%, but importantly, it would reduce the amount of money that is included in the definition of TR by 18%, to allow for certain additional expense deductions. These additional expenses would be on top of the already existing $1.0 billion in expense deductions. If the 18% expense deduction were applied to the 2008 league year revenue, it would result in an additional expense credit of more than $1.3 billion. The obvious effect of this 18% expense deduction is that the players would get the same percentage of a much smaller revenue pie. Instead of each dollar of Total Revenue being included in the cap calculation, only 82 cents of each Total Revenue dollar would be included. That translates into an 18% reduction in the total amount of money included in the cap.

Expressed another way, the NFL owners are asking that the players reduce their percentage of TR, as it is currently defined, from 58% to 47.56% of TR. This lowering of the cap by 10.44 points represents an 18% reduction in the applicable percentage. Expressed in dollars, a cap of $116 million per club as calculated under the existing definition of TR, would be reduced to $95.12 million under the NFL's proposal. Thus, if the impact of the proposal were to be spread evenly over all player salaries and benefits across the league, each player would have to take a cut of 18% in salary and benefits.

You would have to turn back the clock to the early 1980's, in the days before free agency, to find a season in which the players' share of football revenue was as low as that being proposed by the NFL owners for 2010 and beyond.

Ownership wants to increase season length for no reason other than there colossal failure at trying to sell "pre season" games as normal games.

They refused to have any backbone and bent to the will of every agent representing a first round pick. Now they are crying foul at rookie salaries they had entire control over.

Ownership in the NFL requires the knowledge of a walnut.
You are not going to be the Owner or President of Google , Apple , Coke etc and get by for decades making money hand over fist with absolutely no input or knowledge of your product. In the NFL it happens all the time.

Theres little investment in your facilities as most stadiums are subsidized to the point little or no ownership money is actually risked.
Profit is essentially guaranteed every year.

Only one team(publicly owned packers) has ever opened up there books for scrutiny or auditing to back up there claims.

I could be wrong but no owner has ever lost money on a sale of his franchise.

Despite a recession revenue still rose for all teams and profits for many.

Franchises who are now claiming to be "for the fans" are still charging upwards of 20,000$ for personal seat licenses , and charging regular season prices for preseason games.

Noones forcing you to buy a franchise. Sell and use the money for oil rigs if business is so bad.


No reason the NFL owners cant get that percentage tweaked and have a NFL Rookie salary cap implemented. NONE. Deal would have been done ages ago.
But thats not enough. Ownership wants to squeeze every last dollar out of its workforce and customer base.
Profits>Product.

Thats what happens when ownership doesnt have a clue.
Thats what happens when you have a commissioner with no vision other than $$.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Unless you or I are privy to what these expense reductions consist of, it's impossible to comment.

I'll never begrudge a business owner for trying to make more money. That's the point of being in business. And the commissioner works for the owners, so of course his M.O. will and always will be to increase profits.

PSL's cost $20k and upwards for two reasons. Number one, people are willing to pay, because aside from Jacksonville, SD, and TB, the stadiums are full and have massive waiting lists. Number two, is the owners are being raped by the players to the tune of 60% of all revenue.

And the 18 game season benefits everyone with league interests. The owners win, the players union gets extra roster spots plus the potential of extra game checks, bar owners get two extra Sunday's, fans get two more Sunday's, the networks win, everyone wins.