NFL Players preparing for a lockout

[sharpe1027]

Whoa.

This sentence stood out to me - the casual observer.

Note: The actual dollar amount of the Salary Cap can not be less than the actual dollar amount of any Salary Cap for the preceding year.

So if we had an even worse economy, perhaps even depression-like and the NFL revenue took a huge dive, the salary cap can never go down? I assume this is all up for debate with having to create a new CBA - but still. Doesn't this kind of tie the hands of the NFL regarding players salaries?

Not quite, there is still a limit:
"The Projected Benefits, plus the amount of the Salary Cap multiplied by the number of Teams in the NFL, can not exceed 61.68% of Projected Total Revenues."

[MichiganPackerFan]

I with ya. Unless you're an accountant

Did I reveal myself a bit too much as a CPA there?!

Good info on the cap calculation. I would like to see them use a bit more of their excess on veteran benefits. Those guys played for peanuts, have the long-term health results and aren’t being covered like they should be.

[vince]

The individual players get the majority of the licensing revenues - outside of the salary cap structure, so it looks like everyone is at least half right.

http://www.nflplayers.com/user/template.aspx?fmid=182&lmid=355&pid=0&type=n

Licensees

Apparel Overview

The Apparel Department manages licensing programs and relationships in the apparel category and several other areas. Adidas Sports Licensing Division, doing business as Reebok, is NFL PLAYERS’ foremost partner for licensed apparel. Although their core product is player jerseys, they also produce tees, headwear and fleeces utilizing players’ names, numbers and/or images. NFL PLAYERS also licenses several customizers to decorate blank jerseys with player names and numbers, including GSI/NFL Shop. The Dallas Cowboys have a separate license for their licensed player apparel, and VF Imagewear is licensed for women’s product distributed in the mid and mass retail segment.

The department also oversees the licensing and marketing for Fathead, LLC. Fathead produces oversized wall decals and smaller tradable product portraying images of both active and retired players. Also included in this department is business to business photography and on-line print-on-demand licensing programs.

Most player licensed apparel as well as all Fathead product portrays individual players. For such merchandise, players receive the majority of royalties earned on the sale of their particular product, also known as premium royalties. This model allows players to receive an equitable royalty share from sales driven by their popularity and strength in the marketplace, as well as an equal share portion from other products.

[CaptainKickass]

Whoa.

This sentence stood out to me - the casual observer.

Note: The actual dollar amount of the Salary Cap can not be less than the actual dollar amount of any Salary Cap for the preceding year.

So if we had an even worse economy, perhaps even depression-like and the NFL revenue took a huge dive, the salary cap can never go down? I assume this is all up for debate with having to create a new CBA - but still. Doesn't this kind of tie the hands of the NFL regarding players salaries?

Not quite, there is still a limit:
"The Projected Benefits, plus the amount of the Salary Cap multiplied by the number of Teams in the NFL, can not exceed 61.68% of Projected Total Revenues."

Yeah - I saw that too. And it seems like they contradict each other. Or at least the possibility exists that 61.68% could be less than the cap the previous year.

Lemme simplify the question:

If "61.68% of Projected Total Revenues MAN"
gets into a bar fight with:
"Cannot be less than the actual dollar amount of any Salary Cap for the preceding year MAN"

Who wins?


.

[sharpe1027]

Yeah - I saw that too. And it seems like they contradict each other. Or at least the possibility exists that 61.68% could be less than the cap the previous year.

Lemme simplify the question:

If "61.68% of Projected Total Revenues MAN"
gets into a bar fight with:
"Cannot be less than the actual dollar amount of any Salary Cap for the preceding year MAN"

Who wins?
.

I read it as the base percentage determines the salary cap, however this percentage cannot be used as a basis to lower the cap. However, in no case can the cap ever exceed the 61.68%.

61.68% man wins, if the fight ever gets to him.

[vince]

I with ya. Unless you're an accountant

Did I reveal myself a bit too much as a CPA there?!

Good info on the cap calculation. I would like to see them use a bit more of their excess on veteran benefits. Those guys played for peanuts, have the long-term health results and aren’t being covered like they should be.

Yeah MPF, you have my sympathy. I asked for it, and you delivered... I hope you weren't offended by that comment, as I certainly didn't intend any offense to bean counters... In the same spirit, here's a video for you...
Monty Python - Accountant wants to become a lion tamer.

[CaptainKickass]

Yeah - I saw that too. And it seems like they contradict each other. Or at least the possibility exists that 61.68% could be less than the cap the previous year.

Lemme simplify the question:

If "61.68% of Projected Total Revenues MAN"
gets into a bar fight with:
"Cannot be less than the actual dollar amount of any Salary Cap for the preceding year MAN"

Who wins?
.

I read it as the base percentage determines the salary cap, however this percentage cannot be used as a basis to lower the cap. However, in no case can the cap ever exceed the 61.68%.

61.68% man wins, if the fight ever gets to him.

Thanks - you really are sharp (Sharpe?). Living up to your pronounciation is nothing to be ashamed of.

[MichiganPackerFan]

Yeah MPF, you have my sympathy. I asked for it, and you delivered... I hope you weren't offended by that comment, as I certainly didn't intend any offense to bean counters...

Not in the least! I'll check the link when I'm not at risk of lurking bosses on a Friday afternoon.