Jump to content

RedRamage

HOF players want Salary, Health Care... threaten boycott of HOF ceremonies.

Recommended Posts

https://www.mlive.com/sports/2018/09/hall_of_famers_still_want_to_b.html

Members of the Pro Football Hall of Fame are threatening to skip future induction ceremonies if they're not paid an annual salary by the NFL, and provided health insurance.

More details as well as the actual letter sent to the NFL at the link above.  Basically they are saying that the reason the NFL is so popular and wealthy right now is because of what they did in the past and they should get compensated for it.

On one hand, I sorta get it... a number of them didn't get nearly what even the veteran minimum is right now.  But this is true for just about every industry, isn't it?  I mean, if I worked for a company that became wildly successful *after* I left, should I be compensated after the fact?  Should someone who worked on the very first iPhone and then retired be given an annual salary because the iPhone is just hugely popular and making Apple oodles of money now?

Health coverage is a different story... I'm more of in favor of the NFL giving discounted coverage, based on years in the NFL, due to the damage it does to a player's body... but I'd argue all players should get this, not just HOFers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NFL makes money off of these HOFers via a variety of means, and I think it's fair they receive a piece of the pie if they don't already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Euphdude said:

The NFL makes money off of these HOFers via a variety of means, and I think it's fair they receive a piece of the pie if they don't already.

How much do they really make off a HOF player?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RedRamage said:

How much do they really make off a HOF player?

I don't know.  I do know the NFL uses HOF players to generate revenue though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Euphdude said:

I don't know.  I do know the NFL uses HOF players to generate revenue though.

How so?  I mean what does the NFL do to cash in on them?  The only time I can think of when a HOF player is used is for things like HOF ceremonies or maybe some pre-game things.  None of which I think are activities that generate huge money for the NFL.  Am I missing something else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RedRamage said:

How so?  I mean what does the NFL do to cash in on them?  The only time I can think of when a HOF player is used is for things like HOF ceremonies or maybe some pre-game things.  None of which I think are activities that generate huge money for the NFL.  Am I missing something else?

Jersey sales, player likeness in video games, the HOF itself all come to mind initially.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Euphdude said:

Jersey sales, player likeness in video games, the HOF itself all come to mind initially.

I don't think Jersey sales would be significantly higher for a HOF vs. non-HOF player...  It's the popularity of the player, which is usually based on skill, which often means they are in the HOF, but being HOF vs. non-HOF isn't going to see a radical jump in sales in my humble opinion... at least not for an extended period of time.  Maybe a year or two surrounding the enshrinement at best.

Likeness' in Video Games?  I really doubt there is anyone who is going to be more inclined to buy a Video game because it does vs. doesn't have a HOF player likeness in it.  

You buying the new Madden 2019? Heck no!  Earl Campbell isn't in it. I'm no shelling out my hard earned money for an Earl Campbell-less game!

The HOF itself is probably the biggest one that depends on the HOF players themselves.  But the question I'd have is how much does the hall actually make?  Is it that big of a profit center?  I supposed if so, then yeah... the HOFers probably deserve a portion of that, but I suspect it'd be a very small amount of money even if ALL profit from the hall if given to the players, then split equally among all living players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Games where a player's number is retired generate extra ticket sales in many instances.

Aren't most games in the NFL sell outs?  I supposed there's some level of extra sales, but I wouldn't expect this to be huge.  Nor would I expect to see the profits from extra ticket sales being enough to sustain a "salary" for even one player, let alone all the HOF players.

Plus, not every HOFer gets their number retired as the NFL discourages retiring numbers in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Biggs and I presented some arguments why HOFers should receive income when they are used to generate revenue.  I presume you're against it RedRamage, although it's not clear to me if you're being argumentative for the sake of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Euphdude said:

Biggs and I presented some arguments why HOFers should receive income when they are used to generate revenue.  I presume you're against it RedRamage, although it's not clear to me if you're being argumentative for the sake of it.

Probably somewhat being argumentative cause I do enjoy a good debate, but honestly too... I just don't think the league is making significant money off them as HOFers.  Is it making some?  Yeah, you could probably say that.  But I'd be pretty surprised if actual profit from HOFers is more than 100K per year.  

Looking at the numbers in the letter sent to the NFL it appears they are estimating <4 million to cover health insurance for the players, or about 3 cents for every $100 in league revenue.  Later they say paying HOFers would amount to 40 cents for every $100, which (if I'm doing my math right) means paying this annual salary would cost more than 50 million.  Do you think the league is making 50 million in profit over HOFers every year?

I guess the thing that feels off to me on this is the feeling that HOFers were probably the better paid players at their positions in the years that they played, and I don't think the league is making significantly, if any, more off them than non-HOF players.  They talk in the letter about how they helped make the NFL what it is today, and there's truth there, but so did the non-HOF players, and these are guys who probably need the money much more then the HOFers, yet it's strictly HOFers who would get the insurance and who would get the salary.

I'd honestly have less of a problem with this is the HOFers were making a stand to get ALL players a pension and/or insurance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd guess part of the calculus is the same HoF made the league as popular as it is.  They have created surplus value far greater than their aggregate career earnings. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NFL pensions kick in at 55, since they’re in  the HOF they are definitely vested. The Players Association also has an agreement with the teams for a 401K plan for players with an employer match. There are some health care benefits for retirees as well, but then they don’t probably kick in until 55 or later as well.

This is the best summery I can find

https://jeffnixonreport.wordpress.com/2013/04/23/nfl-player-salaries-and-benefits-under-the-cba/comment-page-1/#comments

I’m thinking they might want some sort of appearance fee and a cut of jersey and other items related to the HOF??

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

I'd guess part of the calculus is the same HoF made the league as popular as it is.  They have created surplus value far greater than their aggregate career earnings. 

Okay, but that goes back to my earlier comment.  If one of the lead engineers on the original iPhone leaves Apple, should s/he get a salary from Apple above and beyond what salary s/he received while employed because the iPhone has become wildly successful?

That's not a perfect analogy of course... there are definite differences, but it feels like an employee agreeing to work for a given salary, then years later going back to the company and saying:

"Wait a minute, you ended up being REALLY successful, and you got that way in part because of me... so I DEMAND that you give me salary now... for as long as I live.  I know I agreed to work for the money I did but and you gave me that money, but now I think I deserve more."  That just seems silly to me.

I mean think of the reserve situation... what if the NFL ended up NOT doing as well.  What if the bottom dropped out of the sports business.  Would anyone think there would be any logic to the NFL going to the retired players and say: "Hey, in hindsight we probably paid you too much and we're in the red now... can't pay off our bills, so we're gonna need some of that money we paid you back."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, CMRivdog said:

I’m thinking they might want some sort of appearance fee and a cut of jersey and other items related to the HOF??

In the letter sent they reference health care being 3 cents on the a every $100 of revenue and that it would total less than $4 million.

Later the letter says the "salary" for HOFers would be 40 cents on every $100 of revenue, or around $50 million annually. 

According to wikipedia there are 318 members in the HOF, though I'm not sure how many are players and how many are others (and I don't know if the others should also receive the salary??).  I also don't know how many are still alive.  Let's be conservative and say that 200 of the members are still alive and would eligible for the salary.  That's $250K per person.  I'd guess that isn't unreasonable as an appearance fee for a really popular person who's going to majorly influence ticket sales, but I dunno if there would really increase ticket sales that much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, RedRamage said:

Okay, but that goes back to my earlier comment.  If one of the lead engineers on the original iPhone leaves Apple, should s/he get a salary from Apple above and beyond what salary s/he received while employed because the iPhone has become wildly successful?

I suppose it depends somewhat on the specifics of her contributions were and what compensation she received for those contributions.

I have no issue with the individual to try to get say a royalty if her contributions merit a reasonable discussion on the topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, RedRamage said:

Okay, but that goes back to my earlier comment.  If one of the lead engineers on the original iPhone leaves Apple, should s/he get a salary from Apple above and beyond what salary s/he received while employed because the iPhone has become wildly successful?

That's not a perfect analogy of course... there are definite differences, but it feels like an employee agreeing to work for a given salary, then years later going back to the company and saying:

"Wait a minute, you ended up being REALLY successful, and you got that way in part because of me... so I DEMAND that you give me salary now... for as long as I live.  I know I agreed to work for the money I did but and you gave me that money, but now I think I deserve more."  That just seems silly to me.

I mean think of the reserve situation... what if the NFL ended up NOT doing as well.  What if the bottom dropped out of the sports business.  Would anyone think there would be any logic to the NFL going to the retired players and say: "Hey, in hindsight we probably paid you too much and we're in the red now... can't pay off our bills, so we're gonna need some of that money we paid you back."

That is a pretty good analogy, the only change I would make is inserting something about the league knowing about CTE and concussions way before it came out and making some money on the 'big hits' they took and gave out, but that would not change my feelings on it much.  That is what courts are for.

This just has the feel of 'I did not make enough money in my career to live on and now I am a little jacked up and old and the league is so popular and...well other leagues do it so you should to.'

They will bend because the pressure from society will make them do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, John_Brian_K said:

That is a pretty good analogy, the only change I would make is inserting something about the league knowing about CTE and concussions way before it came out and making some money on the 'big hits' they took and gave out, but that would not change my feelings on it much.  That is what courts are for.

This just has the feel of 'I did not make enough money in my career to live on and now I am a little jacked up and old and the league is so popular and...well other leagues do it so you should to.'

They will bend because the pressure from society will make them do it.

The CTE and concussion stuff is another story in my humble opinion.  That's a different than just wanting more money.  That's wanting compensation for heath risks that were not disclosed and/or covered up.  If there's sufficient evidence (which I believe there is concerning concussions) that the NFL covered up the dangers then the players have a legit beef.

For the record, I also don't have a problem with the players asking for more health coverage given the nature of the sport.  But again I think this should be applied for ALL players (based on time in the NFL) not just the HOFers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah as really NFL not really caring about C.T.E. It is all talk no action. Back then remember did not have the millions they made back in the day. And had to get a side job at the time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/18/2018 at 12:39 PM, RedRamage said:

https://www.mlive.com/sports/2018/09/hall_of_famers_still_want_to_b.html

 

 

More details as well as the actual letter sent to the NFL at the link above.  Basically they are saying that the reason the NFL is so popular and wealthy right now is because of what they did in the past and they should get compensated for it.

On one hand, I sorta get it... a number of them didn't get nearly what even the veteran minimum is right now.  But this is true for just about every industry, isn't it?  I mean, if I worked for a company that became wildly successful *after* I left, should I be compensated after the fact?  Should someone who worked on the very first iPhone and then retired be given an annual salary because the iPhone is just hugely popular and making Apple oodles of money now?

Health coverage is a different story... I'm more of in favor of the NFL giving discounted coverage, based on years in the NFL, due to the damage it does to a player's body... but I'd argue all players should get this, not just HOFers.

I agree. I was actually amazed that former players didn't get NFL healthcare. Just because a player doesn't need knees or hips replaced while they're playing doesn't mean they won't need them replaced several years later from the damage they did while playing. As well as many other football related injuries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...