The National Football League has been ordered to return what its union calculates is more than $100 million to the pool of revenue that it shares with its players.
The ruling, handed down last week by arbitrator Stephen Burbank, found that the NFL owners had mischaracterized what Players Association officials say is roughly $120 million of ticket revenue during the past three years by creating an exemption that had the effect of keeping about $50 million in salary out of players’ pockets. The NFL Players Association, which discovered the discrepancy during an ongoing audit of league finances, filed a grievance on the matter in January.
“They created an exemption out of a fiction and they got caught,” said DeMaurice Smith,executive director of the NFLPA.
NFL officials would not confirm the figure. In an email, Brian McCarthy, a spokesman for the NFL, referred to the ruling as the resolution of a “technical accounting issue under the CBA involving the funding of stadium construction and renovation projects.” He stated that the main effect was one of timing.
The ruling is the latest in a series of legal victories for the NFLPA over the league, including last year’s U.S. District Court ruling that overturned Tom Brady’s four-game suspension in the controversy known as “Deflate-gate.”
This dispute stemmed from provisions of the collective bargaining agreement that allow NFL teams to exclude certain money from the pool that determines its players’ share of revenues. Players receive 40% of local revenues, which mainly come from tickets sales, 45% of sponsorship money, revenues from the post-season and NFL Ventures, such as NFL.com and the NFL Network, and 55% of the revenues from media deals.
Teams can exclude money from the sale of personal seat licenses, premium seating, and from mega-deals with corporations to put their names on stadiums. The NFLPA agreed to these exclusions because teams often use these funds to help finance renovations and the construction of new stadiums, which significantly increase revenue and the amount of money that gets shared with the players.
McCarthy said the ruling would not affect the league’s ability to support new stadium projects
In its review of the NFL’s financial calculations, lawyers and accountants with the players association found the league had created another category of exempted money that isn’t in the collective bargaining agreement. In his ruling, Burbank noted that while the language and provisions of the agreement are complicated, interpreting the contract isn’t. The so-called “waived gate” revenues in dispute didn’t fit into any of the exempted categories. Burbank ordered the NFL to return the money to the shared revenue pool immediately, which, if the union’s calculations are correct, should increase the salary cap for the 2016 season by about $1.5 million per team.
“People have become accustomed to how we protect our rights when it comes to player discipline,” Smith said. “We are equally diligent when it comes to getting our share of revenues.” He said the NFLPA review of the league’s accounting will continue.
The ruling, handed down last week by arbitrator Stephen Burbank, found that the NFL owners had mischaracterized what Players Association officials say is roughly $120 million of ticket revenue during the past three years by creating an exemption that had the effect of keeping about $50 million in salary out of players’ pockets. The NFL Players Association, which discovered the discrepancy during an ongoing audit of league finances, filed a grievance on the matter in January.
“They created an exemption out of a fiction and they got caught,” said DeMaurice Smith,executive director of the NFLPA.
NFL officials would not confirm the figure. In an email, Brian McCarthy, a spokesman for the NFL, referred to the ruling as the resolution of a “technical accounting issue under the CBA involving the funding of stadium construction and renovation projects.” He stated that the main effect was one of timing.
The ruling is the latest in a series of legal victories for the NFLPA over the league, including last year’s U.S. District Court ruling that overturned Tom Brady’s four-game suspension in the controversy known as “Deflate-gate.”
This dispute stemmed from provisions of the collective bargaining agreement that allow NFL teams to exclude certain money from the pool that determines its players’ share of revenues. Players receive 40% of local revenues, which mainly come from tickets sales, 45% of sponsorship money, revenues from the post-season and NFL Ventures, such as NFL.com and the NFL Network, and 55% of the revenues from media deals.
Teams can exclude money from the sale of personal seat licenses, premium seating, and from mega-deals with corporations to put their names on stadiums. The NFLPA agreed to these exclusions because teams often use these funds to help finance renovations and the construction of new stadiums, which significantly increase revenue and the amount of money that gets shared with the players.
McCarthy said the ruling would not affect the league’s ability to support new stadium projects
In its review of the NFL’s financial calculations, lawyers and accountants with the players association found the league had created another category of exempted money that isn’t in the collective bargaining agreement. In his ruling, Burbank noted that while the language and provisions of the agreement are complicated, interpreting the contract isn’t. The so-called “waived gate” revenues in dispute didn’t fit into any of the exempted categories. Burbank ordered the NFL to return the money to the shared revenue pool immediately, which, if the union’s calculations are correct, should increase the salary cap for the 2016 season by about $1.5 million per team.
“People have become accustomed to how we protect our rights when it comes to player discipline,” Smith said. “We are equally diligent when it comes to getting our share of revenues.” He said the NFLPA review of the league’s accounting will continue.
At the minimum the split should be 60-40 across the board(60% to the players) THE MINIMUM...if it was up to me it would be 80-20
