Play Fantasy Use your Fantasy skills to win Cash Prizes. Join or start a league today. Play Now
Blog Entry

NFL offers third option to victims of 'SeatGate'

Posted on: February 15, 2011 1:39 pm
 
Posted by Will Brinson

The NFL is upping the ante for the 400 folks that missed the Super Bowl -- they're now offering to get $5,000 or more in the pockets of those who were shorted.

According to a displaced fan named Brad Powell the NFL has offered to pay back the full total of each fan's "actual substantiated expenses" or $5,000, whichever is greater.

Here's the actual legalese from the NFL, per Powell:
III) The greater of $5,000 or your actual substantiated expenses in defined categories for attending Super Bowl XLV
Powell says he "didn't see the [category] list" but it seems safe to say it will include airfare, room and board, hotel costs, etc.

Clearly if a fan bought a new Ferrari while on vacation with the purported purpose of driving it around Dallas, the NFL isn't going to pay them back. And that's why there have to be specifically designated categories -- otherwise, people would just get loose on the league when it comes to what they expense.

Offering this much in terms of reimbursement -- the NFL had offered either I) $2,400 and a ticket to next year's game or II) a future ticket to a Super Bowl plus hotel and airfare -- should mean that "the 400" are now satisfied, at least in terms of compensation. (Of course, that might not mean much for the rest of the fans suing the NFL, though you could argue that getting rid of the first 400 from the lawsuit gives it a lot less weight.)

The NFL obviously can't give them the experience of seeing the Steelers and Packers play, but give them credit for trying to make sure that fans don't come away too bitter from the experience.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.
Comments

Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: January 10, 2012 2:51 am
 

NFL offers third option to victims of 'SeatGate'

May possibly a number of i appreciate this excellent a revelation resource site .My wife and i undoubtedly welcome every one lightweight chunk of the device. I do have we bookmarked as their favorite your actual reflection wide range online website on line to find through on your fresh stuff you area further up.



Since: Nov 18, 2010
Posted on: February 17, 2011 3:08 pm
 

NFL offers third option to victims of 'SeatGate'

Hey PAThfinder it is me, bdaddy.  As we have discussed before we do see eye to eye on people/players get what the market pays.  We just don't agree that players have the right to ask for more or in this case just the same pay they have been getting.

Owners threaten cities and TAX PAYERS to biuld them new stadiums or give them more or they will leave, (currently the Viking's owner).  My only real question is: Why should the owners be able to do this and not the players?

Now, if I get everybody in the company to say "screw it, we're not doing this until we get more money" the company can go find people that won't be as good as me and will charge less. That's kind of what I'm hoping the NFL does. I'm hoping the union decertifies and the NFL gets replacement players.

Look at the quality of some of the college football programs out there, you're not telling me there's not enough talent to put together some decent teams

You can hope that will happen all you want, but he NFL already played this game back in 1986, you know the strike year.  The NFL & players will come to an agreement, it is called negotiations, all we as fans are seeing rights now is PR moves, not what is really going on.  If you think that because there are not "offical" meetings going on that owners and union reps arn't talking at the "billionaire boys club" you are crazy.

The problem with some quality college players and washed up has beens gitting put on the feild to make "some decent teams" is NFL fans will not pay "outragous prices" to see a "decent" team!  That means the owners don't get $150-$350 a ticket they get $20-$40 a ticket like college football and arena leagues do.  That equals less profits for the owners.  Not to mention that NBC, ABC, and CBS will break their contracts with the NFL because it is not the same PRODUCT they paid $20 million a game to broadcast.  There goes the rest of their profits.  

If the NFL does replace the current players with scrubs and says you can't make more than $250,000 and year to play in the NFL, some other group of millionairs will hire all the NFL players and start the "NEW NFL" and the old NFL audience (including you) will go to the new league to watch quality football instead of Ryan Leaf, Jamarcus Russell, and the new college boys from South Tennese Junior College play.



Since: Aug 20, 2006
Posted on: February 16, 2011 2:55 pm
 

NFL offers third option to victims of 'SeatGate'

Dead on that this IS an NFL problem, not just a Jerry Jones problem.  It is Jerry's fault, but now that it's an issue, it's up to the league to deal with it.  Is it the league's fault when one of the players kills someone, runs a dog torturing ring or plays smack down with their significant other? Nope, but the league sure does jump in and hand out disciplinary action --- to protect the league's image.  Rightly so btw.  The league similarly needs to step in here and deal with this issue (created by JJ to be sure) and hand out a solution that goes out of the way to placate those displaced fans that had a unique experience ruined.



Since: Sep 7, 2006
Posted on: February 16, 2011 11:45 am
 

NFL offers third option to victims of 'SeatGate'

@BrewHaHa -

On the CBA argument I take a pretty unpopular stance. I'm in full favor of the owners doing pretty much whatever they want. It's just my opinion, but they front the capital, they take on the risk, they should be able to spend the money they make how they see fit. Now, a lot of people say that they don't make the money, it's the players that bring in the money, and they're right. Thing is, the players are the product the owners put on the field.

That's like saying the owner of Coca-Cola has to give his employees whatever they want. The employees at Coca-Cola will get paid what the owner pays them, or they're more than welcome to work for Pepsi. Does the owner actually mix the ingredients or bottle the stuff? No more than Jerry Jones or Robert Kraft tackle, throw or block. Thing is, the owner owns, and anything that comes as a result of that is technically theirs.

Now, athletes will continue to get crazy money, it's just the beast that's been created. As long as people like Daniel Snyder and Jerry Jones own football teams, players with skill will continue to get paid exhoribitant amounts of money in the quest for the super bowl, and I'm fine with that. It's just that the players are the product of the owners and they can ask for whatever they want, but when the owners say now they can also go find themselves another job.

I'm a contractor for a government defense agency. If I don't like the money I'm making on this contract, I've got a couple choices. One, I can go find another contract that pays more money. Two, I can find another job outside what I'm good at and eek out a living. Three, I can STFU and take what I'm getting and be happy. The owner of my company doesn't do what I do, they can't do what I do. Thing is, I'm their product, I'm what they provide to the department of defense, and I get paid what they say I get paid. Otherwise, I just go find another job. Now, if I get everybody in the company to say "screw it, we're not doing this until we get more money" the company can go find people that won't be as good as me and will charge less. That's kind of what I'm hoping the NFL does. I'm hoping the union decertifies and the NFL gets replacement players.

Look at the quality of some of the college football programs out there, you're not telling me there's not enough talent to put together some decent teams.

That's just my take.



Since: Jan 2, 2008
Posted on: February 16, 2011 11:29 am
 

NFL offers third option to victims of 'SeatGate'

If I was there but in a different seat I want: all expenses reimbursed

If I didn't even get to see the game I want: all expenses reimbursed, seasons tickets to my favorite team, tickets (but not expenses) to a future Superbowl of my choice.



Since: May 17, 2008
Posted on: February 16, 2011 11:17 am
 

NFL offers third option to victims of 'SeatGate'

First things, first.  This is not an NFL problem.  They don't own Jerry Jones Field at Texas Stadium via Arlington.

Actually, yes it is an NFL problem, as much or more than a Dallas Cowboy problem, at least as to the 400 fans who did not get seats.  You are right that the NFL does no own Cowboys' stadium, but it does own the Super Bowl and did have authority over and approve ALL of the preparations for the game, including the seating plan.  It is the NFL, not Jerry Jones/Dallas Cowboys that received the purchase price of the tickets.



Since: May 17, 2008
Posted on: February 16, 2011 11:12 am
 

NFL offers third option to victims of 'SeatGate'

At first I was thinking the guys who lost out on seats were going way overboard with this lawsuit, then some poster put it in pretty good perspective. The NFL takes advantage of us on everything - $250 bucks for a freaking jersey you had made in South East Asia for 15 bucks? Really? So, now it's our turn (and, as a fan, I'm lumping myself in with "our" in hopes that these 400 will stick it to them for the rest of us).

First, I will respectully disagree that "the NFL takes advantage of us on everything".  Really, the fans do it to themselves -- if you know the jersey costs $15 to make in South East Asia and you still pay $250 for it that is up to you, you obviously were not mislead about the cost or profit margin (which does not take into account shipping costs, advertising costs, licensing fees to the teams and players, taxes, etc -- it is not $235 pure profit) so if  you choose to buy it, that is on you.  I think its ridiculous so I don't buy those jerseys -- look at that, personal responsibility for my own buying decision.  You and I both know that we can buy hotdogs/buns at the grocery store for, what, 50cents each -- so we know the markup at the game, if you buy the hotdog at that price you're making a decision, not being taken advantage of.

Second, even is we assume that the "NFL takes advantage of us on everything", you appear to be opporating on the assumption then that "two wrongs make a right"?  Not me.  The 400 fans who did not get a seat are entitled to compensation.  There are three offers on the table, including paying the higher of their "actual costs" of attending the game or $5,000.....if they don't take it, and want to sue, they are wrong and only the lawyers benefit.



Since: Apr 10, 2010
Posted on: February 16, 2011 11:04 am
 

NFL offers third option to victims of 'SeatGate'

hookers could cost alot more than 5000.00 for a week of partying in Dallas and then theres the strippers you know the price of lap dances went up that week



Since: May 17, 2008
Posted on: February 16, 2011 11:03 am
 

NFL offers third option to victims of 'SeatGate'

When a season ticket holder pays top dollar for tickets, parking and concessions  - they should be able to expect top dollar management and performance on the field. Hardly the case from the owner, Daniel Snyder, to players like Albert Haynesworth.
Some may argue that no one is forced to buy a ticket but it's not that simple for folks who have devoted generations of an allegiance to a team.

Sorry World, but there is no way this happens.  If you buy a ticket to the game, you have a contract for 1 seat to watch 1 game.  There is absolutely no legal right created by that ticket that would give the holder the ability to sue the team or NFL for, essentially, not winning, or not even being competitive.  There is no guarantee, express or implied, that  your favorite team is going to win, or be any good at all for that matter.  This is an isolated matter dealing with seating -- the NFL would like it to go away (1) as a PR nightmare and (2) so they don't have to pay its own lawyers tens of thousands of dollars, maybe hundreds of thousands of dollars, to defend it and that is all....It has nothing to do with trying to avoid future litigation over a lack of "top dollar management and performance on the field".  If that were the case a number of teams would have been sued a long time ago.

Your ticket and parking gets you admission to the designated game, nothing more.  There is no guarantee of perfomance regardless of "devoted generations of allegiance to a team".




Since: Nov 18, 2010
Posted on: February 16, 2011 10:39 am
 

NFL offers third option to victims of 'SeatGate'

I beleive that this offer made by the NFL is more like what should have been made to start with.  Repaying "actual" expences that the fans had trying to attend a special event, the Superbowl.  I did not agree with the first offer made by the NFL, they were just trying to pull a PR move, and get away with out paying up what was due.  By the way, it it did out work out to well for the NFL did it.  I think many of the 400 will take this offer, but it should have been what was offered to start with.  For those that want to continue to sue I will not say don't do it because it is their right, but I am guessing they will not get alot more than what is being offered now.  They might get some more more $$$$ for time taken off work but that is about it.  To bad the NFL would not be a little more reasonalbe to start with, they might have avoided this whold lawsuit to start with.  By the way the NFL is only doing this to try to get the 400 out of the lawsuit to make the other peoples case weaker, not for the benefit of the 400 seatless fans.

In a perfect world people would not have to sue, in a perfect world the NFL's greed would not have tried to cram extra seats into the stadium to make more $$$$$.

In perfect world the NFL owners would not charge $9 for a 30 cent hot dog, LOL.  The moral of the story is,  if the NFL did not want to get screwed by the fans they should not have tried to screw them to start with.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com