Licensing with 2011 NFL Products

I have to admit I don't know all of the ins and outs of the licensing involved with cards, so if anyone can add on to my thinking (or most likely, correct me), I welcome the info.

With the NFLPA no certified, wouldn't that impact the licensing? The licenses for players run through the NFLPA, no? If they are no decertified, then the licenses that they agreed to would also become defunct, right?

I know, a lot of questions.

I am not pretending to be an expert at all, but I believe that even with the de-certification, the licensing deals stay in place with the NFLPA for 6 months and can be extended, if necessary.

I'm going to assume the NFL is similar to MLB

NFLP: NFL Properties. The license to use team nicknames and logos
NFLPA: NFL Players Association. The license to use player names and likenesses

The NFLPA being decertified has no bearing on the manufacturer contracts, unless there was a stipulation where the contract would be voided if there is a work stoppage (which I highly doubt).

Same with NFLP

gt2590 said:

I am not pretending to be an expert at all, but I believe that even with the de-certification, the licensing deals stay in place with the NFLPA for 6 months and can be extended, if necessary.

Click to expand...

I think the big part of this isn't the players currently under contract, but the players that've yet to become a member of the NFLPA. The licensing agreement has to be fulfilled by the parties who appointed the PA power of attorney, essentially.

Could Upper Deck pull a razor and sign the entire set of RB and QB to an exclusive deal? Indeedly, do. Before, it was a matter of acquiring signature contracts with the individual athletes, but if UD had the stones, they could sign exclusive contracts outside of the boundaries of the NFLPA.

pigskincardboard said:

gt2590 said:

I am not pretending to be an expert at all, but I believe that even with the de-certification, the licensing deals stay in place with the NFLPA for 6 months and can be extended, if necessary.

Click to expand...

I think the big part of this isn't the players currently under contract, but the players that've yet to become a member of the NFLPA. The licensing agreement has to be fulfilled by the parties who appointed the PA power of attorney, essentially.

Could Upper Deck pull a razor and sign the entire set of RB and QB to an exclusive deal? Indeedly, do. Before, it was a matter of acquiring signature contracts with the individual athletes, but if UD had the stones, they could sign exclusive contracts outside of the boundaries of the NFLPA.

Click to expand...

A few problems with this

1. I can't find anything on whether players are required to join the NFLPA. If it's like the MLBPA or other unions, I'm willing to bet they have to. And I bet a stipulation of joining is that they can't sign exclusive licensing (for cards, at least) contracts

2. I doubt UD would risk trying to sign players to exclusive contracts. For every one player that signs, 100 would refuse. And UD risks the prospect of those players refusing to sign with them in the future.

3. Say for example a player could sign an exclusive contract, and didn't have to worry about the NFLPA because he doesn't have to join. He'd be a pariah. The PA is basically a huge fraternity of guys who are physically huge. You remember how scabs were treated in baseball? Pariahs. And football is a sport where you'll get killed if you're an outsider.

Gt - Good to know.

JoshHamilton - So the new guys who weren't in the NFLPA before decertification wouldn't be covered in this agreement (the upcoming rookies), and would have to sign individual contracts?

Pigskin - That's kind of along the lines of what I was thinking when I posted this. Since the players are now acting as individuals, I thought they would each have to come to an agreement with the card manufacturer to use their name/likeness because the NFLPA has decertified.

I'm sure players could sign exclusives, but they wouldn't be allowed to rejoin the PA once it's recertified.

Exclusives suck anyway. Remember 1992, when we had the NFLPA and the Quarterback Club? And they hated each other so much that neither would sign with a company if the other group already had a contract with them? It sucked. 1992 football products sucked. I was pulling Tommy Vardell cards when I should have been pulling Joe Montana cards

I was wondering the same thing - with them decertifying and not having it just be a lockout.

I would have assumed it could lead to problems and not having the players rights.....but I did see EA claiming that the move by the NFLPA will have no bearing on the new Madden game and it will be released as planned.
I know that's not trading cards, but that would lead me to believe the comments regarding past contracts remaining valid may be correct. (Though not sure how that effects the rookies and any use of their likeness).

JoshHamilton said:

pigskincardboard said:

gt2590 said:

I am not pretending to be an expert at all, but I believe that even with the de-certification, the licensing deals stay in place with the NFLPA for 6 months and can be extended, if necessary.

Click to expand...

I think the big part of this isn't the players currently under contract, but the players that've yet to become a member of the NFLPA. The licensing agreement has to be fulfilled by the parties who appointed the PA power of attorney, essentially.

Could Upper Deck pull a razor and sign the entire set of RB and QB to an exclusive deal? Indeedly, do. Before, it was a matter of acquiring signature contracts with the individual athletes, but if UD had the stones, they could sign exclusive contracts outside of the boundaries of the NFLPA.

Click to expand...

A few problems with this

1. I can't find anything on whether players are required to join the NFLPA. If it's like the MLBPA or other unions, I'm willing to bet they have to. And I bet a stipulation of joining is that they can't sign exclusive licensing (for cards, at least) contracts

2. I doubt UD would risk trying to sign players to exclusive contracts. For every one player that signs, 100 would refuse. And UD risks the prospect of those players refusing to sign with them in the future.

3. Say for example a player could sign an exclusive contract, and didn't have to worry about the NFLPA because he doesn't have to join. He'd be a pariah. The PA is basically a huge fraternity of guys who are physically huge. You remember how scabs were treated in baseball? Pariahs. And football is a sport where you'll get killed if you're an outsider.

Click to expand...

Players do not have to join, it's just generally beneficial to receive that extra income stream and protection.

It's basically the Lavar Arrington rule. Anytime you ever see someone in Madden as LINEBACKER #52 (or whatever) it means that they're not getting the MADDEN BILZZZ cause they're not part of the NFLPA.

You can't legally force anyone to join a union.

JoshHamilton said:

I'm sure players could sign exclusives, but they wouldn't be allowed to rejoin the PA once it's recertified.

Exclusives suck anyway. Remember 1992, when we had the NFLPA and the Quarterback Club? And they hated each other so much that neither would sign with a company if the other group already had a contract with them? It sucked. 1992 football products sucked. I was pulling Tommy Vardell cards when I should have been pulling Joe Montana cards

Click to expand...

This is what the big problem is right now -- Everyone and their brother knows that the union will eventually reform and this is why the NFL is claiming the ability to lock the players out. The union cannot decertify simply to wage an anti-trust lawsuit with plans of immediately reforming once the lawsuit is settled. You can't just arbitrarily opt-out of the collective bargaining process every time you feel like it only to wage a legal war and then re-enter the process.

I think we have to make this clear: No one benefits from an anti-trust lawsuit going all the way through the courts and standing. In that case, everyone loses. Even if the players get a CRAZY-HUGE amount of money, in the long term everyone suffers. Neither the NFL Owners or the Players want this thing to go all the way.

Thankfully, the guys in the players ears (if they're not completely retarded) are the agents. The agents self-interested enough to provide a reasonable viewpoint.

All players have to sign a GLA (General Licensing Agreement) through the NFLPA before they can appear in an NFLP/NFLPA licensed card product. I'd guess only a handful of rookies had signed and returned their GLA's to the PA before it disbanded. With the union disbanded, there is no longer any group licensing that can be done. That being said, a lot of the non-rookie content in most early NFL licensed products has already been approved by the NFL and Player's Inc (the marketing/licensing arm of the NFLPA). If this goes into the summer the only new products we'll see will be SA-GE, Press Pass and Leaf since they are not. I spent a lot more time working on baseball rather than football so I'm not super sharp on some of the technicalities of dealing with the NFL/NFLPA. This is about all I have to throw out.

Juddy said:

All players have to sign a GLA (General Licensing Agreement) through the NFLPA before they can appear in an NFLP/NFLPA licensed card product. I'd guess only a handful of rookies had signed and returned their GLA's to the PA before it disbanded. With the union disbanded, there is no longer any group licensing that can be done. That being said, a lot of the non-rookie content in most early NFL licensed products has already been approved by the NFL and Player's Inc (the marketing/licensing arm of the NFLPA). If this goes into the summer the only new products we'll see will be SA-GE, Press Pass and Leaf since they are not. I spent a lot more time working on baseball rather than football so I'm not super sharp on some of the technicalities of dealing with the NFL/NFLPA. This is about all I have to throw out.

Click to expand...

That's some good behind the scenes info to know, so thanks for posting.