- Joined
- Feb 9, 2014
- Messages
- 20,922
- Name
- Peter
http://espn.go.com/blog/baltimore-r...l-packages-for-rams-players-relocating-to-l-a
Former Ravens kicker Matt Stover wants financial packages for Rams players relocating to L.A.
Jamison HensleyESPN Staff Writer
Former NFL kicker Matt Stover said there should be a financial package in place for Rams players forced to relocate from St. Louis to Los Angeles.
Stover lost thousands of dollars after he sold his house in 1996, when he was among the players who moved from Cleveland to Baltimore in the Browns' relocation. None of it was repaid.
According to the NFL Players Association, franchises are only required to pay moving and relocation expenses under the collective bargaining agreement.
"We weren't ready for it, we had no control over it and we were under contract, so we were obligated to go," said Stover, who was the Browns' players union representative at the time of the move. "I'm hoping the Rams organization will take care of their players. There should be a financial package for the players moving to L.A."
Stover said the Browns chose not to pay for the realtor fees and closing costs on the houses sold by the players. The organization contended anything paid beyond moving expenses would be a violation of the salary cap.
"It was testy at times," said Kevin Byrne, the Ravens' senior vice president of public relations who moved with the Browns. "Players came to us and said, 'You told us seven, eight months ago to be part of the community and buy a house and now I have to sell?'"
In addition to losing money in moving, players will also have to adjust to the substantially higher cost of living in Los Angeles.
"There'll be a considerable difference in net money or the ability for players to save while they're living in the market," Stover said.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...te-matt-stover-hopes-rams-compensate-players/
After losing in real estate, Matt Stover hopes Rams compensate players
Posted by Darin Gantt on January 18, 2016
With all the big dollars being thrown around in the Rams’ move to Los Angeles, it’s easy to overlook the cost being paid by those with far less at stake — the Rams players.
While teams are responsible for moving costs and relocation expenses under the collective bargaining agreement, the Rams are also faced with the reality of moving to a market with much higher costs of living.
Former NFL kicker Matt Stover went through it when the Browns moved to Baltimore, and after losing his shirt in a real estate deal, thinks players deserve to be compensated.
Stover was the Browns union rep at the time of the move in 1996, and lost thousands when he sold his house. He said the organization didn’t repay any closing costs or realtor fees for the players who made the decision to settle down in Cleveland.
And while there are some free agents who will be enticed by the bright lights of Hollywood and the weather, there will also be some who balance the costs of real estate and might be turned off. But for existing Rams players, there’s little choice.
---------
Doesn’t sound too unreasonable. A lot of people get compensation when transferring out of state with their companies.
Surely the owners can afford to help them out with costs
and stuff.
--------
Yeah, not.
You pay the expenses of where you play and there should be not extra money or effective increase in the salary cap because of it.
New York and San Francisco are both extremely expensive housing markets and those players don’t get bonuses or housing allowances.
Nothing says players have to rent or buy hugely expensive places. They can rent a nice condo if they want to be cost effective but should receive zero special treatment in that respect.
--------
California has high state taxes and a higher cost of living. That’s just part of living in California. Teams should not be expected to compensate for that or for the higher cost of real estate. There’s probably salary cap issues for that. As for costs to break leases, commissions on sales, and relocation, that’s fair and covered in the CBA. Given the choice, I’m sure many would still prefer LA over St Louis. If some don’t want to go to LA, it’s fair to ask for a trade.
---------
Millionaires worrying about losing a couple thousand? My heart bleeds.
--------
It’s easy to say for an ignorant PFT poster to say “I’m supposed to feel bad for millionaires?”, but the simple fact is that there are many, many more players on NFL teams without millions of the dollars in the bank.
Undrafted or late-round rookies still on their first contracts, practice squad players, etc.. are being uprooted and moved across the country without any say in the matter. It’s only fair that they should be compensated in some way for the hassle and market difference.
---------
Forget about the dollar signs involved. I agree with Stover. Moving costs alone are thousands, having to sell your house last minute, buy a house last minute, learn a new city/state, leave everything you know, pull your kids out of schools with all their friends. This could be devastating for families if they choose to stay in Missouri while Dad is living in LA for 6 months out of the year. What a messed up situation for the contracted players.
I know many salaries are $100k a year but apartments rent for $2000 a month to start so to live in the suburbs around the stadium will cost significantly more. If I was early/middle of my career, I’d ask to be let out of my contract if no extra help was offered. There would be legal standing as well, I doubt the original deals involved relocation as it happens rarely in this league.
---------
As much as I’d like to write off the players as millionaires who should be able to afford it, I can’t. Why? Because not everyone with the team is swimming in cash. Keep in mind that late round (6-7th round) guys don’t make too much, and the practice squad even less. This also goes for the other people (non-players) in the organization. Sure, the front office types have the cash to move, but equipment managers, trainers, etc probably don’t.
It’s not unreasonable to see the owners foot the bill for some of these people, especially with LA being as expensive as it is. In this case, I’ll side against the billionaires.
---------
Here in lies the reason so many players don’t live where they play and instead live in Florida, Arizona, a hometown, etc- the transient nature of free agency makes buying a house a bad deal. No matter who you play for, they can’t away your home base.
However, established players with families probably don’t want to live out of a condo, so they buy a house. Stover makes a good point that you buy a house, put down roots and your job moves on you, the company should include a relocation package. If you bought a house for $1mm and its worth $700k because of bad timing/new inventory glut and your job relocates for reasons out of your control, the team/league should compensate. Hell, the costs would be less than 1% of the relocation fee to offset losses and fees.
---------
I live in Ca just fine on a fraction of what league minimum players make. Don’t buy a house for a job that might only last 2-4 years in that location bro. They have these things we call leases here in Ca. Shoot, I bet they have them everywhere.
---------
St Louis is one of the lower cost area’s to leave in the US. Your tax guy & agent can’t figure out the benefits of keeping your St Louis residence & renting out your home as a investment property?…really?
Former Ravens kicker Matt Stover wants financial packages for Rams players relocating to L.A.
Jamison HensleyESPN Staff Writer
Former NFL kicker Matt Stover said there should be a financial package in place for Rams players forced to relocate from St. Louis to Los Angeles.
Stover lost thousands of dollars after he sold his house in 1996, when he was among the players who moved from Cleveland to Baltimore in the Browns' relocation. None of it was repaid.
According to the NFL Players Association, franchises are only required to pay moving and relocation expenses under the collective bargaining agreement.
"We weren't ready for it, we had no control over it and we were under contract, so we were obligated to go," said Stover, who was the Browns' players union representative at the time of the move. "I'm hoping the Rams organization will take care of their players. There should be a financial package for the players moving to L.A."
Stover said the Browns chose not to pay for the realtor fees and closing costs on the houses sold by the players. The organization contended anything paid beyond moving expenses would be a violation of the salary cap.
"It was testy at times," said Kevin Byrne, the Ravens' senior vice president of public relations who moved with the Browns. "Players came to us and said, 'You told us seven, eight months ago to be part of the community and buy a house and now I have to sell?'"
In addition to losing money in moving, players will also have to adjust to the substantially higher cost of living in Los Angeles.
"There'll be a considerable difference in net money or the ability for players to save while they're living in the market," Stover said.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...te-matt-stover-hopes-rams-compensate-players/
After losing in real estate, Matt Stover hopes Rams compensate players
Posted by Darin Gantt on January 18, 2016
With all the big dollars being thrown around in the Rams’ move to Los Angeles, it’s easy to overlook the cost being paid by those with far less at stake — the Rams players.
While teams are responsible for moving costs and relocation expenses under the collective bargaining agreement, the Rams are also faced with the reality of moving to a market with much higher costs of living.
Former NFL kicker Matt Stover went through it when the Browns moved to Baltimore, and after losing his shirt in a real estate deal, thinks players deserve to be compensated.
Stover was the Browns union rep at the time of the move in 1996, and lost thousands when he sold his house. He said the organization didn’t repay any closing costs or realtor fees for the players who made the decision to settle down in Cleveland.
And while there are some free agents who will be enticed by the bright lights of Hollywood and the weather, there will also be some who balance the costs of real estate and might be turned off. But for existing Rams players, there’s little choice.
---------
Doesn’t sound too unreasonable. A lot of people get compensation when transferring out of state with their companies.
Surely the owners can afford to help them out with costs
and stuff.
--------
Yeah, not.
You pay the expenses of where you play and there should be not extra money or effective increase in the salary cap because of it.
New York and San Francisco are both extremely expensive housing markets and those players don’t get bonuses or housing allowances.
Nothing says players have to rent or buy hugely expensive places. They can rent a nice condo if they want to be cost effective but should receive zero special treatment in that respect.
--------
California has high state taxes and a higher cost of living. That’s just part of living in California. Teams should not be expected to compensate for that or for the higher cost of real estate. There’s probably salary cap issues for that. As for costs to break leases, commissions on sales, and relocation, that’s fair and covered in the CBA. Given the choice, I’m sure many would still prefer LA over St Louis. If some don’t want to go to LA, it’s fair to ask for a trade.
---------
Millionaires worrying about losing a couple thousand? My heart bleeds.
--------
It’s easy to say for an ignorant PFT poster to say “I’m supposed to feel bad for millionaires?”, but the simple fact is that there are many, many more players on NFL teams without millions of the dollars in the bank.
Undrafted or late-round rookies still on their first contracts, practice squad players, etc.. are being uprooted and moved across the country without any say in the matter. It’s only fair that they should be compensated in some way for the hassle and market difference.
---------
Forget about the dollar signs involved. I agree with Stover. Moving costs alone are thousands, having to sell your house last minute, buy a house last minute, learn a new city/state, leave everything you know, pull your kids out of schools with all their friends. This could be devastating for families if they choose to stay in Missouri while Dad is living in LA for 6 months out of the year. What a messed up situation for the contracted players.
I know many salaries are $100k a year but apartments rent for $2000 a month to start so to live in the suburbs around the stadium will cost significantly more. If I was early/middle of my career, I’d ask to be let out of my contract if no extra help was offered. There would be legal standing as well, I doubt the original deals involved relocation as it happens rarely in this league.
---------
As much as I’d like to write off the players as millionaires who should be able to afford it, I can’t. Why? Because not everyone with the team is swimming in cash. Keep in mind that late round (6-7th round) guys don’t make too much, and the practice squad even less. This also goes for the other people (non-players) in the organization. Sure, the front office types have the cash to move, but equipment managers, trainers, etc probably don’t.
It’s not unreasonable to see the owners foot the bill for some of these people, especially with LA being as expensive as it is. In this case, I’ll side against the billionaires.
---------
Here in lies the reason so many players don’t live where they play and instead live in Florida, Arizona, a hometown, etc- the transient nature of free agency makes buying a house a bad deal. No matter who you play for, they can’t away your home base.
However, established players with families probably don’t want to live out of a condo, so they buy a house. Stover makes a good point that you buy a house, put down roots and your job moves on you, the company should include a relocation package. If you bought a house for $1mm and its worth $700k because of bad timing/new inventory glut and your job relocates for reasons out of your control, the team/league should compensate. Hell, the costs would be less than 1% of the relocation fee to offset losses and fees.
---------
I live in Ca just fine on a fraction of what league minimum players make. Don’t buy a house for a job that might only last 2-4 years in that location bro. They have these things we call leases here in Ca. Shoot, I bet they have them everywhere.
---------
St Louis is one of the lower cost area’s to leave in the US. Your tax guy & agent can’t figure out the benefits of keeping your St Louis residence & renting out your home as a investment property?…really?
