Skip to content

Roger Goodell wants “around-the-clock talks” with union

Bears Vikings Football

After talking to union head De Smith on Wednesday, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said on Thursday that he thinks talks will need to continue virtually non-stop if a deal is going to be reached before midnight on March 4, when the current labor agreement expires.

“I think that’s critical,” Goodell said on ESPN’s Jim Rome Is Burning. “I think that’s going to take a sustained and disciplined commitment and around-the-clock talks to get that done.”

But as Rome noted in a follow-up question to Goodell, management and labor haven’t been talking around the clock, and it doesn’t appear that they’re going to talk around the clock over the next month and a half. Goodell acknowledged that a few breaks will be necessary.

“There are probably times when a healthy break from negotiations can occur, but they have to be done in a way that’s working toward an agreement,” Goodell said.

Goodell also made his case for an 18-game season, pressing the point that he wants to eliminate two preseason games while adding two regular-season games, and keeping the total number of games at 20.

Another issue that’s important to Goodell is curtailing trash talk.

“We want to make sure that there’s respect among the players, coaches and most importantly for the game,” Goodell said. “It’s something we’re going to address in the offseason.”

Goodell also indicated that there are positive developments in Los Angeles toward getting the NFL back in the country’s second-biggest market.

“We want to be back in L.A.,” Goodell said. “It’s clearly going to take a stadium to do that successfully. We know the fans want us to be there, but getting a stadium built, and more importantly getting it financed in this kind of environment, is a real challenge.”

Permalink 32 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories, Union
32 Responses to “Roger Goodell wants “around-the-clock talks” with union”
  1. schnalls says: Jan 20, 2011 5:02 PM

    Did someone say “impasse”?

  2. hobartbaker says: Jan 20, 2011 5:04 PM

    DeMo Smith caved on some key issues because his bladder just couldn’t hold out any longer.

  3. cincyorangenblack says: Jan 20, 2011 5:05 PM

    you’re ruining the league you A-Hole….keep 4 preseason games, make them half priced or less and let the players talk as much sh*t as they want while hitting eachother as hard as they want…..it ain’t broke, so stop trying to “fix” it.

  4. joetoronto says: Jan 20, 2011 5:06 PM

    “We want to make sure that there’s respect among the players, coaches and most importantly for the game,” Goodell said. “It’s something we’re going to address in the offseason.”

    Good luck with that. So many of these bombo’s are incapable of respect.

  5. dccowboy says: Jan 20, 2011 5:08 PM

    Thus laying the first gorundwork for declaring an impasse on March 4th…

  6. riggo4prez says: Jan 20, 2011 5:10 PM

    I dont know who is worse Stern or Goodell. Guy is a joke and is helping to destroy the game we all love. Sadly I will still watch.

  7. coloradothistle says: Jan 20, 2011 5:14 PM

    So Goodell wants “around the clock talks.”

    As a football fan, so do I.

  8. lemmam says: Jan 20, 2011 5:14 PM

    As a member of one of the teams chain crew (start of drive stud), I certailnly hope both parties get this resolved and in the rear view mirror.

  9. ryansdirtytrailer says: Jan 20, 2011 5:17 PM

    We don’t care about the preseason games, Roger. Just don’t charge the same price for them, and if you’re going to charge the same price for them, make parking free. Throw us a bone here.

    Let them talk smack and let them hit as well. This isn’t the Monks’ league, it’s the NFL.

  10. laeaglefan says: Jan 20, 2011 5:19 PM

    Someone should enlighten Mr. Goodell to the fact that no one in LA cares about having an NFL team here. We all care more about seeing our own home town teams on TV more, and not have to watch the local team instead.

  11. geezohman says: Jan 20, 2011 5:23 PM

    “we want to make sure that there’s ‘respect’ among the players…”

    =================

    HA ! Tell me the percentage that even have a (college degree) and the one’s that do… what are they in? (basket weaving)… Not saying all but a majority !

    College is just the ‘minor’ leagues for these guys… HALF of them can’t even talk proper ENGLISH !

    respect for most of them was at the end of a gun in their high schools…. hell, half of them continue that with drugs, guns… prostitutes…

    Get real… you’re running a glorified smack down ring

  12. kc4life7 says: Jan 20, 2011 5:29 PM

    Will they quit talking about what they want and just f ‘ n do it already?!?!?!!!

  13. jamie54 says: Jan 20, 2011 5:35 PM

    Well, Rog, since you’re the face of the league it looks like you’re in for little sleep over the next six weeks since you should be the one organizing and facilitating the talks. Or, these words are meaningless BS and you’re just talking out of both sides of your mouth. It’s put up or shut up time, what will it be?

  14. NoHomeTeam says: Jan 20, 2011 5:36 PM

    17 Regular Season games.

    8 “Home”
    8 “Away”
    1 at a neutral site.

    Like that new stadium in downtown L.A.

    No fans get cheated out of a Home game, nobody “loses” their team to relocation, and we get pro football back in Southern California.

    Who loses here?

  15. NoHomeTeam says: Jan 20, 2011 5:40 PM

    laeaglefan says: Someone should enlighten Mr. Goodell to the fact that no one in LA cares about having an NFL team here. We all care more about seeing our own home town teams on TV more, and not have to watch the local team instead.

    Someone should enlighten laeaglefan that he or she doesn’t speak for all of us.

    And that Southwest Airlines has daily flights traveling from LAX to Philly starting at around $170.00

  16. arcaero says: Jan 20, 2011 5:54 PM

    Like I said before, NFL or not, my life will go on just fine without football on Sunday. Go ahead and blow the season up. I will spend my hard earned money somewhere else. Dumbasses.

  17. broncsfan says: Jan 20, 2011 5:57 PM

    Does anyone know what the real sticking point is? Sometimes I hear it’s 18 vs. 16 games, sometimes I hear it’s a salary cap, sometimes I hear its insurance/pensions for ex-players, sometimes I even hear it’s more an internal owners squabble over revenue sharing. Hopefully there’s some more clarity behind the scenes, or God help the negotiators.

  18. cappa662 says: Jan 20, 2011 6:02 PM

    Leave it at 16 games!!!!!! 18 games is too many, before you know it, the NFL will turn into MLB… where just about every game is meaningless.

  19. snaponrules says: Jan 20, 2011 6:24 PM

    If the fans really want a team in LA, why do teams keep leaving LA to go elsewhere?

  20. manderson367 says: Jan 20, 2011 6:28 PM

    Instead of trying to “grow the fan base” with stupid overseas games, why not try to grow the fan base in the US and move the preseason games to locations that don’t have an NFL team?
    Kind of like what the MLB does with baseball? Keep it in the general region, like the Chiefs playing in OKC or Lincoln. Broncos in Salt Lake, Titans in Memphis, something along those lines.
    Then the season ticket holders aren’t getting robbed by paying full price for meaningless game and people in other locations can see NFL football (sort of) without having to travel as far.

  21. Deb says: Jan 20, 2011 6:30 PM

    “We want to be back in L.A.,” Goodell said….“We know the fans want us to be there…”

    What fans would that be? The Vikings and Chargers fans who’ve been loyal to their teams for half a century? The Jaguars fans who 15 years ago were sold the bill of goods that they’d won an NFL franchise?

    Or do you just mean billionaire owners looking for a way into one of the nation’s largest television markets?

    Rog, while you’re salivating over the LA stadium for the nonexistent team–are you helping the Vikes get a stadium? Are you helping actual fans who’ve been buying tickets and merchandise for 50 years?

  22. 49erman says: Jan 20, 2011 6:35 PM

    LA deserves an NFL franchise? Oh please. It couldn’t keep the Raiders and the Rams were they were there in the 80’s and very early 90’s so why should they get another franchise now?

  23. thetooloftools says: Jan 20, 2011 7:18 PM

    Like they need broke taxpayers in California to build a stadium for a team they don’t need and won’t support.
    “Build it.. and they will come” in the second qtr and leave in the 3rd”.
    Unless they name this team “The Hollywood Stars” and give out plastic “bling” it will crash and burn.

  24. freedomispopular says: Jan 20, 2011 7:38 PM

    Your Jedi mind trick won’t work on me, Roger!

  25. mayfieldroadboy says: Jan 20, 2011 7:57 PM

    LA is the probably the biggest TV market in the US. Why? Because a vast number of southern Californians lives on government subsidies and they sit in front of a TV waiting for the hand-outs to arrive. But if no one goes to the game, the games are blacked out and the advertisers are just spending idle dollars in an insecure market. Also, California, because of the inherent financial burden of the southern part of the state, is the largest debtor in the USA. $19,000,000,000.00 in the red. LA is the last place to put a football team; going to a pro football game costs over one hundred dollars, on the cheap, per person. Get an agreement signed and take care of the NFL you have; as business men you should understand that a weak foundation will not support the superfluous and supercilious additions you want to make to an already booming business.

  26. erikw65 says: Jan 20, 2011 8:23 PM

    Totally agree w/Manderson, “why not move the preseason games to locations that don’t have an NFL team?”

    I grew up not far from the Yale Bowl, where the Giants and Jets played a bunch of games in the early 70’s, and it had a big effect on me.

    Maybe they could play some more games in Canada, early in the season, instead of Europe in late October?

  27. geezohman says: Jan 20, 2011 10:03 PM

    the atmosphere’ of going to a ‘home’ game is just ‘awesome’… I was at the Steelers – Ravens game and if it is like that at other stadiums… then that is where the games should be held…

    Communities spent alot of money to build those stadiums.. some from the ‘county’ residents…

    (In Cleveland it was a ‘sin’ tax only on that county)…

    No.. don’t need to go to a ‘third’ rate stadium to see a game… same as in baseball… try the real thing, not AA etc

  28. bpross01 says: Jan 20, 2011 10:05 PM

    All of you people wanting half price preseason:
    Don’t you realize that’s the SAME as dropping two preseason games and making a 2+16 season?? And the players won’t go for that because it directly drops revenue, and they don’t want to be the party that is responsible for dropping revenue.
    The owners aren’t going to gain much revenue from a 2+18 over a 4+16. They’re going to a 2+18 because THE FANS WANT IT. They’re not going to a 2+16 or a “half-price preseason” because it will DROP REVENUE.

  29. goldsteel says: Jan 20, 2011 10:46 PM

    “We want to make sure that there’s respect among the players, coaches and most importantly for the game,” Goodell said. “It’s something we’re going to address in the off season.”

    That’s a very generalized statement that could mean a number of things. It’s the typical political statement one should expect from Roger Goodell’s No Fun League. Another grasp at more power to control the game.

    No one from the owners to the players cares what Roger Goodell wants. The negotiations will be what they are when they are.

    Fire Goodell.

  30. anthonyfromstatenisland says: Jan 21, 2011 2:57 AM

    Let me try my hand at this:

    1. An 18-game regular season, with two preseason games for ALL teams, including those playing in the Hall Of Fame Game, which will henceforth be played the same week as the rest of the preseason openers, rather than one week before (and on a Thursday night, so it remains the first preseason game played). Also, all player base salaries increase 12.5% across the board, each team gets two bye weeks, and all mandatory off-season workouts are abolished.

    2. A per-team annual allotment for rookie salaries, which each team can distribute among its rookies any way they see fit. For example, a team could do what the Saints did in 1999, and trade all their draft picks for a single selection (Ricky Williams in that case) and spend their entire allotment to pay that one player; in other words, no hard, per-player maximum.

    3. All new contracts shall be guaranteed.

    4. Abolish the salary cap altogether, because the 18-game schedule format will call for first-place teams to play six of their 18 games against other first-place teams, while last-place teams play six of their 18 games against other last-place teams (by means of adding two inter-conference games to each team’s schedule), thereby obviating the need for a salary cap to promote so-called “competitive balance.” Furthermore, with only two preseason games, more valuable players will be cut in preseason, and claimed off waivers by weaker teams.

  31. NoHomeTeam says: Jan 21, 2011 3:15 AM

    snaponrules says “If the fans really want a team in LA, why do teams keep leaving LA to go elsewhere?”

    49erman says: “LA deserves an NFL franchise? Oh please. It couldn’t keep the Raiders and the Rams were they were there in the 80′s and very early 90′s so why should they get another franchise now?”

    Really? That’s the best you’ve got? Events from almost 2 decades ago? “Why do teams keep leaving?” Who “keeps leaving,” snappy? Who couldn’t we “keep,” 49erman? “The Raiders, who couldn’t manage to draw a crowd when they were the only game in town? Or the scRams, who a) didn’t even play in L.A. County and b) had an ownership who deliberately ran the team into the ground in order to claim a lack of fan support and justify their move to another city?

    St. Louis allegedly wouldn’t support the Cardinals; do they “deserve” the Rams? How about Cleveland? They wouldn’t put up a new stadium for Art Model. Should they have the “New Browns?” Baltimore “couldn’t keep” the Colts; perhaps you think they shouldn’t have the Ravens.

    I could go on, but do I really need to?

  32. anthonyfromstatenisland says: Jan 22, 2011 2:57 AM

    And the Los Angeles situation points up a way the owners can FORCE the adoption of the 18-game schedule – by means of expansion, as it would be logistically impossible to maintain the neat divisional rotation adopted along with the 2002 realignment with 34 teams (one more team means two more teams, sooner or later, as the league would not tolerate an odd number of teams indefinitely) playing only 16 games. If you don’t believe me, sit down with a pen and a pad when you’re not doing anything, and try it – and believe me when I say that I have.

    San Antonio – population 1.25 million – would be the heavy favorite to garner the other expansion team. The L.A. team goes into the NFC West – and it must be in the NFC to avoid the same blackout radius overlap with San Diego that prompted the league to fiercely oppose Al Davis’ move of the Raiders to L.A. in 1982 – while San Antonio can go in the NFC East to provide the Cowboys with a natural geographical rival. Seattle can then return to the AFC West, which Paul Allen never wanted to leave to begin with, Allen casting the lone dissenting vote against the ’02 realignment (and it’s only fair that the NFC get both new teams when the AFC got both new teams in the last round of expansion – Cleveland in 1999 and Houston in 2002).

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!