Skip to content

NFLPA* responds to Goodell letter: “Your statements are false”

NFL Lockout Looms As Negotiations Reach Final Day Getty Images

As promised, the NFLPA* has responded to Commissioner Roger Goodell’s letter to them with a four-page letter of their own:

We’ll publish the entire letter and break it down further later, but here are a few highlights:

1. The letter starts with this sweet nothing:  “We start by reminding you that we were there at negotiations and know the truth about what happened.”  (Their bolding, not ours.)

2. The letter criticized the league for not having owners present during the majority of negotiations.  The players listed a number of facts with the preface to Goodell: “Your statements are false.”

3. The facts primarily dealt with the problems that the union has with the financial aspects of the proposal, with the players contending that their percentage share of revenue decreasing.  Much of the same ground was covered by DeMaurice Smith earlier in the week.

4.  The players expressed unhappiness with the proposed rookie wage scale.  “Your rookie compensation proposal went far beyond addressing any problem of rookie ‘bust’ and amounted to severely restricting veteran salaries for all or most of their careers, since most players play less than 4 years.”

5. The NFLPA* dismissed the apparent gains in health and safety issues like so:

“All of the other elements of the negotiation, which you claim players should be eager to accept, were conditioned on the players agreeing to a rollback of their traditional share of 50/50 of all revenues to what it was in the 1980’s, which would have given up the successes the players fought for and won by asserting their rights in court, including the financial benefits of free agency the players won in the Freeman McNeil and Reggie White litigations more than 20 years ago.”

6.  The most depressing part of the letter for fans:  The chances for further negotiations before a court date don’t sound promising.  “We no longer have the authority to collectively bargain on behalf of the NFL players, and are supporting the players who are asserting their antitrust rights in the Brady litigation,” the players write.  “We have heard that you have offered to have discussions with representatives of the players.

“As you know, the players are represented by class counsel in the Brady litigation with the NFLPA and is Executive Committee serving as an advisor to any such settlement discussions.  If you have any desire to discuss  a settlement of the issues, you should contact class counsel.”

Next stop: Court?

In the meantime, we’ll continue to report on the owners and the NFLPA* talking to each other without, you know, actually talking to each other or getting anything accomplished.

Permalink 91 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories, Union
91 Responses to “NFLPA* responds to Goodell letter: “Your statements are false””
  1. sdboltaction says: Mar 19, 2011 1:11 PM

    The union seems adament about going to court, which will have an extremely liberal-progressive judge, no doubt. Leave it to the courts to be the supreme authority. Look at what’s happening to Gov. Walker in WI! What’s re point of electing officials when an appointed judge can just do whatever they want if t shots their ideals? The law is like he Bible, it can be skewed or “interpreted” to suit ones agenda. Bull Poop! Where’s this country going….

  2. sdboltaction says: Mar 19, 2011 1:12 PM

    *the and *suits. Sorry for the typos, stupid phone.

  3. norfva says: Mar 19, 2011 1:16 PM

    Man this is getting depressing. I love football have my entire life but I am starting to get really annoyed with this crap. I can not promise I will be as passionate about it if they Lise game next season. They are really taking us as fan for granted and it is pissing me off. I have a bargain for you lower the ticket price and the prices off the jerseys so normal cans can enjoy them and stop whining like you are entitled.

  4. hobartbaker says: Mar 19, 2011 1:17 PM

    Once again, the athletes and their (De)Mentors prove the “Peterson Principle”, which states that speed and agility are inversely proportional to Wonderlic scores.

  5. thereisalwaysnextyear says: Mar 19, 2011 1:19 PM

    4. The players expressed unhappiness with the proposed rookie wage scale: “Your rookie compensation proposal went far beyond addressing any problem of rookie “busts” and amounted to severely restricting veteran salaries for all or most of their careers, since most players play less than 4 years.

    Hello? The reason the average is so low is because there are so many sub-par players that get a shot when they are young, play special teams etc and then are out of the league if they don’t get better. Those guys wouldn’t really be impacted by the rookie wage scale(as I know it) because they wouldn’t be the top guys taken. They would be the lower round guys and free agents.

  6. mumakata says: Mar 19, 2011 1:21 PM

    “All of the other elements of the negotiation, which you claim players should be eager to accept, were conditioned on the players agreeing to a rollback of their traditional share of 50/50 of all revenues to what it was in the 1980′s,”

    Will the players share the operating costs 50/50? Doubt it. Greedy players.

  7. chatham10 says: Mar 19, 2011 1:23 PM

    Who cares what the NFLPA thinks, they do not exist. The players wanted to meet just with the owners and the owners said, where and when? Players, put up or shut up.

  8. mkuske says: Mar 19, 2011 1:25 PM

    I asked this in another post, but will ask it here too.

    I would love to know from someone with legal expertise whether the judge can reject the decretification of the NFLPA. It seems to me that they obviously are still coordinated and acting in concert and that the NFLPA is still a de facto active union. For a judge to act as if the union is truly decertified, shouldn’t the union have to act like they are no longer a union?

  9. duanethomas says: Mar 19, 2011 1:27 PM

    The only way this is going to end is to stop the back and forth and be completely honest with each and negotiate in earnest. No agenda’s, no pride, no revenge, just get a deal done that will continue to grow the game. Right now it just assured mutual destruction with no winners. The players have to get off challenging the league’s antitrust exemption and making the books public. The owners have to be respectful (we will open the books but you wont understand them??? ) and PLEASE stop the false statements like Joe Banner did this week on the site. April 6th if its goes in favor of the players, we will have no more lockout and business as usual, if not it will be awhile. Not pro-player. Not pro-owner. Pro NFL. Players and Owners will come and go the NFL has been here for over 90 years and will be here 90 yeras from now.

  10. sanjosecupcrazy says: Mar 19, 2011 1:28 PM

    Obvious by the last statement that the players have no intention of returning to the bargaining table. At this point, you can hang the blame on them.

  11. zaggs says: Mar 19, 2011 1:28 PM

    First off this shows Mike Vrabel a complete an utter liar. He says one day players want to speak directly to owners, then the next signs his name to a letter saying that only class counsel should be contacted.
    The rest is really just BS. Goodell never said they were maxing out the salary cap. What he said was that they were meeting the union half way on salary cap. I’d also like to see the mythical Moody’s report, because I do not think it says what the union says it does.
    I also notice the complete lack of a counter offer.

  12. jeff061 says: Mar 19, 2011 1:28 PM

    More bomb throwing half-truths by the Union without (ever) providing their positions on anything. If I’m Goodell I’d ask the u ion to share their positions publicly – rather than just making general claims that the owners are way off.

    Not sure if this comes from pure idiocy on the part of the players, or I’d D Smith has just been successful in not telling the truth to the players. I think the players have over-played their hand, and the court isn’t going to appreciate this charade.

    Its apparent the strategy for the union is “distract” and get to April 6th – pretty lame.

  13. bf53 says: Mar 19, 2011 1:30 PM

    Meanwhile, Suzie Q, Arizona Cardinals office secretary, was up all night trying to figure out what to cut from her budget when she loses 35% of her paycheck next month.

  14. thestrategyexpert says: Mar 19, 2011 1:32 PM

    Well nice to see the NFLPA agreeing with me on the rookie “busts” problem that I wrote about earlier and got slammed with a bunch of negative points. Even they are on my side. Get your head in the game PFT readers! :)

  15. bronco1st says: Mar 19, 2011 1:32 PM

    The owners who are making all these gestures for the NFLPA* to return to the table to negotiate is just a ruse designed to gain public favor.

    The NFLPA cannot return, since they have already decertified and to do so, would undermine their legal foundation on decertification (as a union). By returning to the table, the owners could then justifiably argue that the decertification was a sham.

    By negotiating, the players would would add validity to the argument made by the owners that they (players) are still acting as a union and thereby rendering the now filed law suites by independent, individual players like Brady, Manning, Brees and the others as without a legal basis (since they would then be still be represented by the union and therefore, required to address their issues through the union and not the courts).

  16. bucngator says: Mar 19, 2011 1:33 PM

    The players worked all night on this response? …..and Vrabel’s suggestion to meet with the owners, didn’t carry any weight or authority??

    ATTENTION NFL PLAYERS: You Suck, and would have gotten your collective “butts” handed to you against Jones, Richardson and Kraft!

    Now you’ll pin you hopes in court?? Psssssttt…. check out who sits on the appeals board in that circuit…. De Smith, isn’t as bright as he’s led you to believe!!

    I’m almost at the point, where I hope the season is cancelled and the players are forced to join “OUR” world, of uncertain future, and scraping to get by on a monthly basis.

    You’ll have no one to blame but yourselves!

  17. nitschke66 says: Mar 19, 2011 1:38 PM

    Awesome! 13-17% of the country is out of work, we are witnessing crisis upon crisis any you all can’t find a way to get this done or at least keep it out of the news. All for playing a game in stadiums funded by tax payers who for the most part can’t afford to go to a game. Slavery? Idiots!!

  18. chiefsnfl says: Mar 19, 2011 1:38 PM

    First there is a letter from Goodell which is then re-written by the players for accuracy. What’s next? Is Goodell going to doing an interpretive dance which will then have to be re-done by the players for accuracy?! C’mon, man. Just meet in person instead of these silly antics.

  19. ezmoover says: Mar 19, 2011 1:42 PM

    It continues to boggle my mind that grown men with seven figure salaries continue to behave like finger-pointing children through public forums.

    “He’s a lousy, scum liar!”

    “No! He’s the dirty, piece of garbage liar!”

    “No! It’s all on you, ya lying sack of crap!”

    “No! You’re the big, fat liar!”

    “Wahhhh”

    “Wahhhh”

    “I’m going back home to my big expensive house in the Hamptons that my million dollar executive salary has earned!”

    “Ya? Well me too!”

    “See you in court, ya stupid liar!” (gets in Benz limo, drinks Chivas and drives off)

    “No! You’re the big, stupid liar!” (gets in Benz limo, drinks Chivas and drives off)

  20. Deb says: Mar 19, 2011 1:43 PM

    Thank you for providing links to the players’ letter in its entirety. As I’ve been posting since last Friday, the owners improperly (according to federal court ruling) arranged to siphon money from their TV contracts to finance their long-planned lockout. They never negotiated in good faith, turned down proposals by the players, and dropped the so-called “fair” offer on them in the ninth hour–an offer that didn’t address the revenues in contention. With the deadline looming, the players had to decertify or be left with no way to fight back. As the players wrote:

    “You had ample time over the last two years to make a proposal that would be fair to both sides, but you failed to do so. During the last week of the mediation, we waited the entire week for the NFL to make a new economic proposal. That proposal did not come until 12:30 on Friday, and, when we examined it, we found it was worse than the proposal the NFL had made the prior week when we agreed to extend the mediation. At that point it became clear to everyone that the NFL had no intention to make a good faith to resolve these issues in collective bargaining and the owners were determined to carry out the lockout strategy they decided on in 2007.”

    The owners’ proposal delivered that Friday was all or nothing. If the players had agreed to the section in the 18-game season, they would have had to accept deep pay cuts plus a 10-year agreement that didn’t even address long-term revenue splits. Just because they play a game for a living doesn’t mean they should let themselves be played. They didn’t pick the fight … and they didn’t shut down the league.

  21. eagleswin says: Mar 19, 2011 1:43 PM

    “All of the other elements of the negotiation, which you claim players should be eager to accept, were conditioned on the players agreeing to a rollback of their traditional share of 50/50 of all revenues to what it was in the 1980′s, which would have given up the successes the players fought for and won by asserting their rights in court, including the financial benefits of free agency the players won in the Freeman McNeil and Reggie White litigations more than 20 years ago.”

    ———————–
    I’m extremely curious to read this 4 page letter. I don’t recall anyone mentioning a repeal of free agency on either side so that sounds more inflammatory than factual.

    It really does highlight that THE PLAYERS DON’T CARE ABOUT PLAYER SAFETY if they have to pay for it. The same thing about retirement benefits. Yes, they want it, but not if they have to take one dollar less today to get it.

    The players really do see the owner’s money as theirs. It’s not enough that the league is effectively promising to take care of them for life now. It is not enough that the league guarantees the salary cap and actual money spent will increase every year for the life of the CBA. They are still concerned that they are leaving one penny on the table.

    No salaries will be rolled back. Noone is asking them to give back one penny of salary that they are contracted for. Noone is asking them to invest in the league. Noone is asking them to donate any of the money they make off of the endorsement deals they sign as a result of the league.

    No matter how much money they make it’s never enough. No matter how many benefits they get it’s never enough.

  22. uncleb3 says: Mar 19, 2011 1:45 PM

    We’re here because the owners want some money back, which is justified by the players acknowledging they got a sweetheart deal last time. So now, the improvements on health/safety are unacceptable because they’re contigent on giving some money back? Sounds to me like the players want to take, with no give.

  23. prmpft says: Mar 19, 2011 1:47 PM

    …FIRE ALL OF THEM!!!

  24. morebrocato says: Mar 19, 2011 1:48 PM

    So…Now that there is no union negotiating on behalf of the players…What’s to stop the owners from using replacement players..?

    If we just want to see football in the Fall…Do we care if it’s Ochocinco and Vrabel? …At some point, there’s always college football, and maybe an occasional “He Hate Me” on the NFL screen.

    Would that be so bad?

  25. oldbyrd says: Mar 19, 2011 1:53 PM

    How did the owners let these socialists take over their business. Each time they started their C–P they should started over.

  26. hobartbaker says: Mar 19, 2011 1:54 PM

    In the works of several bitter, angry, unemployed malcontents, of no fixed affiliation…..Roger Goodell is a liar. You be the judge.

  27. thefiesty1 says: Mar 19, 2011 1:56 PM

    I’m going to tell Mommy Na, Na, Na, Na! You are all a bunch of cry babies. Your boy, De screwed you to the wall. The players don’t deserve what they had before the CBA.

  28. brambo67 says: Mar 19, 2011 1:58 PM

    What the players don’t understand and I can’t quite believe isn’t being said is the simple fact that ALL businesses what standardised costs for each financial year. The owners NEED to know what their costs will be. They want to have a set amount set aside for salaries, thus working in the same way that other businesses do.

    Sorry, but if the players go the route of litigation as they want then players WILL LOSE OUT. The first thing that clubs will do is set a players wages (salary) budget. Do not think that everyone will just keep pushing up the amounts each year. That does not necessarily follow.

    The players are deluded.
    The NEED TO BE BACK negotiating, NOT letting their lawyers do the work because all that happens under the litigation scenario is they extent, extent and finally do little.

  29. euroamericans says: Mar 19, 2011 2:04 PM

    You know what, screw you players. I am trying to read these other articles about football news instead of all this back and forth about the CBA and stay into football but it is ruined. I find myself despising the players which makes me not even want to care about what is going? Now you want to take the draft away from me and these kids coming into the league? How dare you. Goodell may be the figure head that is currently locking you out but be a man and leave personal feelings out of it. You have a lawyer and bitter washed up lineman that no one wanted calling your shots. Ever think they may not be the best choices? Matbe they have their own agenda?

  30. fanatic8200 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:05 PM

    I think it’s very suspicious and funny that the NFL summarize the letter for the public instead of presenting the entire letter. MrGodell letter was on public display..just saying

  31. j0esixpack says: Mar 19, 2011 2:05 PM

    This could be settled in negotiations.

    Regardless of how unfavorably they view the NFL’s offer, the NFLPA itself refuses to propose a counter-offer.

    The fans – and its own players – known this, and are growing more angry that the NFLPA would rather litigate than negotiate.

    And I’m sure I’m not the only who knows that the small army of $500 per hour lawyers will drag this out as long as possible.

  32. ratbastardshanahandjob says: Mar 19, 2011 2:06 PM

    >>>>Meanwhile, Suzie Q, Arizona Cardinals office secretary, was up all night trying to figure out what to cut from her budget when she loses 35% of her paycheck next month.<<<<

    Just have her call an office secretary from teams like the Jets or Bills and ask what to do. They have already had their pay cut. But hey Woody Johnson like other owners are hurting. His 3 billion $$ worth doesnt go as far as it used to. Like the players these secretaries, janitors, window washers etc that work for an NFL team are just going to have to do with less……Good thing the NFL owners negotiated with them in "good faith"……

    I hope the NFLPA/players hold out, go to court and stick it to that worthless Puppet Adolf-Pinocchio Goodell and the rest of the owners who opted out……

  33. brambo67 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:06 PM

    As John Clayton of ESPN made clear, there was no doubt that the offer was obviously made with an expectation that it would be improved. As he made clear, a number of recent contracts could not really be worked under a reduced salary cap amount.

    Read the article and it makes perfect sense.

    The owners want a definitive amount for the salary cap going forward. They want to be able to budget longer term on the most fluid of expenses. Doesn’t that make perfect sense?

  34. 2009kenny says: Mar 19, 2011 2:06 PM

    It amazes me how anyone suggests that this decertification isn’t a sham. Of course they will recertify after an agreement is signed. Forget about the rookie scale, there will be one. This is all about the money. It insults my intelligence when both sides keep talking to the fans and washing their dirty laundry in public. Players should remember that whatever they expose about the owners that leads to decrease earning power of the owners will ultimately lead to less money for them. Basically they are biting the hand that feeds them

  35. fanatic8200 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:09 PM

    entire letter

    http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/2011/03/players_send_re.html

  36. footballfanatic2010 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:10 PM

    My biggest problem with the NFLPA’s response is that they didn’t even address the main issue here…slavery. How dare these owners force the players to PLAY a GAME that allows them to earn MILLIONS of dollars not only in salary, but in endorsement deals.

    In all honesty, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Tom Brady have all earned many millions of dollars, and this is how they treat the men who made them rich beyond all possible need? I think every player listed on that lawsuit(along with AP and R. Mendenhall) should be banned from the NFL(when it returns), and allowed to continue their lives elsewhere.

    I’m so sick of these players that I am now rooting for a lost season. You don’t bite the hand that feeds you…but that’s exactly what the players are doing. What a pathetic group of individuals.

    IF ANY 49ER PLAYERS ARE LISTENING….I LOVE THE 49ERS, BUT I SWEAR TO GOD, IF ONE OF YOU TRIES TO DEFEND AP, OR MENDENHALL AND CLAIMS THAT PLAYING FOR THE NFL IS AKIN SLAVERY, I’M DONE WITH THE 49ERS, AND I’M DONE WITH FOOTBALL.

  37. thumper00 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:13 PM

    I’ve had enough, you guys (players) have such a big ego you think your not replacable. I hope the nfl shuts down for a season and maybe disolves to start league, you guys may have killed your sweetheart deal , see what the unemployed go through who WERE your fans…

  38. claymus1 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:13 PM

    Fire ‘em all and start over! in a year or two the level of play will be almost what it is now. To hell with these spoiled brats who can’t appreciate what a rare gift fate has laid upon them. Worry and struggle every day to keep body and soul together…Do your best for your family and be stong when it’s just not quite enough….by all means, do not have a grateful bone in your bodies. You ALL make me sick ! I’ve watched pro ball since before the ‘ice bowl’ and have spent a lot of time and money over FIVE decades supporting the game. If this does’nt end well and soon I will be ALL DONE with the NFL. Time to go outside and play {hunt n fish} on sundays…. Probably better anyway!

  39. oldhamletman says: Mar 19, 2011 2:16 PM

    the Players are completely outclassed…. these are Billionaires who made their money out of business ventures… this is like a war between the USA and Switzerland in this regard.

    They have teams of people (who won’t miss a single question on the Wonderlic, to say the least) working on legal and public relations strategies…. they have decades of multi-Billion dollar deal negotiating experience against the best old time pros in American business like the TV Networks…

    the Players are being completely dominated in the PR war and have been strategically maneuvered into dissolving their union… now they are up against one of the best lawyers in the country and opponents with practically unlimited resources

    Basically the Owners have just returned 4 kickoff returns for 4 TDs on 4 consecutive plays….

  40. flr29 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:16 PM

    If the players have their way, we will have a 2011 seasons with independent contractors while the labor situation is decided in court. Good for the fans, and good for the players.

    The owners cannot have this. They need the players to miss game checks, which is why they are in court trying to force a lockout, and force the players to belong to a union.

    Don’t lock someone out, and then complain that they don’t want to negotiate with you. The owners wanted the players to be scared of a lockout, the players called their bluff, and now the owners don’t know what to do.

  41. t1mmy10 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:18 PM

    first off, goodell didn’t lie, he only presented their facts. the players just don’t AGREE with the offer…there’s a difference. they sound like a broken record in the letter just repeating “we don’t want to give up any money & we want you to prove you need more money by opening your books.” i get that & it’s obvious to the public the owners offer wasn’t good enough to accept out right…but that’s what NEGOTIATIONS are for. i don’t how the players think it’s ok to continue to demand the owners compromise on all key parts of their wants (18 game schedule, revenue splits, rookie wage scales, etc) but refuse to offer any compromise on issues they have. it’s not rocket science that disagreements aren’t resolved by making the exact same unreasonable demands for 2 years. it’s not the owners fault for refusing to accept your demands for 2 years, it’s yours for not having more reasonable demands.

    they complain when the owners are at the table, then they turn around and complain when they aren’t at the table. vrabel demands to speak to the owners in person, then writes a letter saying he has no power & speak to the lawyers…there’s just no satisfying them. they claim the owners weren’t treating negotiations seriously? where’s a legit cba offer from the players? haven’t seen one yet other than the offer to “continue to do things they way they were…with improved benefits for the players.”

    oh, and their demands for retributions from the last year of the CBA due to increases in RFA is a joke. they agreed to that contract so they shouldn’t be pissed it happened.

  42. djcboyz says: Mar 19, 2011 2:24 PM

    You must be kidding. This goes out to all the supporters of the owners (idiots). If you are a billionaire, thats cool, but if you are like the rest of us back the players. They are fighting for their rights.

    The owners are the same people who screwed the rest of the world with their credit default swaps and lobbying for huge tax breaks. Do you really think the owners have the fans best interest in mind? Not a chance, get reaql people.

    Back the players, they put their bodies and brains (read concussions) on the line for your enjoyment. They deserve to get paid and not have their pay cut. the average career is only 3 1/2 years.

    I support the players. Remember fans, the owners started this with their lockout insurance by blackmailing the networks for $4billion and not have to play a game. Fans lets unite behind the players.

  43. Canyonero says: Mar 19, 2011 2:28 PM

    The NLF’s insanely inconsistent penalty-calling last season made the games almost unwatchable. The ONLY tension or drama in the game was “is the ref gonna call a penalty……..?” after every single play.

    It’s like being in a Skinnerian experience box; we’re getting conditioned to the “new way” the game is going to be played.

    But this labor deal crap…

    Can honestly say for the first time this year football hasn’t been a lot of fun to watch.

  44. ny82jy says: Mar 19, 2011 2:29 PM

    Everyone should go on the wfan audio page. Mike Francesa interviewed John Mara and de smith this week. It’s intereresting to hear a good interview from both parties. Desmith and the players feel the owners have been planning this lockout since 09. I feel both sides are messed up and greedy but after the interview I am siding more with the players. Listen to the interviews see what you guys think. I can’t blame the players, as rich as alot of them are what the owners are proposing just doesnt sound fair .

  45. eagleswin says: Mar 19, 2011 2:35 PM

    Deb says:Mar 19, 2011 1:43 PM

    The owners’ proposal delivered that Friday was all or nothing. If the players had agreed to the section in the 18-game season, they would have had to accept deep pay cuts plus a 10-year agreement that didn’t even address long-term revenue splits. Just because they play a game for a living doesn’t mean they should let themselves be played. They didn’t pick the fight … and they didn’t shut down the league.
    ====================
    Please tell me about these “deep pay cuts”. Is Peyton Manning no longer guaranteed his $23 million for next year. Is the salary cap not going up? Please tell me how the players will be making less money next year than this year? If this is not the case please stop mischaracterizing the owners proposal.

    The players did pick the fight by not negotiating. The league was shut down because they walked away from the negotiating table (where they gave zero concessions to the owners). How can you blame the owners when the players (self-admitted that they screwed the owners on the last deal) refuse to make any concessions and WALKED AWAY FROM NEGOTIATIONS.

    From what i’ve read in the partial links above, Goodell hasn’t lied about anything but there are several points there with which the players could negotiate with the owners. Sadly, the players refused to negotiate as they think they’ll win in court. That has been their strategy since day one. If you disagree, show me what progress was made on the players side of negotiations? Having a 58 page antitrust brief ready before the end of negotiations and having the “league wide decertification tour” before negotiations ever started was plenty of indication that the players wanted this. They didn’t hire DeSmith to negotiate a CBA. He has no experience in it, they hired him to perform his chosen profession, litigation.

    The league has repeatedly tried to the players to come back to the table but have been repeatedly rebuffed. Vrabel himself wrote an open letter to the owners asking to meet with them and then the following day attaches his name to the letter telling the owners to go pound sand and don’t talk to him.

    Which way does Vrabel want it? Meet with the NFLPA executive committee to resolve their issues or litigate? By signing his name to this letter it’s clear that the Vrabel never expected the owners to take him up on his offer. Everything the players have done starting with the “open the books” sound byte that means nothing as they refuse to look at the books for the last 5 years auditted by an INDEPENDENT 3RD PARTY ACCOUNTING FIRM. They want their auditors and their financial guys to look at it and anything else is unacceptable. Any reasonable person should ask themselves why? The reason is obvious if you aren’t to blinded by the rallying cry “open the books for the last 10 years!” to ask why and why do they need more than what the owners have already proposed to give them.

    The players walked away, not the owners.

  46. elrushbo2 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:36 PM

    The owners are not going to let the players take over the league NBA style. The players are not business partners and never will be. As an employee, you can’t force or expect the owners of a business to open up their financial records because you think you have a right to see them…….YOU DO NOT.

  47. bronco1st says: Mar 19, 2011 2:40 PM

    PFT has the dumbest bloggers in the universe. They kiss the butts of the owners just like they kiss their own bosses butts. I guess they just like having a little romance while they’re being screwed.

  48. brambo67 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:41 PM

    j0esixpack says: Mar 19, 2011 2:05 PM

    This could be settled in negotiations.

    Regardless of how unfavorably they view the NFL’s offer, the NFLPA itself refuses to propose a counter-offer.

    The fans – and its own players – known this, and are growing more angry that the NFLPA would rather litigate than negotiate.

    And I’m sure I’m not the only who knows that the small army of $500 per hour lawyers will drag this out as long as possible.

    ______________________________________

    No quite right.
    They do have a counter-offer: we want to keep it the same as before.

    Forget that fuel prices and other costs increase season on season.
    Forget that other staff wages need to rise eaqch season.
    Forget that in these uncertain times the clubs want to be able to budget better.

    The players just want the status quo.
    That is there position and it stinks.

  49. bigkat74 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:41 PM

    The players keep using this “we are business partners” crap. And it really pisses me off. They are not “business partners” they are “employees”. Business partners share in every aspect of the business including the costs of running said business. The players only want to share in the profits. They think they make the game great by themselves, but they aren’t spending one dime out of their pocket for marketing, stadium up-keep, equipment up-keep, etc. Wonder how much Peyton pitched in on the light bill at Lucas Oil Stadium this season?

  50. t1mmy10 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:41 PM

    djcboyz says: Mar 19, 2011 2:24 PM

    “You must be kidding. This goes out to all the supporters of the owners (idiots).”

    i guess you missed the memo when >25 players last year made more money than the green bay packers…the super bowl winners. it’s absurd if there’s enough that a team could field enough starters for a game that all make more than it. pretty sure that doesn’t happen in any for profit company anywhere.

  51. ninerfaithful says: Mar 19, 2011 2:43 PM

    My take on this is that the ownership is undermining the players’ intelligence. They used tactics that didn’t support their desire for a fair deal, I don’t understand how they couldn’t be at negotiation meetings, that means the players would be negotiating with the NFL brass, who is supposed to be unbiased.

    What we’re all forgetting is that to be an NFL player takes an extreme amount of talent, which none of us have, and the entire U.S. enjoys watching. They should be compensated correctly for a sport that puts the rest of their lives at risk. Whether you like it or not sports are the highest form of entertainment for all of us and it brings in tons of money, and the players deserve to make a lot of money because not many people can do it. Not many people can be a CEO, that’s why they make a lot of money.

    Roger Goodell is acting on behalf of owners, like him he wants them to be able to build brand new stadiums every five years. As for me, I love the history of Lambeau field, Candlestick park, Soldier field, and others; 99% of the stadiums are perfectly fine, go to Europe and you’ll see stadiums that have been around a hell of a lot longer than any of these.

    I’ve been somewhere stuck in the middle on this, especially because I’m not too fond of D. Smith, but I’ve come to realize the owners aren’t interested in making a fair deal, Goodell treats the players like they don’t have a clue, and we as fans are fed up.

    To College football!

  52. eagleswin says: Mar 19, 2011 2:43 PM

    flr29 says:Mar 19, 2011 2:16 PM

    Don’t lock someone out, and then complain that they don’t want to negotiate with you. The owners wanted the players to be scared of a lockout, the players called their bluff, and now the owners don’t know what to do.
    ——————
    Seriously? The order of events were like this.

    1. NFLPA said negotiations were over and walked out, decertifying, and within hours filed a 58 page antitrust lawsuit.

    2. The owners locked the players out (which is their only leverage at that point to bring the players back to the table.

    You can’t claim point 2 caused point 1 when point 1 happened first.

    Lastly, the league wasn’t bluffing. They actually did lock the players out. If it was a bluff they would’ve backed down. I don’t think the word “bluff” means what you think it means.

    The owners do know what to do and they are doing it. Doing it quite well i may add. Even fans who don’t like the owners have to concede that they know alot more facts about the owners position than they do the players. The players just keep shouting slogans and yelling that the owners are lying all the while not having a clue what the owners are lying about. Their handlers told them the owners were lying and that’s good enough for them.

  53. Deb says: Mar 19, 2011 2:46 PM

    @eagleswin …

    How typical. You state flat-out that you haven’t read the letter, then proceed to say that no one is rolling back the players’ earnings. How the heck would you know????? You haven’t bothered to fact-check anything since you’ve been posting.

    Either you’re an owner shill, a billionaire siding with billionaires … or another idiot who thinks if he kisses enough billionaire backside it will start trickling rosewater on his head. That’s not what backsides trickle. And no matter what the owners get out of this negotiation, not one dime of it will filter down to fans in the form of lower ticket prices or less expensive merchandising.

    You may hate high-paid athletes, but they have not gone on strike demanding more $$$$. The owners have shut down the league demanding more $$$$.

  54. touchdownroddywhite says: Mar 19, 2011 2:47 PM

    djcboyz says: Mar 19, 2011 2:24 PM

    You must be kidding. This goes out to all the supporters of the owners (idiots). If you are a billionaire, thats cool, but if you are like the rest of us back the players. They are fighting for their rights.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    For their right to make ridiculous amounts of money to “work” 8 months a year. Apparently the Vikings punter has an 8.3 million dollar contract… To kick a ball… And nobody is allowed to touch him except in certain and specific circumstances. I’d say they have more “rights” at work than most of us will ever have.

    Does your boss offer you 24 hour a day ride service so you can go out and get drunk any time you want? Most(if not all) of theirs do, and all of them can afford a cab.

    They want to be partners? Take all expenditures off the top and split the money 60/40 in the players favor. Guess who loses in that deal.

    Hint: It’s not the owners.

  55. flr29 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:48 PM

    Let the players decertify. Do not force them to be in a union, if they unanimously voted to not be in a union.

    The season will go on. The fans will be happy. Let the labor situation be decided in the negotiating rooms and/or in the courtrooms, while games go on as scheduled.

  56. brambo67 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:48 PM

    flr29 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:16 PM

    If the players have their way, we will have a 2011 seasons with independent contractors while the labor situation is decided in court. Good for the fans, and good for the players.

    The owners cannot have this. They need the players to miss game checks, which is why they are in court trying to force a lockout, and force the players to belong to a union.

    Don’t lock someone out, and then complain that they don’t want to negotiate with you. The owners wanted the players to be scared of a lockout, the players called their bluff, and now the owners don’t know what to do.

    ____________________________________

    It has been said on this site that the players would be happy to play 2011 under the 2010 rules.

    Now we know why: they are claiming damages for playing under a salary-cap free year THAT THEY AGREED TO UNDER THE LAST CBA.

    And I’m sorry, but if they (the players) didn’t realise the deal was so good back in 2006 they would never have allowed a get-out clause.

    Sorry, but Upshaw and Tagliabue forced the owners into a corner back in 2006 that was wrong and we’re paying for it now.

    And as for your independent contractors “theory”, if the NFLPA* had it’s way and we take antitrust to it’s conclusion, then you’ll have that each and every year.

    The NFL would have about 6 or 7 teams that could win it all every year. But then, if you’re a Cowboys, Redkins or some alike team that might seem okay. Just rule the rest of us out, yeah.

  57. deckard26354 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:49 PM

    At this point, I truly desire the 2011 NFL season to be cancelled.

    The players are fools to have been led into this quagmire by the litigation hungry tactics of De Smith.

    The owners are idiots to have so overconfidently charged into the 11th hour of negotiations without any better offers on the table.

    As big a fan of the game as I am (or was before this nightmare), and as much as it would hurt the unintended people out there (club employees, vendors, city revenue, etc.), I think that the best way to have the game delivered back to the fans is to have both sides (owners and players) suffer defeat in the almighty pocketbook.

  58. brambo67 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:57 PM

    bronco1st says: Mar 19, 2011 2:40 PM

    PFT has the dumbest bloggers in the universe. They kiss the butts of the owners just like they kiss their own bosses butts. I guess they just like having a little romance while they’re being screwed.

    ______________________________________

    There is an easy response I could make about Broncos’ fans being screwed by McDaniels, but I’ll refrain from the details.

    And buddy, you’re calling out your owner who has made it QUITE CLEAR that he’d open his books. Are you calling him a liar? Are you saying he hides things and does things that are illegal?

    Dumbest bloggers?
    Is that the writers on this site or the people using it as a message board that you’re commenting on? What we do isn’t really blogging…

  59. thumper00 says: Mar 19, 2011 2:59 PM

    hey bronco first, you must be a union goon, unions are tearing this country apart and even members are starting to see this….. If owners take the risk to start a business they should have the right to profits..
    An Employee does’t like the pay scale move on, EVERYONE is replacable………..

  60. Entropy says: Mar 19, 2011 3:18 PM

    The players claim that the NFL’s statements are false, without offering any evidence.

    It looks like a more accurate characterization would be: your statements may be true, but here is some other information that helps present our side of the story.

    Its fine (even desirable) that the union do that, but why do they have to call the owners liars when they can’t even illustrate a single instance of them lying.

    This type of behavior only serves to prevent an agreement from being reached.

  61. jeff061 says: Mar 19, 2011 3:26 PM

    I love the idiot comment in the letter chastising the owners for making a profit.

    Der – the owner are the future of the league – no profit – no league.

  62. edgy says: Mar 19, 2011 3:33 PM

    thereisalwaysnextyear says:

    Hello? The reason the average is so low is because there are so many sub-par

    *******************

    Do you not understand what they’re talking about? They’re wanting to be set free EARLIER than 4 years, which would allow them to cash in on their rookie performances when they far exceed their contract and it’s a win for the owners because it would mean that they get the draft busts off their payroll sooner.

    This hurts the real stars more because the lower you make those salaries, the less that they can point at what busts are getting and use that as leverage. The majority of those that favor a RWS are guys who were never drafted and while they may be making more money because they signed a contract extension, the extension was limited by what they were getting in the first place and in order to really cash in, they have to keep signing contracts until they reach full free agency. They would actually make out better than they would under the proposed system because they would still have to wait longer than the union wants and so they won’t make the big money unless they avoid injury and being cut for cap purposes.

    Also, the contract is a one-way street. The players have to honor it and if they don’t then the owners play PR with the fans and they end up losing in the public’s eye for being “greedy” but none of the fans are there to support those same players when management dumps them before they can finish out the contract that they were forced into honoring.

  63. FinFan68 says: Mar 19, 2011 4:12 PM

    @Deb: Please think more and type less. ;) You have brought up some fair points but you have also contradicted yourself in the process. The players admit to at least two offers made by the owners but I saw nothing where the players actually did any negotiating. They just complained about the timing of the offers. Demonizing the owners for the lockout insurance attempt is justified but ignoring the planned decertification by the union and the still coordinated efforts of the union after they decertified is disingenuous at best. I lean towards siding with the owners but I acknowledge their side has its own fault and blame. The bottom line is simple: regardless of the timing, the owners made a fair offer that could have been negotiated further and the players CHOSE to leave it on the table and walked to the courthouse. The players walked out before they were locked out.

  64. emmonsh says: Mar 19, 2011 4:27 PM

    give the players 1 week to sign or ban them from playing for 1 year. many people not in the association can play. let the old players go to the candaian league for 1/50th the money.

  65. commandercornpone says: Mar 19, 2011 4:28 PM

    duh’s a lawyer. he wants to go to court. the players are desperate. well, the union leaders are. some players will exact oakley-ewing moments.

  66. flr29 says: Mar 19, 2011 4:46 PM

    It is a bluff because the lockout is not as powerful as the owners wanted the players to believe.

    The players have made the very wise move to not care about public opinion. The strategy that says once you succumb to an opponent’s strength, then you can use it to your advantage. And this is frustrating the owners.

    The owners have nothing, nothing on their side except public opinion.

    The owners are whining for the players to negotiate, because if this goes to court the owners will lose.

    The owners locked the players out. Own it. The players want to play. The owners are in court trying to keep the players from playing.

    The owners overstretched on the American Needle case and got burned. 9-0. Hard to do with our current Supreme Court.

    If the Brady case goes to the Supreme Court, the owners will lose again. Everyone knows this.

    Owners have bitter fans on their side. Players have people who understand economics, and the law. I’ll take the latter.

    Go back to complaining about the players walking away.

  67. bahamallama says: Mar 19, 2011 5:07 PM

    I think the point most people are missing is that this is not a normal job. They had a contract and a union, why shouldn’t the players try to get as much as possible, you know the owners and league are, they even sold seats to the super bowl that didn’t exist!

    Both sides are out for themselves plain and simple, they need an agreement in place as both will suffer with no season, the owners can outlast the players but that doesn’t make them right it just means they have more money.

    What person posting here would be happy if his boss took money away from, or some of his benefits?

    I had it happen to me, I tried to negotiate in good faith with my boss but he wouldn’t give me what the employee guaranteed me. I turned him into the department of labor and got my 6 weeks of lost pay back, not only for myself but for the entire company! Does this make me selfish like the players? Not at all, there was an agreement, legal precedence, and he was in the wrong! Like the owners he kept crying poverty, but it’s funny, he not only had enough to pay me but everyone in the company!

    I don’t see why anyone would want to lose money on either side, that just doesn’t make sense, both sides are out to win, the only losers in all this is us, the fans!

  68. Deb says: Mar 19, 2011 5:31 PM

    @FinFan68 …

    Yes, my posts could be shorter, but they’re complex issues and difficult to cover in quips. But I don’t feel my posts are contradictory. The players were operating under time constraints. They received the last offer from the owners at 12:30 p.m. on Friday, and felt it was a significant step back in negotiations. They had to decertify by midnight or the owners could lock them out and they’d lose the opportunity to challenge them in court. They waited until 5 p.m. I wouldn’t have waited until the last minute either.

    The owners had weeks earlier turned down a proposal from the players in which they offered to cut back their revenues and to drop their request to see the books. The owners repeatedly walked away from negotiations in the weeks leading up to the dealine. They had a week to present a counterproposal but waited until less than 12 hours before the deadline. They had already attempted to improperly funnel money from television contracts into a lockout fund.

    Sorry, but I think they’d been planning a lockout for a couple of years. Decertification is a stopgap measure–a way to counter a lockout. It’s not an aggressive strategy. In other words, the owners were planning how to drill a hole in the dam and the players were simply planning how to fill it. That’s why I haven’t called them out on decertification.

  69. blantoncollier says: Mar 19, 2011 5:36 PM

    I have posted this before and will again..Dee Smith wants to be the Marvin Miller of football. His one goal, besides promoting Dee Smith, is to destroy pro football as we know it today.

    Dee has a big problem, the system we have today is what has made the game great.

  70. stevem7 says: Mar 19, 2011 5:55 PM

    Gee the UNION is calling Goddell’s statements lies. Kind of like Kettle meet Pot. The UNION fails to bring up that they, the UNION, began instructional training for all players two years ago on financial responsibility and having money available because it was ALWAYS the UNION’s intent to decertify and get the differences into a court of law. This means that the UNION, has bargained in BAD FAITH for the last two years because they never intended a CBA to become a reality. I have no use for the UNION and their underhanded ways and hope the owners go get a COMPLETE set of replacements and go forward with a new NFL where things aren’t this disingenuous. And current NFL players are NEVER offered a contract again by any owner.

  71. laeaglefan says: Mar 19, 2011 5:57 PM

    Why does everyone keep blaming the Union for not stating their position or making counter proposals to the owners? They’ve stated their position very clearly. They want the old CBA….nothing more, nothing less. Its the owners who insist on tearing it up and redoing it in a way far more beneficial to them.
    It behooves the owners to come up with a proposal that the Union is willing to accept….not make counter offers to.

  72. FinFan68 says: Mar 19, 2011 6:01 PM

    @Deb: Saying they walked away from the offer because of this deadline and then citing a similar situation before the last deadline IS contradictory. Did the players offer an extension to hash out this particular offer? No. You are correct that the owners mentioned the lockout a couple years ago but what you forget is that the owners first mentioned renegotiating the deal first. The players said no, thereby forcing the lockout strategy in order to get the players to sit at the table in the first place. The scam to syphon money for the lockout was wrong and the players rightfully won that in court. That money is not available to the league during the lockout and is no longer relevant to the situation. To use your analogy, the owners were saying the dam will burst…

  73. Deb says: Mar 19, 2011 8:16 PM

    @FinFan68 …

    Ah, but if the owners had stuck with the existing CBA instead of using the opt-out clause, there’d be no need to have a negotiation or a deadline, would there? ;)

    Do I think the players could have handled this better? Probably. I know the owners could have handled it better. As you noted in reference to the lockout fund, no need to keep rehashing what was. Vrabel’s suggestion that the players and owners meet without their attack dogs or the divisive commissioner is the best chance to reach an agreement both sides can tolerate before the courts take it out of their hands. The most important thing now is to move forward.

  74. x4a1496 says: Mar 19, 2011 8:23 PM

    Who cares? Most NFL (and NBA Players as well) are nothing more than Highly Overpaid Semi Literates who can’t put together a coherent sentance if they tried!!!

  75. kairn42 says: Mar 19, 2011 8:53 PM

    BOTH sides could have handled this much better than they are, and if both sides took all the effort they’re wasting trying to win the “court of public opinion” and spent it on “Sit down, shut up and negotiate” this would have been done already.

    And maybe the people who are saying “to be business partners, the players should take some of the risk…”

    …I’d love to see people tell folks like Collie and Thiesman that they weren’t taking any risk. Maybe to be “partners” people like Kraft and Jones should pad up and take some hits…

  76. snnyjcbs says: Mar 19, 2011 9:00 PM

    There was to be no more Union, ya right. The Court move is nothing but a shame. I cannot wait to see the look on the players Faces when the Court Rules it is a shame and that the Lock Out will Stand.

    I keep hearing all this player hype, point is they never once mention what they offered. The owners moved and negotiations should have continued. But the Union always planned on trying to use the Court.

  77. patsfan51 says: Mar 19, 2011 9:10 PM

    The only other organization that gets less accomplished than the NFL players / owners………..the United States Congress!!!

  78. eagleswin says: Mar 19, 2011 9:49 PM

    Deb says:
    Mar 19, 2011 2:46 PM
    @eagleswin …

    How typical. You state flat-out that you haven’t read the letter, then proceed to say that no one is rolling back the players’ earnings. How the heck would you know????? You haven’t bothered to fact-check anything since you’ve been posting.

    Either you’re an owner shill, a billionaire siding with billionaires … or another idiot who thinks if he kisses enough billionaire backside it will start trickling rosewater on his head. That’s not what backsides trickle. And no matter what the owners get out of this negotiation, not one dime of it will filter down to fans in the form of lower ticket prices or less expensive merchandising.

    You may hate high-paid athletes, but they have not gone on strike demanding more $$$$. The owners have shut down the league demanding more $$$$.
    ————————–
    Much like D. Smith’s charges you declare that the other side is “lying” without stating why you think the other side is lying. Your arguments are perceived emotional slights, much like the union.

    Presenting a rational argument is not being a shill. Rebutting a rational argument with emotional tripe, well that’s more likely to be done by a shill. I don’t hate either side and there’s many things the owners do that I don’t like but this isn’t one of them.

    Again, the owners are not taking any money that the players have earned (contracted for) away from the players. They are not limiting the players earning potental away from the field (ie .. commercials, endorsements). The NFLPA will not be “writing a check” to the NFL like D. Smith likes to say. I think everything else i have to say has been said previously and you have yet to refute or answer any of the questions i’ve asked .

  79. FinFan68 says: Mar 19, 2011 10:03 PM

    @Deb: The NFLPA has publicly admitted (a couple years ago and also as recent as this month)that the latest CBA was disproportionally advantageous to the players. Of course they want to keep the deal the way it is. Both sides signed the deal with the opt out clause. Both sides agreed to renegotiate if the opt-out happened. The players said, nevermind we will see you in court. While the owners have tried some shenanigans, the players have failed to negotiate. You mention that the players made an offer weeks ago but did the owners respond by waiting for the CBA to end so they could lockout the players? No, they agreed on an extension and made an offer that at least addressed some of the players’ demands. Both sides are at fault. The owners are being stingy and the players are being greedy. All sides are acting like spoiled kids.

  80. Deb says: Mar 19, 2011 11:45 PM

    x4a1496 says:

    Who cares? Most NFL (and NBA Players as well) are nothing more than Highly Overpaid Semi Literates who can’t put together a coherent sentance if they tried!!!
    ————————————————-

    Says the guy who can’t spell sentence.

  81. Deb says: Mar 20, 2011 12:12 AM

    @eagleswin …

    I didn’t say one word about you lying. You said you hadn’t read the letter, then commented on it anyway, and I said that was typical. With all due respect, you haven’t been posting logical arguments.

    @FinFan68 …

    The owners have made a show of releasing their last proposal, which sounded good to fans. But let’s face it: It’s not about us so we don’t really know what’s good and what isn’t.

    For instance, most fans think a rookie salary cap is about limiting salaries to rookies. It’s not. That rookie contract may extend four years or six. Suddenly it’s not about an unproven rookie but about a veteran in his prime earning years. That’s a point of contention. The players have agreed to a rookie salary cap but they’re debating contract length–for good reason.

    People keep asking me “where is the players’ proposal?” It doesn’t work that way. In fact, the players did make a proposal several weeks ago. But the owners exercised the opt-out clause, so it was up to them to make the first move, and they dilly-dallied on negotiations until Doty ruled against that trick they’d planned with the lockout fund. Then they suddenly developed a little more urgency.

    This is how negotiating goes. They propose, the players counter. That’s why you’re not seeing a proposal from the players. They’re not the ones seeking a change. But they have been at the table–when they could get owners to sit down with them, which has been a real problem–and they have been negotiating. The owners have confirmed that. Now Vrabel has come reached out yet again. The owners have made some noise, but we’ll have to see if they do anything substantive.

  82. goldsteel says: Mar 20, 2011 1:31 AM

    Some prosaic efforts going on in this thread. The NFL attempted to negotiate in the press which should never be done. The NFLPA essentially said the owners and Roger Goodell were liars and the real details of the negotiations are not known by the public. I find the NFLPA’s argument credible because I regard Roger Goodell to be an overpaid, lying snake. April will be here soon enough.

  83. commandercornpone says: Mar 20, 2011 9:03 AM

    based on all the yak, and especially the tone, it is the players who have overplayed their hand.

    //////////////

    deb, he is a Highly Underpaid Semi Literate, okay?

  84. FinFan68 says: Mar 20, 2011 9:30 AM

    Deb says:
    Mar 20, 2011 12:12 AM

    This is how negotiating goes. They propose, the players counter. That’s why you’re not seeing a proposal from the players.
    ———————————
    At least you get my point, the owners have proposed several offers and the players have not countered…that’s why you’re not seeing any progress.

  85. edgy says: Mar 20, 2011 10:11 AM

    FinFan68 says:

    @Deb: The NFLPA has publicly admitted (a couple years ago and also as recent as this month)that the latest CBA was disproportionally advantageous to the players.

    *****************

    That has to be one of the most absurd things that I’ve seen. Let’s say that your boss comes to you and says that he’s regretting the 5% raise he gave you a couple of years ago and even though he’s not losing money because of it and you’re performing well above that 5%, he wants it back because he could use it to help make repairs on his condo. Are you saying that because you don’t want to give that 5% back, you’re admitting that it’s disproportionately advantageous to you to have that raise?

    You’re taking the owners position that they feel that the deal was bad for them and then turning it around as if the players have said that it’s disproportionately advantageous to them when that’s YOUR characterization and NOTHING that the players have said and if you can show a quote from the players that use that phrasing, I’ll apologize but the fact is that it’s YOUR characterization and not their position. If that deal was so bad then why did the owners SUPPOSEDLY come down from their $1 billion demand? If they really needed that money then why did they supposedly shave more than 2/3 of that off in their final offer? The money isn’t needed for D-T-D operations because the CBA ensures that they make money — PERIOD. What it doesn’t do is force the richer owners ,like Jerry Jones, into sharing the wealth that they’ve gained by using their money and building palaces with revenue that benefits the owner of that team and not the rest of the league.

    People keep bringing up the Packers but as Forbes has stated, most of their losses came from their investments and because the economy has tanked for a couple of years, they have seen a tremendous loss in their portfolio, which has been added on to their bottom line to show a loss. Yes, they’ve got increased players’ costs but the real losses are their investments in the market and real estate (Look up Forbes for 2009 to see this).

  86. FinFan68 says: Mar 20, 2011 12:18 PM

    @ edgy: I was not quoting a specific statement and I think you know that, but if you are looking for something the players have stated that means roughly the same as my “characterization” 10 seconds of research would have provided you with the following:

    “I think what really happened is in 2006 we got such a great deal” —-NFLPA President Kevin Mawae (Jan, 2011)

    Don’t chastise me for an opinion that differs from yours and then throw out an absurd comparison. As for your statements about shaving 2/3 off in their latest offer…that would be called negotiating which, at least to most people, would indicate that neither side would get exactly everything they want.

  87. Deb says: Mar 20, 2011 1:20 PM

    @FinFan68 …

    So you ignored my response … which is that the players have been doing their negotiating–and offering their counters–at the negotiating table where they’re supposed to do it rather than playing to the court of public opinion.

    Now I will leave you to edgy’s most capable care :)

  88. edgy says: Mar 20, 2011 4:56 PM

    FinFan68 says:

    **************************

    and this screams “disproportionally advantageous” to you because one guy said that they got a great deal? Listen, it’s the OWNERS who keep characterizing it as that, not the players. The players feel that they got a great deal but NOT disproportionally advantageous. Seriously, the NFL is making money hand over fist and while the bottom 5 teams aren’t making as much as the top 5, they are still making well over $200 million per year, which MORE THAN pays for their players’ salaries and benefits and leaves them money left over to pay themselves.

    As for the “negotiating” comment, it was the OWNERS who INSISTED that they needed every penny of that $1 billion because they said that escalating costs were killing them and yet, they shaved off 2/3 of it while STILL insisting that they’re bleeding money (even as Jerry Jones takes in over $400 billion in revenue from the Palace Near Dallas). Either they’re bleeding money or they’re lying. Either they need that $1 billion or they COVET that $1 billion. If it was that important when they brought it up before, why is it suddenly not as important now?

  89. juancorsair says: Mar 21, 2011 4:08 PM

    I am confused on the concept of “decertification” and what it means exactly. From what I understand, when a union decertifies it thereby ceases to exist. If that is the case, why doesn’t the league start negotiating the specific terms of employment with every player in the league as individuals, as is done in every non-union shop in North America? No union = no CBA. We certainly didn’t have a CBA in any non-union workplace I have been employed in.

  90. jpmelon says: Mar 23, 2011 5:53 PM

    @ juancorsair

    That’s why the decertification is (from the NFL’s point of view) a “sham”. The union is decertified, yet the players are all acting like they are part of a union. The letter explains this by saying that future negotiations need to be handled by “Brady et al” lawyers.

    When the union decertified, the NFL was not supposed to lockout the players….however, since the players are all still acting like they are part of the union, the NFL feels like it still has the right to lockout the players. If the judge is liberal, the players will likely win and the lockout will be deemed illegal…..I think (sorry, not a lawyer, but this is the way I understand it)

    In my opinion, the fact that the NFLPA issued a letter in return, helps the NFL’s argument.

  91. axespray says: Mar 25, 2011 12:49 AM

    meanwhile, they’ve ran out of bottled water in japan….

    but that’s a non-issue!

    There’s million dollar players that won’t be satisfied with a 50/50 split with billionaires!

    The Players are slaves darn it!

    off-topic: conservatives always mess up the economy….liberals are soft, but atleast they’ve got common sense.

Leave a Reply

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