Skip to content

DeMaurice Smith blames NFL for allowing chaos to occur

DeMaurice Smith AP

NFLPA* Executive Director DeMaurice Smith says he’s relieved that Judge Susan Nelson lifted the lockout, but he’s dismayed that the owners’ side in the labor battle isn’t starting the league year right now.

“I’m certainly happy for that,” Smith said on ESPN’s Mike and Mike in the Morning. “I know our fans love football. To be in a state where the National Football League is allowing this kind of chaos to occur, I’m not sure this is a good day for football.”

Smith said that it’s incumbent on NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to get the league moving again.

“I’m not the commissioner of the National Football League,” Smith said. “He’s the commissioner of the league. And we’re in a world where the owners of the National Football League opted out of a contract that was fine. They went to the Supreme Court to try to stick it to the players and they lost. They tried to keep revenue sharing from happening in 2010 and they lost. A judge ruled that they gamed the TV contracts to lock the players out and they lost. And then they lock the players out and took football from our fans, and yesterday they lost.”

Smith said that the court ruled that the lockout is illegal, and therefore the NFL needs to comply, specifically regarding players who are due offseason bonuses, including workout bonuses. At the moment, players are still not being permitted to work out at team facilities.

“To be in a world where guys are showing up because they want to play football, and they’re being told to go home? Or magically, today is the day that the strength coach has off? It’s petty and small at best,” Smith said. “For a world that loves this game and for fans who have done nothing over the last 50 years but be loyal to our teams, I’m not sure it’s the right way to treat our fans.”

Immediately after Smith’s comments, the NFL’s lawyer, Jeff Pash, came on ESPN Radio to offer his side, saying he expects to win on appeal.

“I think it’s quite a stretch to say that the judge ruled yesterday that we broke the law or violated any law,” Pash said. “We’re quite confident that our position will be sustained when we’re in front of the Eighth Circuit.”

Pash said it’s too soon to say exactly what yesterday’s ruling means regarding when players could return to team facilities.

“We’re trying to determine what’s the scope of the order,” Pash said. “We’ve asked for a stay. If that stay is given, either by the trial judge or by the court of appeals, that would affect what happens in the facilities. We’re going to take it one step at a time in an orderly way, in a way that’s fair and evenhanded for the players and all 32 clubs. But our commitment is to comply with the orders.”

Permalink 69 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories
69 Responses to “DeMaurice Smith blames NFL for allowing chaos to occur”
  1. snowpea84 says: Apr 26, 2011 10:27 AM

    The owneers should just pack up and move on. Things are only get worse for their businesses in the years to come.

  2. grizzlyfox says: Apr 26, 2011 10:30 AM

    Wow. De Smith should remember that he’s a lawyer by trade, and that a request for a stay is pretty simple.

    If this is “chaos” for him and the players it’s only b/c he failed to notify them of a simple procedural step that everyone and their mother knew the NFL would take if they lost on the initial ruling.

  3. billybats says: Apr 26, 2011 10:31 AM

    I can’t wait to see Jackie Chiles lose on appeal and get removed as head of the players union.

  4. richsaint says: Apr 26, 2011 10:32 AM

    Of course he is going to say that just like the owners like to point out that the players walked from negotiations.
    Both sides have to finger point as much as possible.
    If I were appointed Earth Czar tomorrow my first act would be to place De and Roger in a room say negotiate a new labor agreement and dont say a word to the media until its done.
    This is about Grand Standing and looking good as much of more so than it is actually getting a deal done.
    Roger and Demaurice need to come up with a plan that is in the LONG TERM best interest of the league before the NFL becomes the NBA (22 teams losing money this season) That means that yes the players probably need to give some money back and yes the owners probably need to take a lot less than they want and absolutely yes the retired players NEED to be taken care of!

  5. rdssc says: Apr 26, 2011 10:32 AM

    Didn’t Pash also say they were confident that Nelson would rule in favor of the league on the lockout. Not sure I can listen to that guy much longer.

  6. rdssc says: Apr 26, 2011 10:33 AM

    The League has always wanted to keep this out of the courts…..Oh REAALLLLY???
    “We’re trying to determine what’s the scope of the order,” Pash said. “We’ve asked for a stay. If that stay is given, either by the trial judge or by the court of appeals, that would affect what happens in the facilities. We’re going to take it one step at a time in an orderly way, in a way that’s fair and evenhanded for the players and all 32 clubs. But our commitment is to comply with the orders.”

  7. rad312 says: Apr 26, 2011 10:34 AM

    Enough with listening to De Smith…….

    The reality is the NFLPA / NFLPA* legal team is laying in wait for the NFL’s next move so they can play out the next legal chess move, which surprise….surprise will be filed in Minnesota to be heard by……Nelson, Doty, and/or the next liberal judge on the payroll….

    The only one that won with yesterday’s ruling was the lawyers for both the NFLPA and the owners.

    More litigation!

    Less productive discussions!

    More billable hours!

    More frustration for the fans!

  8. wawa33 says: Apr 26, 2011 10:35 AM

    D. Smith is Maxwell Smart-Kaos vs. Control

  9. clintonportisheadd says: Apr 26, 2011 10:36 AM

    “Immediately after Smith’s comments, the NFL’s lawyer, Jeff Pash, came on ESPN Radio to offer his side, saying he expects to win on appeal…”

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

    No he doesn’t. And if he REALLY does then he is the worst lawyer in the world.

    As Smith pointed out, the NFL has lost EVERY case on this issue. Every single one! They say that insanity is “doing the same thing over and over yet expecting a different result” so you have to wonder if the NFL is sane.

  10. jw731 says: Apr 26, 2011 10:38 AM

    i have always watched college football…..On Saturdays…..been to a few major collegiate games….Tickets were always easy to get, but reservations at hotels near the stadium was always a task, as the alumni book months in advance, but it’s worth the hassle, if i have to listen to anymore of these idiots talk about how they care about the fans, it will be worth it….

  11. truvikingfan says: Apr 26, 2011 10:38 AM

    Is anyone else sick of this chump, De? On one hand he says how much he adores the fans, or anyone “who digs our game”, and than on the other he blasts the very game “we all dig”, by being one of those people who are constantly stirring this pot of chaos. I am not saying that the owners/NFL side aren’t to blame either, but C’mon Man!!! Do you really expect us fans to fall for the “dig are game” crap you keep laying out there?

    This whole thing has gotten way past the point of stupid, and I am damn near ashamed to be a fan of the NFL.

    NFL=Not for Long, as in “Not many fans for very much longer!!

  12. geemoney713 says: Apr 26, 2011 10:38 AM

    I wish he would just shut up

  13. samie09 says: Apr 26, 2011 10:38 AM

    I just can’t stand this guy. He ‘s so full of crap. Yes you won, but don’t start bombing the other side. i just listen to his rant on espn saying that the players went to court because they love football and he hopes that someone on the other side loves football as much so they can get back to the table. If the players went to court for the love of the game than i go to the games because i love 8 dollar beer. I hope the players get good health care even though i’m not sure why they can’t afford it. I believe they should take care of retired players to so degree.( Especially health problems.) but beyond that just shut up and play out your contract.

  14. waitingguilty says: Apr 26, 2011 10:40 AM

    I can’t believe I’m going to say this….but I agree with the gremlin that the league needs to open back up for business.

    Every fan in the country wants trades back on for the draft. Let the 2 sides fight about this, but please…let the teams trade players NOW!

  15. clintonportisheadd says: Apr 26, 2011 10:41 AM

    “We’re trying to determine what’s the scope of the order,” Pash said.

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

    PUH-LEEZE!!!

    The “scope” is you lost on EVERY argument made by David”$700 an hour”Boies and were told to end the lockout now. Not tomorrow. Not next week. Now.

    It appears that the NFL feels it is above the law and is free to ignore a Judge’s order. I believe that’s called contempt.

    I wonder if Goodell looks good in an orange jump suit?

  16. commoncents says: Apr 26, 2011 10:44 AM

    Hey Demaurice, the fans blame you for this, not the players, not the owners, you!! Don’t reference me for your benefit, I would rather live without football for a year than risk you changing the game I love forever!! Demaurice, it is you we blame!!!

  17. warmachine2112 says: Apr 26, 2011 10:46 AM

    “Smith blames NFL mind control techniques for forcing the NFLPA to leave the negotiating table with over 5 hours left of the standing agreement”.

    FIFY.

  18. dldove77 says: Apr 26, 2011 10:47 AM

    De Smith is a conman.

  19. ArtModellsPimp says: Apr 26, 2011 10:49 AM

    This article embodies all of the reasons I despise lawyers, billionaires and unions.

    The sick part of this is that, if you ask each of them, they will tell you, “We are doing this for you, the little people…”

    Sickening…

  20. finfanjim says: Apr 26, 2011 10:53 AM

    DoucheSmith treats us like morons. I pray this ends so I don’t have to listen to him or Kessler again. Jerkoffs, all of them…

  21. seahawkhuskyfan says: Apr 26, 2011 10:53 AM

    What would prevent the owners from taking the year off? Let the players test the business market for other jobs, they all have those free college degrees right? Maybe if the owners decided to have a season in 2012 the players would find the wage scale slightly hire than what they will find in the job market today

  22. bfridley says: Apr 26, 2011 10:54 AM

    I hate DeMaurice Smith.

    The league created this chaos? Because they felt like their current deal was bad business? Of course he claims it was “fine” – it was a gold mine for the players.

    The league and players tried negotiating a contract, with the union leader calling the proposal “the worst deal in the history of sports.” So the league locked out the players to discontinue any league workings until the labor situation was settled. The union responded by decertifying their union and taking the league and all of the owners to court.

    You tell me who created chaos. I refuse to believe that this is on the league.

    I hate DeMaurice Smith.

  23. txchief says: Apr 26, 2011 10:54 AM

    So basically DeWhatever states the chaos is due to the league not immedately giving him everything he demanded.

  24. freddyfelder says: Apr 26, 2011 10:55 AM

    The league needs $10 tickets $1 hotdogs and $2 dollar beers.. and each team make one fan a millionaire.. lottery each year.. and no rookie wage scale and bring back 2k.. and i’m ohh sooo good!

  25. domeunit says: Apr 26, 2011 10:56 AM

    De Smith is a world class con artist, don’t insult us by saying you’re fighting for the fans and the owners are the ones making all the problems. Owners didn’t walk away from the table…I can’t stand this BS just show me the draft.

  26. patsforever says: Apr 26, 2011 10:56 AM

    DeMaurice Smith is punk. He has done nothing to resolve this situation. His rhetoric has served no purpose but to further divide the players and owners. His reference to the owners being “petty and small” is absurd. There actions are out of an interest in minimizing liability. If the players were to lose a decision they would take the same approach, seeking an alternate approach. This guy has not done the players any favors in the negotiation of a new CBA.

  27. 7pints says: Apr 26, 2011 10:57 AM

    I love how Smith and a good portion of the players portray this “we love the fans” angle. Memo to all NFL fans, neither Smith nor most players give a damn about the fans. If they did they would take their multi-million dollar paychecks, STFU and play football.

  28. brutus9448 says: Apr 26, 2011 10:57 AM

    Everytime I look at this guy’s face i want to throw up.

  29. lucky5934 says: Apr 26, 2011 10:59 AM

    I would love for DeSmith to just go away. Comments like these just insult the fans and are completely unnecessary. Finally, I wouldn’t celebrate too much players… I rather lose now and win the appeals than the other way around.

  30. chatham10 says: Apr 26, 2011 11:01 AM

    What do you think Smith would say, I wonder why ESPN would bring him on, there is no union so Smith should go and coach his sons soccer game.

  31. zaggs says: Apr 26, 2011 11:02 AM

    Why is De Smith even talking? If there is no union, and decertifying isn’t a sham ,why is the former union head talking making criticism? Or for that matter why are the former player reps allowed to tell their teammates what to do?
    This is the BS that gets ignored when you get pro-labor judges.

  32. jonesjack says: Apr 26, 2011 11:03 AM

    “We’re going to take it one step at a time in an orderly way, in a way that’s fair and evenhanded for the players and all 32 clubs. But our commitment is to comply with the orders.”

    I’ve avoided taking sides in this dispute but this strikes me as incredibly arrogant. How about “we’ve appealed and asked for a stay but no matter what we will do what the Federal Judges tell us to do.”

  33. crazy2bbengals says: Apr 26, 2011 11:09 AM

    De Smith is right, it is now up to Goodell to stand up and end this insanity! With NO UNION to negotiate with he and the Owners should institute their rule changes, Rookie Salary Caps ect. and move forward.
    If the players want to be in the business of making these decisions then they should buy a team, until then, they need to shut up and play ball.
    Only in America would a Liberal Judge rule in favor of a Union that does not excist.

  34. ckg0913 says: Apr 26, 2011 11:15 AM

    How about Smith clams up and actively tries NOT to make things worse!

  35. mbarylski says: Apr 26, 2011 11:18 AM

    I really wish these overpaid DBags would quit pointing their fingers at one another and sit down and get it done. It’s really disgusting

  36. orbearider66 says: Apr 26, 2011 11:21 AM

    I’ve had it with these players. As far as I’m concerned, I almost wouldn’t mind seeing the owners just cancel the upcoming season and use the time to negotiate a contract that is fair for everybody … employers and employees alike. I think it’s time the players realize that they are paid to play a game and that they are employees. If they don’t like the rules, go somewhere else and see if they can be paid mullions of dollars.

  37. crazy2bbengals says: Apr 26, 2011 11:22 AM

    Question: Why is it up to the Owners, or for that matter any business owner to supply healthcare to its emplyees and retirees?
    Answer: Because no one wants to plan a head, and take full accontability for themselves.

    This model did not work out well for GM nor will it work for the NFL or the fan of the NFL. Ultimately it is the fans that pay and eventually it will be too expensive to attend a game let alone be a season ticker holder. At the end of the day everyone must remember all increases and expenses get passed to the payeer (the fan or the consumer)!

  38. biggerballz says: Apr 26, 2011 11:34 AM

    not one picture where his mouth isn’t open!!!

  39. wasafan says: Apr 26, 2011 11:34 AM

    Those who think the NFL should immediately open their doors, have you considered the long term implications of this ruling? No cap, no minium, no FA rules, no draft.

    You may get your wish and there may be football this year, but without rules in place, you will start to see the league contract within 5 years. Teams like the Packers, Vikings, Rams, Steelers, and other small market teams will end up either moving to a larger market or constricting as they lose more and more money.

    Like I said, in the short term, this may bring back Football. In the long term, this is not good for the league and not good for the fans. In 5 years, everyone who is currently lauding this ruling will be wondering what happened to the game they love.

  40. dknice says: Apr 26, 2011 11:52 AM

    If you are ever interested in researching the phrase “Dumbing down of America”, read this forum. Somehow the greedy party is the football player who on average makes $350,000-$400,000 for about three years. Most players are not millionaires; except most of you can’t do the math.
    On the flip side, we donate out hard earned tax money to billionaire owners to build their palaces, with little to no incentive other than some low paying, seasonal jobs. These are the sympathetic figures to most of you. Unreal!!! These same billionaires opted out of the contract they agreed to, yet I see many comments about players shutting up and playing out their signed deals.
    Let’s be honest, message boards like this are populated by mostly racists that can’t stand that a black lawyer and mostly black players don’t answer “yes masta” when the owners want to take money away. It is the same for the current president. GW raised deficits more than anyone before him, yet we get fiscally responsible when a black man becomes president. There is nothing worse than angry white men that create straw man arguments instead of being brave enough to say what they really mean.

  41. blackshirtz says: Apr 26, 2011 11:59 AM

    The penis in a hat speaks. He’s nothing but a chump.

  42. pappysarcasm says: Apr 26, 2011 12:01 PM

    It’s “petty” and “small” for this azzhat to attempt to ruin the NFL for his own personal gain! He created the chaos by walking away from the table and suing in this liberal biased judicial system! What a tool!

  43. 8man says: Apr 26, 2011 12:06 PM

    I’m no fan of DeSmith’s, but so far, he has seemingly pushed all of the right buttons to move things around his way.

    But my questions is this. If this stay is based on the fact that there isn’t a union and won’t be a union, how do the players benefit in the long run without some sort of collective bargaining to establish guidelines for compensation?

    There are a lot of smart people on this board, I know at least one of you can answer this.

  44. tommyf15 says: Apr 26, 2011 12:12 PM

    snowpea84 says:
    Apr 26, 2011 10:27 AM
    The owneers should just pack up and move on. Things are only get worse for their businesses in the years to come.

    Yeah, they should just fold up their teams that are worth about a billion dollars each out of spite.

  45. mick730 says: Apr 26, 2011 12:26 PM

    ” Somehow the greedy party is the football player who on average makes $350,000-$400,000 for about three years.”

    Well, since the league minimum is 375K, the average can hardly be between 350 and 400K, now can it?

    Seems like you might be a good example of the dumbing down of America. But then, since you see everything and anything through the prism of race, why should I be surprised.

  46. bigsuede says: Apr 26, 2011 12:31 PM

    8man- the players benefit because football owners will have to compete with other teams to get players. There will be a market for ball players- teams that try to get players cheap will routinely lose- and may go out of business.

    A good model is professional soccer. The game employs 100′s of players and those at the top make a fortune- and the average player makes a good amount too. The owners on the other hand- don’t make much at all. It is more like a hobby for the rich. Which in my opinion, is how sports should be run-

  47. eagleswin says: Apr 26, 2011 12:32 PM

    dknice says:Apr 26, 2011 11:52 AM

    If you are ever interested in researching the phrase “Dumbing down of America”, read this forum. Somehow the greedy party is the football player who on average makes $350,000-$400,000 for about three years. Most players are not millionaires; except most of you can’t do the math.
    On the flip side, we donate out hard earned tax money to billionaire owners to build their palaces, with little to no incentive other than some low paying, seasonal jobs. These are the sympathetic figures to most of you. Unreal!!! These same billionaires opted out of the contract they agreed to, yet I see many comments about players shutting up and playing out their signed deals.
    Let’s be honest, message boards like this are populated by mostly racists that can’t stand that a black lawyer and mostly black players don’t answer “yes masta” when the owners want to take money away. It is the same for the current president. GW raised deficits more than anyone before him, yet we get fiscally responsible when a black man becomes president. There is nothing worse than angry white men that create straw man arguments instead of being brave enough to say what they really mean.
    —————————————————–
    Football players on average made just under $1.8 mill/yr in 2009. I’d provide a link but this site does not allow it. Also, even if your numbers were right, which they aren’t even close, $350 x 3 = $1.05 mill dollars which would make the players millionaires even at your absurdly low numbers.

    I do not support public funding of the owners stadiums.

    There’s a difference between utilizing an out clause written into a deal vs forcing renegotiation via methods not specified in the contract. Please learn the difference.

    Honestly, from reading your post it seems that the only racist here is you and not a very literate one at that.

  48. veraky says: Apr 26, 2011 12:38 PM

    Wow dknice, pulling the race card?? (Warren Moon is that you?). Now that’s funny, seriously you’re a moron. This has nothing to do with color, this is all about the $$$.

  49. dcviking says: Apr 26, 2011 12:42 PM

    dknice says: Apr 26, 2011 11:52 AM

    If you are ever interested in researching the phrase “Dumbing down of America”, read this forum. Somehow the greedy party is the football player who on average makes $350,000-$400,000 for about three years. Most players are not millionaires; except most of you can’t do the math.
    —————————————-

    Spare us if we don’t feel sorry for those people who make $350-$400 K / year for only 3 years. That’s over a million dollars — more than many will make in a lifetime.

    Plus, just like anyone else, players jobs skills become obsolete, so they need to find another job just like anyone else. Do you think the guy who fixed standard definitions televisions still has a job?

    If they want long term security, they should try barber college.

    Plus, they’ve got that degree from college, right?

    On the flip side, we donate out hard earned tax money to billionaire owners to build their palaces, with little to no incentive other than some low paying, seasonal jobs. These are the sympathetic figures to most of you. Unreal!!! These same billionaires opted out of the contract they agreed to, yet I see many comments about players shutting up and playing out their signed deals.
    ———————————————-

    I have no argument about taxpayer money being used to fund stadiums for the rich, however, the owners exercised a right in the contract they signed. They didn’t simply attempt to re-negotiate a contract that didn’t have an opt-out provision. Plus, if the owners were making huge money, don’t you think the players would have opted out of the deal.

    Let’s be honest, message boards like this are populated by mostly racists that can’t stand that a black lawyer and mostly black players don’t answer “yes masta” when the owners want to take money away.
    ————————————————-

    You got it right — lots of racists on this board.

    It is the same for the current president. GW raised deficits more than anyone before him, yet we get fiscally responsible when a black man becomes president. There is nothing worse than angry white men that create straw man arguments instead of being brave enough to say what they really mean.
    ——————————————
    There may not be anything worse, but there are something that are just bad.

  50. crazy2bbengals says: Apr 26, 2011 12:43 PM

    @dknice let us remind you these players also were given an opportunity to educate themselves, when their NFL average three years are up, they should have that to fall back on. The NFL minimum of $350K is still 7x’s what the average US Citizen makes a year. This is not about race and your ignorance shows: when you don’t have a good argue, why run to the race card?

    BTW- $350K x 3 =$1,050,000 (millionaire even by your math)

  51. 8drinkminimum says: Apr 26, 2011 12:44 PM

    dknice,
    Barack Obama is fiscally responsible? You don’t have the first clue how to read a balance sheet do you.

  52. oldbyrd says: Apr 26, 2011 12:45 PM

    The 3′-1″ mini commie shoots his mouth off again. What a piece of s–t

  53. orbearider66 says: Apr 26, 2011 12:46 PM

    @kknice … only a true moron would get on here and try to portray people being paid $350K (using your lowball number) as being victims and worthy of our sympathy because they are demanding more money to play a GAME. BTW get your facts straight … the average salary in 2009 was $770K.

    You’ll forgive me for not being terribly sympathetic about that as I slog away at a job that pays me half of what I was making two years ago thanks to our bad economy.

    My frustratation has nothing to do with race … it has to do with frustration. The “race” card … the go to play for people who can’t make an argument stand up to reason. Good job … now you’re ignorant in addition to being a moron.

  54. moochzilla says: Apr 26, 2011 12:49 PM

    NFL owners wanted a $1B raise.

    Players wanted to keep it as it was, not getting one dime more unless overall revenues increased.

    So, yeah, it’s 100% on the owners. I don’t think anyone can make a case that it isn’t.

    It’s a lockout, not a strike. The owners decided that.

  55. imongo says: Apr 26, 2011 12:51 PM

    DeMaurice is a clown, a street corner preacher just like another that we know of. He sure does talk a good game, but when it comes to results, or intelligent bargaining…he shows his true colors. A silken voiced philistine with no answers and no solutions.

  56. moochzilla says: Apr 26, 2011 12:53 PM

    “If this stay is based on the fact that there isn’t a union and won’t be a union, how do the players benefit in the long run without some sort of collective bargaining to establish guidelines for compensation?”

    One point to make is this – most of the owners benefit from the protection the CBA provides, almost as much as the players do.

    If there is no cap, and no draft, the owners of Jacksonville, Carolina, Tampa are done. They become the Pittsburgh Pirates to the Cowboy’s Yankees/Sox.

    Even successful teams would die – as no shared TV revenue would render the Packers at a sever disadvantage when generating cash to pay players. The Giants and Jets and Bears would be dominant as they’d draw in far more local TV revenue.

    One could argue that most owners want the equal playing field more than the players. Because they stand to lose huge investment without it.

    And, as we see in MLB, salaries soar when you have unfettered bidding.

  57. laxer37 says: Apr 26, 2011 12:56 PM

    Way to take the high road Smith. He’s just another lawyer that thinks negotiating is blaiming the other side when they don’t cave in to all of your demands.

    It takes two parties to create this sort of chaos.

  58. childressrulz says: Apr 26, 2011 12:56 PM

    crazy2bbengals says: Apr 26, 2011 11:22 AM

    Question: Why is it up to the Owners, or for that matter any business owner to supply healthcare to its emplyees and retirees?
    Answer: Because no one wants to plan a head, and take full accontability for themselves.

    This model did not work out well for GM nor will it work for the NFL or the fan of the NFL. Ultimately it is the fans that pay and eventually it will be too expensive to attend a game let alone be a season ticker holder. At the end of the day everyone must remember all increases and expenses get passed to the payeer (the fan or the consumer)!
    _____________________________
    Here we go. Another poster pretending he went to college. I’ll bet he didn’t even take economics let alone actually go to college. He is right in a sense that “increases and expenses get passed to the payee.” This is true only to a point. Businesses that figure out how to put out the highest quality products at the lowest cost point are the ones that succeed. So generally speaking the organization that stays in business is the one that passes on the least amount of it’s overhead to consumers. This guy probably thinks businesses move because of taxes as well. Jobs are shipped overseas because the workers are cheaper there. Taxes cost the average corporation a fraction of what workers and their benefits cost.

  59. childressrulz says: Apr 26, 2011 12:58 PM

    Oh yeah go players!

  60. rooster1975 says: Apr 26, 2011 1:11 PM

    Listening to this pitbull litigator whine about chaos is like listening to an air traffic controller insist that he was just resting his eyes for a few seconds.

  61. realdeal12 says: Apr 26, 2011 1:12 PM

    Hey DeMouth you know when we “lost”? when you were appointed/hired/elected to be the head of the Union. You sir are a politician who only cares about elevating you status in the eyes of other politicians. Every chance you get you get on your soap box and run your big yap about this being the leagues/owners fault.

    Please go crawl back in the hole you came out of and maybe us fans can have the game we love so much back.

    PS. close your mouth its not a good look for you.

  62. toaster463 says: Apr 26, 2011 1:34 PM

    I am frightened for the future of this country based on reading the majority of these comments.

    People attaching their political views to this situation, without any real knowledge of what is going on, fueled by ignorance and hate. I count several attacks of De Smith’s physical features on here. My intent is not to pull the ‘race card’, but its undeniable that there is a level of hatred toward De Smith here, and it is expressed with ad hominem attacks, its just a fact.

    There was a CBA in place where the players were making lots of money, and the owners were making EVEN MORE. But the owners decided to try to jam their labor force and take away revenue and benefits.

    Now pay attention here, this is why the owners are wrong: The NFL is not the normal business operating under the rules of free enterprise and capitalism. IT IS A MONOPOLY. They bought out their competition, they stifle competition, they dominate Football around the globe. And there is nothing wrong with that, some businesses require it.

    But in the early 20th century, the human race learned that when there is a monopoly, certain things that corporations are allowed to do normally end up hurting everybody. If the labor force has no alternative, the ownership can jam the labor force to accept compensation below their market value. SO, we passed laws to prevent it.

    To equate the courts rulings today to liberal bias and anti-capitalism is plain, pure and simple, ignorance.

    And for any fan to side with the owners just shows a lack of critical thinking, its a LOCKOUT, by definition, its the owners fault. The players liked the current deal, and ownership was thriving under the current deal, profits up, revenue up, ratings up, tv contracts up, PSL’s and season tickets up. But somehow thats not good enough, the ownership says its not a good deal. They wont show us their losses, but you can trust them, right?

    Its like supporting OPEC morons, the owners are trying to jam you, the NFLPA is fighting back and winning, the result will be a CBA that is closer to the old one than the owners wanted originally, but at the end of the day they will take it because it was so profitable for them.

    And then you’ll go back to watching football and the players on your fantasy teams, and you’ll hate De Smith, but if the NFLPA was under lesser management, yes the lockout probably would be over by now, but the players would have given back much more than they should’ve.

  63. crazy2bbengals says: Apr 26, 2011 1:34 PM

    @childressrulz , I’ll put my education to your’s anytime! The point you fail to realize is the NFL opperates in a vaccum. If the owners can not control how much they spend and on whom they spend it, the only way to maintain the same profit margin is to increase cost to the consumer.

  64. nmeagle33 says: Apr 26, 2011 1:42 PM

    The players knew what was going to happen when they elected him.
    I’m tired of union bull. All they appear to be anymore are unelected politicans and law makers. Our country in is in deep s… and these guys are still demanding what put us there in the first place; also noting politicans and lawyers were very instrumental, big pay checks for them.
    I am no longer interested in the NFL and care less about the players.
    I’m not sure this is possible: 1st suggest the owners give the players all they want and just before the season declare, 2nd bankruptcy-ch.11 I think. With the debt most owners have and the new union player demands would make making money impossible. I wonder how d will attack that move; btw, is he still getting a pay check for a position that no longer exists. Probably did his CYA QUITE WELL.
    The players can have whatever they want and I’ll not be around to watch this terrible new game.

  65. nard100 says: Apr 26, 2011 1:53 PM

    crazy2bbengals says:
    Apr 26, 2011 11:22 AM
    Question: Why is it up to the Owners, or for that matter any business owner to supply healthcare to its emplyees and retirees?
    Answer: Because no one wants to plan a head, and take full accontability for themselves.

    ___________________________________

    Really?! So now if you get health care through work, your part of the reason the country is going down? Seems a bit much.

    The truth is the NFL lost because neither the law or anyone with common sense feels sorry for them. The idea that people side with them still puzzles me. I am not a union guy at all, but if any business entity tells you to take an 18% pay cut “cuz they said so” and you do it, you deserve what you get (or don’t get). People, let’s go over the facts again:

    1. The players are NOT on strike. They want to work. They don’t have a problem with the deal they signed years ago. The same owners who want the players to “come back to the bargaining table” are the ones who are preventing the players from doing the jobs they are under contract to do.

    2. They players have simply asked for a good reason to take an 18% decrease in pay while working for one of the most profitable entities in all of sports. It still puzzles me why people feel that’s unreasonable. How many of us would put up with that and say nothing. If the owners are willing to prove hardship (via opening the books – remember people, they are being asked to take the loss of just under 1/5th of their pay).

    3. Why are player revenues so high? Because of owners like Al Davis and Jerry Jones consistently over pay for mediocre talent. they think nothing of resetting the whole market to get their “one guy”. If you think that’s wrong ask yourself this. Why would an owner make a defensive TACKLE on the downside of his career the HIGHEST PAID DEFENSIVE PLAYER in the entire league over the next 2 years all the while complaining about “player costs” being too high. We all know why he did it. He didn’t want to have to bargain like normal people do and compete with other teams. So like a high roller at a Sotheby’s auction, he makes a bid so high that he know no one will match it! Should every player in the NFL take a nearly 1/5th pay cut so guys like him can continue to do that?!

    Should the players take a pay cut? Absolutely! Should the owners in one of the most profitable sports organizations in the world have to explain why they need their players to take a nearly 20 PERCENT pay cut?! If your asking 5-7% fine, not 18%.

  66. jlb10 says: Apr 26, 2011 3:18 PM

    dknice
    all i have to say is wtf?!

  67. crazy2bbengals says: Apr 26, 2011 3:46 PM

    nard100 says:
    Apr 26, 2011 1:53 PM
    crazy2bbengals says:
    Apr 26, 2011 11:22 AM
    Question: Why is it up to the Owners, or for that matter any business owner to supply healthcare to its emplyees and retirees?
    Answer: Because no one wants to plan a head, and take full accontability for themselves.

    ___________________________________

    Really?! So now if you get health care through work, your part of the reason the country is going down? Seems a bit much.

    The truth is the NFL lost because neither the law or anyone with common sense feels sorry for them. The idea that people side with them still puzzles me. I am not a union guy at all, but if any business entity tells you to take an 18% pay cut “cuz they said so” and you do it, you deserve what you get (or don’t get). People, let’s go over the facts again:

    1. The players are NOT on strike. They want to work. They don’t have a problem with the deal they signed years ago. The same owners who want the players to “come back to the bargaining table” are the ones who are preventing the players from doing the jobs they are under contract to do.

    2. They players have simply asked for a good reason to take an 18% decrease in pay while working for one of the most profitable entities in all of sports. It still puzzles me why people feel that’s unreasonable. How many of us would put up with that and say nothing. If the owners are willing to prove hardship (via opening the books – remember people, they are being asked to take the loss of just under 1/5th of their pay).

    3. Why are player revenues so high? Because of owners like Al Davis and Jerry Jones consistently over pay for mediocre talent. they think nothing of resetting the whole market to get their “one guy”. If you think that’s wrong ask yourself this. Why would an owner make a defensive TACKLE on the downside of his career the HIGHEST PAID DEFENSIVE PLAYER in the entire league over the next 2 years all the while complaining about “player costs” being too high. We all know why he did it. He didn’t want to have to bargain like normal people do and compete with other teams. So like a high roller at a Sotheby’s auction, he makes a bid so high that he know no one will match it! Should every player in the NFL take a nearly 1/5th pay cut so guys like him can continue to do that?!

    Should the players take a pay cut? Absolutely! Should the owners in one of the most profitable sports organizations in the world have to explain why they need their players to take a nearly 20 PERCENT pay cut?! If your asking 5-7% fine, not 18%.

    _________________________________
    Nard100
    All valid points but at the end of the day your asking a guy who owns a business to open his books so you can dictate to him how much you should make. Walk into your bosses office and use the same tatic, when the laughing stops be sure to ask if you still have a job.

    The truth of the matter is no one feels sorry for the owners, especially me, I am stuck with Mike Brown. With that said the owners should have control over the operation and the budgets of their business. If the players want to earn 50% of the profit then they should pay 50% of the liabilities.

    By the way, it is not 18%, the last offer was 9%.

  68. thefiesty1 says: Apr 26, 2011 4:39 PM

    Chaos? Like when he decertified the union and walked out on the CBA talks knowing that there was a good chance to get a liberal judge that would protect the poor under appreciated players against the big, bad (white) rich corporate owners. Bull!

  69. pluto62 says: Apr 27, 2011 1:28 AM

    de-smith is a de-warf trying to function in a average mans world. the biggest thing stopping negotiations is the micro-midget DeMaurice Smith. the talks are over his head, nothing he is screaming for is in reach. he is not representing the players, he is using the “little man syndrome” to try and make himself appear larger than life.

    i know it’s tough for people like d-mo, everything is a stiff neck and a crotch eye view of the world, they’re worried about getting a cigarette in the eye, or being pushed into a wall socket, so they have to create a situation where they appear taller than they are. d-mo is not representing the players, he is only trying to show what a big man he is, as SHORT SIGHTED as that may be. my advice to the players, punt the micro-man and find a real rep, maybe Troy Vincent is the right answer.

Leave a Reply

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