Skip to content

Vanden Bosch: “We still don’t know who has that leverage”

Detroit Lions v Minnesota Vikings Getty Images

We are playing leverage football, and the NFL owners won for the first time in a long time this week when the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in their favor.

The players know it.   Florio knows it, and thinks we could be playing the leverage game past June.

The way Lions defensive end and NFLPA* rep Kyle Vanden Bosch sees it, we basically have a tie game right now.

“I think the general feeling from both sides was . . . until one side gained leverage, probably not much was going to be decided. And we still don’t know who has that leverage,” Vanden Bosch told Dave Birkett of the Detroit Free Press.

This echoes the thoughts from guard Chester Pitts earlier this week, another NFLPA* leader.

We don’t necessarily disagree with either opinion.  We just have doubts whether the players and owners will ever be able to agree who is winning a game with no real score.

Permalink 40 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Top Stories, Union
40 Responses to “Vanden Bosch: “We still don’t know who has that leverage””
  1. thephantomstranger says: May 18, 2011 9:57 AM

    Let me give you a clue, Kyle. It ain’t you guys.

  2. carson9 says: May 18, 2011 10:06 AM

    Umm, as of now I would say the owners. Next month will probably be them too. And since your “de-certified” NFLPA rep is mentally challenged, probably will be the owners come fall also…

  3. touchdownroddywhite says: May 18, 2011 10:07 AM

    Good luck with that Mr. Vanden Bosch. I sincerely hope you wake up before it’s too late.
    The players don’t even have a bird in the hand right now. They’re too busy chasing the two in the bush and all they’re accomplishing is inching towards a lost season and pissing off fans.

  4. commoncents says: May 18, 2011 10:09 AM

    if we are going to wait around to see whom is granted leverage by the court system, then expect the side with the leverage to put it to the other side when it is time to negotiate. This recipe won’t get us to where we want to be. Good faith negotiations now would pave the way for long term solutions.

    if the players choose to wait for the courts, don’t expect my sympathy when the owners are granted leverage, and turn around and stick it to you.

  5. evilzorac says: May 18, 2011 10:10 AM

    Lets see Kyle you heading into the twilight of your pro career so I am sure you are all for passing on a year of $$$ right? Now tell again who has the leverage?

  6. dryzzt23 says: May 18, 2011 10:11 AM

    Screw the players, the NFL will keep going with new players.

    go owners!

  7. hail2tharedskins says: May 18, 2011 10:12 AM

    Vanden Bosh is probably correct that the leverage game is tied right now. But to use a football analogy, the owners have the ball 1st&goal from 3 yard line with a minute to play in the first half of a tie ball game. Score tied? Sure. But the momentum is all with the owners based on the language in the appeals court granting the permanent stay this week. I really didn’t think we issue a ruling and just allow the temp stay to remain in place avoiding having to write an opinion. Not only did they not avoid writing an opinion it was a very strongly worded opinion and only fool doesn’t see the writing on the wall. Its possible the players’ lawyers could sway the justices in oral arguments, but with justices strongly disagreeing with Judge Nelson’s interpretation of the law and the amicus support from the NHL and more importantly the Chamber of Commerce it is a long shot at best (about the same odds that the defense holds the opponent from scoring with 1st and goal)

  8. truvikingfan says: May 18, 2011 10:13 AM

    It seems some of the players, and I shall not name them *cough-vanden bosch*, are as diluted as D-bag.

  9. tike1776 says: May 18, 2011 10:19 AM

    The Owners do Kyle.

  10. geo1113 says: May 18, 2011 10:23 AM

    The players don’t even have a bird in the hand right now.
    __________________

    Oh, they have a bird in the hand!!!

  11. shallowfan says: May 18, 2011 10:24 AM

    leverage = greed.

    What happened to the days when you could negotiate a fair deal with someone and shake hands?

    Now, it’s all about getting the upper hand and then using it to beat down the other party.

    I think it’s just sad that everyone loses except the owners and players. Sure, some players have to take out 500k loans to survive…poor guy, but long term the players and owners will still be getting richer off of this game while this lockout is going to do harm to the average joe that depends on the game for a chunk of their income…that they will never get back if football games are missed…that sounds like irreperable harm to me.

    I remember when hockey shut down…some bars and restaurants near the forum had to shut down. This will happen again if football games aren’t played.

    If the owners and players had any moral bone in their body they would realize how many ppl they are potentially hurting with their greed and sit down and decide how to split their wealth.

  12. jbaxt says: May 18, 2011 10:24 AM

    Ummm… Until your group of; high interest taking loan guys, bull riders, guys “having a great time off”, convicts, slaves, and greedy employees understand that a business is operated by guys who have vested their entire lives into building an image, as opposed to the 2-3 year careers most of the aboved names mentioned will have, you will never understand leverage.

    There are some owners who have more years invested into a team than an entire offensive unit.

    You will never have leverage. You are the equivalent to a waiter at Denny’s, a mechanic at Walmart, a bagger at Hyvee. It’s just you get paid $500,000 to bag your groceries. And trust me, 85% of us are beginning to hate you even more with your greed. Players are losing leverage with every day that passes and when you come back at the end of the day begging for your paychecks you will look even more pathetic.

  13. bluepike says: May 18, 2011 10:28 AM

    Kyle, I have a great amount of respect for you and I expect that to never change – so I’m hoping that very soon you will see the light and try to direct your brethren to negotiate. I have faith in you to do this once the June 3 court decision is finalized.

    In the interim here’s where the NFLPA* is headed – “Half a league, Half a league, Half a league onward, All in the valley of Death” – this is where De Smith is leading you as the players have become the “Light Brigade”. You can change this by getting rid of the “Little Litigator” and bargain in good faith as soon as possible.

  14. chapnastier says: May 18, 2011 10:38 AM

    How can their be NFLPA reps if the NFLPA doesn’t exist?

  15. dwoofer says: May 18, 2011 10:45 AM

    Leverage goes to whoever can hold out the longest. Such a statement by VanDB shows that the players are willing to budge now that they won’t be paid in the interim; which lets the owners know the players are weak. Everybody just shut up and let the union reps butt heads with the owners. If you need money, ask Obama for a bailout.

  16. jbcommonsense says: May 18, 2011 10:46 AM

    Posters here would be wise to note that while allowing a lockout increases the owners’ leverage, the players still ARE the maketable product. Nobody is going to pay to watch Snyder or Jones in their skyboxes. I’d rate leverage mixed to even, so hopefully these guys can get a deal done.

    Also in the players favor?: National polls find Americans blame the owners. Owners ARE NOT entitled to a rapid growth rate in their profits, at the expense of players, who are clearly sacrificing their bodies for a lucrative salary. Just what are the owners sacrificing?

    The owners are making great profits now on a relatively simple investment with practically NO risk. That’s probably why they refuse to open their books.

    People here have tried to make the argument that the owners’ position is about the sustainability of the game. How so? Both sides have agreed to a team salary cap — http://nfllabor.com/2011/03/11/exclusive-summary-of-nfl-proposal-to-nflpa/

    Polls show that PFT was right about bored, resentful league employees flooding posts here. Real fans understand the facts described above. They are not buying the owners’ distortions.

  17. jbcommonsense says: May 18, 2011 10:50 AM

    Oh, and btw, half of you folks are condescending tools who look down on folks who actually sweat when they work.

  18. tundey says: May 18, 2011 10:57 AM

    If you don’t know who has leverage…guess what? It ain’t you.

  19. kc4life7 says: May 18, 2011 11:00 AM

    DeSmith: “Guys, we still don’t know who has the leverage. Trust me on this, okay? I wouldn’t lie to you”.

    NFLPA*: “We believe everything you say, De. Thanks for saving us from all that pesky reading we’d have to do to look into the situation ourselves.”

  20. geo1113 says: May 18, 2011 11:07 AM

    jbcommonsense says:
    May 18, 2011 10:50 AM
    Oh, and btw, half of you folks are condescending tools who look down on folks who actually sweat when they work.
    _________________

    Anyone who makes a statement like that is him(her)self a tool.

  21. seahawkhuskyfan says: May 18, 2011 11:08 AM

    It just amazes me how the players do not see the writing on the wall. I guess the question they should ask themselves is “without football how do I pay for ______” I guess I almost feel sorry for the players, I didn’t realize they were ALL this stupid!!

  22. armchairgm9 says: May 18, 2011 11:12 AM

    How about this: the court takes all leverage away from both sides. And then tells the players and owners that if they don’t get a deal done, they’ll allow their cities to sue them for loss of revenues that lead to negative economic impact and all the damages will be donated to charities within the communities of each team. Hit them where it hurts (wallet), and give neither of them any leverage so it’s fair negotiations. When negotiations break down, the courts step in and make a concession for the side that’s stalling.

  23. imjinbrdgr says: May 18, 2011 11:13 AM

    I worked in a union shop for 7 years and the owneres always have the leverage. They have the money they will always have the leverage, always.

  24. mick730 says: May 18, 2011 11:15 AM

    “Oh, and btw, half of you folks are condescending tools who look down on folks who actually sweat when they work.”

    Amazing how you know this about people simply from a post.

    But anyway, people who “play” football are not “working” irregardless of how much they may or may not sweat. There is a reason they are called “players” and not “workers”. Last time I checked, they were the NFLPA, meaning National Football League PLAYERS Association.

    See the difference. Players play and workers work. Guys who work construction, often sweat a lot. These guys are workers, or employees if you prefer. Guys who get paid 6, 7, and 8 figure salaries to play football 16 times per year are not workers by anybody’s stretch of their imaginations. And just because some of them sweat during the other 8 months of the year when they are supposed to be staying in physical shape so they can collect on those 6, 7 and 8 figure salaries, doesn’t make them workers either.

  25. tjrubleysaudible says: May 18, 2011 11:18 AM

    jbcommonsense says:
    May 18, 2011 10:50 AM
    Oh, and btw, half of you folks are condescending tools who look down on folks who actually sweat when they work.

    ——-

    Rex Ryan sweats just sitting down.

  26. jerseybaron says: May 18, 2011 11:23 AM

    Here’s a deal. Every team fires all their players. They rehire all those who want to play football under “non-union” rules. All existing contracts shall be honored as long as they resign with their existing team. After the contracts expire they go by any new rules the “non-union” NFL has in place, including wage guidelines. Benefits to be paid by the teams. The draft stays in place with new rules pertaining to bonuses and wage scales pro rated from 1st to 7th round picks. No caps and no bottom.

  27. seahawkhuskyfan says: May 18, 2011 11:27 AM

    If all the players are this dumb, 23% on my money wouldn’t be enough.

  28. cdaws84 says: May 18, 2011 11:29 AM

    I think jbcommonsense is proof of an NFLPA* paid schill on the board. It doesnt even make sense to say that the owners bored and angry employees would post pro-owner statements. Id think it would be the other way around as several owners have forced furloughs and pay cuts during the lockout….If anything those employees would support the players so their jobs could start back up,

    Oh and Jb we pro-owners only look down on those individuals who make $3 bil collectively and complain that they need more money to play a game for 7 months a year.

  29. ffootballontwitter says: May 18, 2011 11:43 AM

    @jbcommonsense
    You’re half-right…we don’t pay to see Jones in his sky box, but we DO pay to see “our team” and the Dallas QB play our rivals.

    But you’ve probably never owned or managed a business, so you’re unable to relate to people who try to earn an honest dollar, but are frustrated by employees who are unreliable, blame their life choices on their boss, and constantly look for excuses as to why they can’t do this or that.

    I would be much more on the players’ side if the NFLPA* looked like they were trying to get to a lasting solution — and when I mean lasting, I mean something that takes care of all of the issues, so you don’t have people getting mad two or three years down the line and then re-litigating the whole mess. De Smith’s solution to NFL alumni who can’t walk straight is to wait a few years until there are more former players entering retirement years, and then re-litigate, instead of working with the NFL’s proposal (as outlined in the link you provided, http://nfllabor.com/2011/03/11/exclusive-summary-of-nfl-proposal-to-nflpa/).

    If I were an owner, NFW would I open my books to De Smith. You just know he would use it to find new and novel ways to litigate three years down the road, repeating this whole nightmare all over again.

  30. jbcommonsense says: May 18, 2011 12:29 PM

    Condescending =Talking about WalMart employees like they were worth less than the dirt under your shoes;

    Completely misguided =Portraying NFL players, who earn their jobs through incredibly difficult athletic competitions, as though they are unskilled labor.

    Biased tunnel vision = forgeting that the ”game” they are paid to play is very hard on their bodies, leaving most of them with limps, back injuries and/or neurological damage that will change their lives forever.

    The players are the reason people watch, take all the risk, and deserve to get a large share of the profits. If they push HARD to get it, so be it.

    I do not work for the NFLPA, just tired of reading the bull posted by pro-owner lemmings.

  31. marjones45 says: May 18, 2011 12:32 PM

    Enough already. I have just had enough. Most of the people that post here are pro-owner which translates into anti-player. The players are contractual partners with the owners, but most posters insist on calling them workers and employees. First of all, this is entertainment, plain and simple. It is not ONLY a business. You do not understand that many of the rules that allow pro football to be what it is for everyone are negotiated rules. The owners draft players, conduct free-agency, have salary caps etc. because the NFLPA agrees to it. In return, the players get different forms of compensation. Whether most of you here either don’t understand that, don’t agree with it or just don’t believe it, it is a negotiated partnership. It has to be to allow some of the rules to exist. This is not Walmart, Microsoft or the local welding shop. But enough is enough, you win.

    There is no more players union. Keep it that way. From this day forward, they are all workers. When they graduate or leave college, they can apply for a job wherever they want, whenever they want. That’s what every other worker has the right to do. There will be no need for a draft salary plan because there will not be a draft. Sign a five or six year contract and when that’s over, a player can go apply for work with another team or two or three. He should be able to choose from the offer that best suites him, his family and his personal and professional goals. Those contracts will include salary, bonuses, health care, retirement, whatever he can get. That’s what every other worker has the right to do. No more player trades. IBM does not and can not trade workers with Symantec. Just release him. He is free to go to work for someone else. And if owners don’t meet the terms of the contracts, the players can just leave and apply elsewhere. That’s what happens in the real world.

    Most of you are so busy treating this situation as if it were just like every other business in America you have lost sight of what it takes to make this work. It exist because it is unique. But, if that’s what you want. I say go for it. The Cowboys or the Giants can win the title every year. You want a salary cap. Fine by me. That’s on the team and the league to deal with. I don’t care what your cap problems are, pay me.

    If you ever want to return to the good old days, that’s fine too. But if you want me to surrender my rights, you will have to compensate me. That’s how the real world does it. And yes, we will draw up a contract (because I don’t trust your word) and I expect you to honor the terms. Otherwise, I agree with the general sentiment on this board, treat it just like every other business.

  32. marjones45 says: May 18, 2011 12:38 PM

    ffootballontwitter says:
    May 18, 2011 11:43 AM
    @jbcommonsense
    You’re half-right…we don’t pay to see Jones in his sky box, but we DO pay to see “our team” and the Dallas QB play our rivals.

    But you’ve probably never owned or managed a business, so you’re unable to relate to people who try to earn an honest dollar, but are frustrated by employees who are unreliable, blame their life choices on their boss, and constantly look for excuses as to why they can’t do this or that.
    ________________________________

    Dude, this reads like you need to grow a set and fire somebody(s).

  33. iamtalkingsolistenandlearn says: May 18, 2011 12:39 PM

    chapnastier says:
    May 18, 2011 10:38 AM
    How can their be NFLPA reps if the NFLPA doesn’t exist?

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

    This site acknowledges they are still a union, the players acknowledge they are still a union, DEmo acknowledges they are still a union.

    Glad to know that the 8th Circuit realizes they ARE NOT a union anymore.

  34. lucky5934 says: May 18, 2011 12:45 PM

    If he doesn’t know who has the leverage, then it’s not the players. Smith would be bragging to the high heavens if the players had the leverage.

  35. emmonsh says: May 18, 2011 12:46 PM

    im always respected him but now i know he isnt the amrtest dude on the block. the players have no leverage at all. period. sign a cba for your millions and play damn ball

  36. bcjim says: May 18, 2011 2:00 PM

    Kyle, Here are your choices:

    A. Play ball for very generous amounts of money.

    B. Do something else.

    The following has been deleted from the list and is no longer available for selection

    C. Play ball for obscene amounts of money.

    As a fan I am sick of owners making their desired margins by charging me $25 to park and $10 for a beer. I would much rather them pay you tools a sensible salary.

  37. thefiesty1 says: May 18, 2011 2:37 PM

    The players are losing. A little more ever day this drags out. When they wake up and get rid of DeMo they can begin playing again as soon as they “really” want to. They are still enjoying their little vacation too much.

  38. giantrealist says: May 18, 2011 2:39 PM

    Obviously the owner will always have the leverage unless there is competition for the employee’s services. The NFL is a monopoly, therefore the players have no choice but the hang tough and wait this out.

    Meanwhile the players will take a lot of heat from people who hate unions. That would have to be the only reason why a person with an IQ higher than a turnip would side with the owners.

    Bottom line is the players want to play regardless if a contract is signed. They will not strike. It’s the owners who are locking them out and still charging for tickets. Only a union hating fool could possible take their side.

  39. jdvallee says: May 18, 2011 2:41 PM

    We do pay to watch the players play. However, most of us have been fans of the NFL since before even the eldest of current players started his rookie year. What does that mean?

    In short it means the players are replaceable. EACH. AND. EVERY. ONE. OF. THEM. ARE. REPLACEABLE.

    For every aging Staubach, Bradshaw and Starr there is a young Montana, Marino, and Favre. When they get too old there is a young Brady, Manning, and Roethlisberger waiting to arrive. Then Bradford, Stafford, and Ryan will take their place.

    The NFL will endure beyond the current flock of players. Count on it.

  40. hawkdawg88 says: May 18, 2011 2:45 PM

    My guess is that Vanden Bosch will learn shortly after June 3 who has the leverage. And if he thinks that’s a 50/50 proposition right now, he ain’t reading the same tea leaves most of the rest of the football world is reading. It is very hard to see anything other than a 2-1 decision against the players in front of this panel in June.

Leave a Reply

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