Skip to content

NFL owners convene Monday for spring meeting

NFL attorney Betterman and team owners Jones and Richardson leave courthouse after NFL labor negotiations in Minneapolis AP

The NFL owners will meet Monday somewhere other than a courtroom.

The league’s spring meeting starts in Indianapolis on Monday.  Florio mentioned last week that a launching ban will be proposed, with an attempt to more clearly define a defenseless receiver.

Usually, owners discuss future Super Bowl sites at this meeting.  That figures to get tabled for now.   Competition Committee chair Rich McKay also said he doesn’t believe the league will discuss contingency plans for a shortened regular season yet at these meetings.

Instead, NFL spokesman Greg Aiello told the Associated Press that owners will be clued in “all aspects of the labor situation and various business reports.”

Summary: The labor situation is going nowhere.  The business was going quite well, but less so now.  (Except in New Orleans.)

Permalink 9 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Union
9 Responses to “NFL owners convene Monday for spring meeting”
  1. TIM says: May 23, 2011 9:10 AM

    The owners have been very consistent,they have said from day one that all they wanted was a fair renegotiation of the last CBA,which everyone agrees was not fair to the owners.
    Maybe the Ambulance chaser will finally come to his senses,but we know Smith is not an NFL man and all he really knows is taking his opponents to court,not how to fairly negotiate. Now that he has miserably failed the players with his poor strategy maybe he will step back and let someone who knows how to negotiate a tough but fair deal take the lead? If not the players should fire their failed leader and get an NFL veteran leader who can negotiate with their employers for them.

    From day one when the owners opted out of the horrible deal they
    accepted a few year ago,as everyone knew they had to do,everyone with a brain knew the owners would get a bigger piece of the pie when the smoke cleared,it was just a matter of how much bigger the owners piece would be.
    The owners made some pretty good concessions about 2 Months ago but Smith wouldn’t even allow one try at counter offers to keep the negotiations active. If Smith wasn’t JUST a Ambulance chasing litigator and really was a representative of his players he could have had a good deal done as long as two Months ago.
    Maybe the players will pressure him to do his job now ,or better yet fire him and move forward with someone with less of an ego,who will keep the players needs in mind and not his own ??

  2. duanethomas says: May 23, 2011 9:19 AM

    The message is going to be “Stay the course, we’re on track as predicted in this same meeting two years ago”.

  3. endzonezombie says: May 23, 2011 9:55 AM

    @TIM: Maybe an ambulance chasing poster can find something new to shill about instead of the same ol’, same ol’ dribble. Hopefully the owners don’t drop a wad of cash to get together today to spew the same nonsense that you do.

  4. TIM says: May 23, 2011 10:08 AM

    Zombie:
    The truth is hard for you to absorb I guess ?

  5. footballfan292 says: May 23, 2011 10:57 AM

    Owners gather to further conspire against an industry and workforce where they control the entire market?

    …nah…that’s not a monopoly at all. Certainly not an anti-trust violation.

  6. willycents says: May 23, 2011 11:20 AM

    @ footballfan292

    Then, following your line of logic; The proper course of action is for the courts to force the NFL to break up, ala AT&T twenty years ago. Thirty two independent businesses prohibited from colluding on any business matters. No salary cap/floor, unlimited free agency, no draft, etc. Right?

    Oh, and by the way, no collusion in scheduling a season also, right? Let the courts do this totally correct according to provisions in the Sherman Anti-trust act. Break the business up totally and enforce all facets of the act, not just the ones that are an inconvenience to the players.

    Please respond to this post in an intelligent and thoughtful manner; not a namecalling manner. Thanks

  7. endzonezombie says: May 23, 2011 11:22 AM

    TIM: no, nonsense is hard for me to absorb, shill.

  8. tommyf15 says: May 23, 2011 12:29 PM

    TIM says:
    The owners have been very consistent,they have said from day one that all they wanted was a fair renegotiation of the last CBA,which everyone agrees was not fair to the owners.

    Tim has an interesting definition of “everyone”.

    That’s the problem with revenue sharing- there is no magical number that everyone agrees is fair. That’s one reason I’m in favor of a free market system for the NFL owners and players- let the market determine how much money is divided between owners and players.

  9. tommyf15 says: May 23, 2011 12:32 PM

    willycents says:
    @ footballfan292

    Then, following your line of logic; The proper course of action is for the courts to force the NFL to break up, ala AT&T twenty years ago. Thirty two independent businesses prohibited from colluding on any business matters. No salary cap/floor, unlimited free agency, no draft, etc. Right?

    Oh, and by the way, no collusion in scheduling a season also, right? Let the courts do this totally correct according to provisions in the Sherman Anti-trust act. Break the business up totally and enforce all facets of the act, not just the ones that are an inconvenience to the players.

    I’ll answer it for him- yes on all counts.

Leave a Reply

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