Raiders abstained due to football and economic concerns

Getty Images

In 2006, 30 teams voted for the proposed CBA.  The Bengals and Bills voted against it.

This time, 31 teams voted in favor of the owners’ agreement, with themselves.  The Raiders abstained.

We initially suspected that the Raiders had concerns about provisions in the CBA regarding the return of the NFL to the L.A. market, given that owner Al Davis possibly still thinks he has dibs on the City of Angels.

In reality, the Raiders disagree with the other owners on a number of issues, as Raiders CEO Amy Trask told Paul Gutierrez of CSNBayArea.com via e-mail.

“We have profound philosophical differences on a number of issues — both of a football and economic nature,” Trask said.  “We have consistently expressed our views on these matters to the league.”

UPDATE:  Raiders spokesman Mike Taylor has provided a somewhat longer statement from Amy Trask to PFT.  “We have profound philosophical differences on a number of issues — both of a football and economic nature,” Trask said.  “We have consistently expressed our views on these matters to the League.  We voted in the manner we believe best for football and with the courage of our convictions.”

40 responses to “Raiders abstained due to football and economic concerns

  1. The Raiders, and Raider Nation, stood together in solidarity. We fans have philosophical differences on a number of issues with the greedy oil barons who have corrupted our great american sport. Obviously Al Davis and Amy Trask share our sentiment. They have abstained from the entire negotiation mess altogether. There was no reason to change now.

  2. You wonder why gene Upshaw did his job so well? Mentored by AL Davis, Al woulda had this whole thing wrapped up miles ago. D. Smith is awful at what he does. Upshaw was a king at it, RIP and anyone that thinks AL has lost it, try and realize he see’s all the insanity in this that the fans do, he disagrees with the economic posture as we all do. Al your a strange crazy old man, some terrible choices at times for my raiders but i admire you for not going

  3. I bet they didn’t vote because they couldnt find a way to get all davis’ dead hand to sign a paper being that he is being “kept alive” weekend at bernies style..

  4. I would like to hear more about the differences Davis has with the current philosophy guiding the owners. I’ve never been one to support Davis, but IMO the current trend is unsustainable and we are headed toward NFL franchises shutting down operations. Depending on his position and the details of the CBA, Al Davis might actually be in the right. I never thought I would live to see the day that I typed that last sentence.

  5. Goodell: Alright, that’s 31 votes. Mr. Davis, if you could just please give a yay or nay we’d be happy to-

    Davis: No, shut up. I don’t like suck-ups.

    Goodell: Understood, sir. Raiders abstain from voting.

  6. >>>“We have profound philosophical differences on a number of issues — both of a football and economic nature,” Trask said.”<<<

    One example the rookie wage scale. "Coach" Davis believes the drafted players (especially the high 1st rounders) should be paid based on their 40 times and how far a QB can throw a football (like his great playaaa's JaMarcus and dhBUST)…….

  7. The owners got lucky. They approved the deal and put it all on the players. If this fails, it’s now on the players.

  8. i hate the raiders, but al davis is clearly one of the only owners who actually built himself up. he knows the nfl is breaking all types of antitrust laws and if federal regulators ever call them out on it, he wants no part of it. with that said hes a terrible gm and i hope the raiders go 0-16.

  9. just another reason to respect the raiders! now if only their fans would practice abstinence……

  10. their fans should practice abstinence!! whoohoo that’s some funny ish right there!

  11. Al refused to read, let alone sign off on, the proposed agreement because it was too sloppy – as evidenced by an egregious typo on the first line. It said “2011” instead of “1963.”

  12. Do not be too quick to make fun of Al for abstaining. Everyone was making fun of Ralph Wilson and Mike Brown last time in 2006 calling Ralph senile and Mike cheap when in reality they were the ones who were right.

    I do not agree with Al, but I am not going to make fun of him, especially when we have not seen the details of the new CBA.

  13. I personally don’t care for Al Davis or the way he runs his group in Oakland…. and it’s very common for Al Davis to abstain from voting…. but when you consider the fact that the players still haven’t even agreed to vote on this…. and the fact that the overwhelming majority of media propaganda is only quoting owners (and not players)…. there may be quite a bit more to this…. especially when one of the guys who helped found this league has “profound differences”.

  14. Al Davis is Al Davis. It’s his team.

    The Raiders returning to Los Angeles is a perfect match.

    With Radio and TV broadcasts of Raider games in Southern California, the large local fan base awaits—–the return.

    L.A. Raiders 2012….

  15. i wonder what joetoronto thinks about this? i guess the niners werent mentioned on this so he has no sh1t to say.

  16. Does the majority of the posters that are making fun of Al know exactly why he abstained? I bet they don’t even have a clue on why. But…it wouldn’t be the same w/out all haters. LOL

    Keep on hating!

    Win, lose or tie…Raiders ’til I die!

  17. why is this a surprise?

    radrntn says:
    Jul 21, 2011 2:00 PM
    owners are not stupid, they will vote yes, and then it looks like it is 100% of the players faults if there is no football.

    I also think 31 owners will vote yes, and one will abstain.

  18. Been a Raider fan my entire life. Have agreed and disagreed with Davis, but followed him since the 60’s. I made a statement after week 17 last season, and I stand by it now. Al Davis has seen his last game. Amy trask is all that has been quoted since the end of February. My belief is that the Raiders abstained…because Al couldn’t vote.

  19. ninerdynasty says: Jul 21, 2011 10:32 PM

    i wonder what joetoronto thinks about this? i guess the niners werent mentioned on this so he has no sh1t to say.
    **************************************************
    Wow, I’m obviously in your head, “ninerdynasty.”

    My opinion is that Mr Davis knows much, much more than most of the owners, maybe all of them, about the in’s and out’s of a CBA.

    He’ll end up right, he almost always does.

  20. If you think about it, it’s a brilliant move by Davis…If the deal doesn’t get ratified by the NFLPA, Al is golden!

    If the deal does get ratified, Al is still golden…why? Many players are pissed the deal got ratified by the owners first, feeling that they were lockout first, they should have agreed first….a lot of grown man acting like baby’s I agree. However, the real reason why the Raiders abstained is to remain in the good graces of their own players and future free agents…maybe they can save a few million because the player will sign for less knowing Davis again gave the finger to the league…trust me, it work back in the day, it works now. This maybe Al Davis last opportunity to stick it to the NFL….maybe not?

  21. Al Davis is as pro player an owner as you’ll ever find.

    If he thought the deal shortchanged the players, he wouldn’t sign off on it.

    Crazy, but true.

Leave a Reply