Owners tried to slip things by the players

[Malazan]

The CBA was negotiated between the NFL and the NFLPA (that's D. Smith) for WEEKS. Everyone on planet Earth knew on Weds tht the owners were going to ratify on Thurs.

 

If the players are claiming they didn't know what was in it until today can blame their union leader. After negotiating this deal, he has the balls to tell the players "there is no deal" today is pure face saving bull.

 

Seriously, this reeks of another D smith attempt at a 'brilliant' maneuver. Players have been drinking the kool aid from a charlatan and likely the fans will pay for it.

Edited July 22, 2011 by jeremy2020

[Hplarrm]

The piece we're discussing was actually written by Greg Rosenthal however Florio did pen the piece which preceded this one by about a half hour.

 

Apparently part of the surprise is a discussion of the supplemental revenue sharing issue which a few of us here brought up yesterday… supplemental revenue sharing is how the high revenue teams compensate the low revenue teams.

 

Florio has a pretty good take on that and here it is.

 

The NFLPA reps are also leaking that they didn't see the complete document before the conference call.

 

Looks like the players side is a bit shaky at the moment although it's probably a lot harder to keep a union of 1900 players apprised as opposed to just 32 owners.

As I said in a post above, like the debt ceiling negotiations, it ain't over until its over and both sides agree. NFLPA leadership would be committing malpractice if the language sent to them as approved included anything which they had not actually talked about and approved (even if this assumption can from an estimation of lack of interest- if the players are not interested then do not ask them to hinge their ratification on approval of this language).

 

In addition, even with the ratified language there is going to be additional discussion and even negotiation over interpretation of what they reached handshake agreement on or agreed to in non-public discussion. Particularly given their mistrust of the NFL leaving profit on the table for strike insurance from the nets to the team owners unwillingness to be honest and show the books, the NFLPA MUST send a message that the NFL better not try anything because the habit is to question every thing.

 

Finally, I just realized another reason why the NFLPA may want to question new language on issues that are clearly of import to the league owners but not to the players.

 

Since the 80s labor dispute got settled with the team owners running to demand that the NFLPA come back and in the 00s renegotiation where Upshaw dictated the final terms publicly at the start and the NFLPA got exactly what they wanted the players became defacto partners with the first victory and defacto majority partners with the second agreement.

 

Like most owners, the players are acting like partners and throwing their weight around on peripheral issues simply because they can.

 

Making Jerry Jones sweat and wonder what the majority partners are doing and thinking may be exactly what the players leaders want to happen.

 

If a deal is finally made tomorrow but the players are hemming and hawing and making the team owners wait to announce this on the NFLPA's chosen schedule. This game playing may be happening or something tangible may be up that none of us outsiders know.

 

My guess is that from the players perspective, they were quite happy with the old CBA, and we are only having this stupid dispute because the team owners exercised their contractual right to start it. Perhaps the players will want to see this end only when they say it ends.

 

However, there is money on the table now so I suspect they will want it to end quite soon.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

This piece by John Clayton sheds some light on the situation.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6791952/nfl-owners-put-all-blitz-players

 

"This was an obvious power play by owners, who want to pressure players into accepting their latest proposal and see how they respond to public pressure. On Thursday night, the NFL Players Association executive board and 32 player reps opted not to vote on the proposal. Players finally received a copy late Thursday of what the owners had passed, but their initial response wasn't favorable. They think they are being played."

[Hplarrm]

Seriously, this reeks of another D smith attempt at a 'brilliant' maneuver. Players have been drinking the kool aid from a charlatan and likely the fans will pay for it.

Could be, or if Smith is smart he is playing the same game of theatrics and shooting his mouth off strategically which got folks to rag on and underestimate Johnny Cocchrane and the Anthony attorney. Folks made their judgments but in the end their clients got what they needed.

 

Who knows what will happen but its probably a sign of intelligence to wait before drawing conclusions about whats what but if he is playing the game he is counting on folks making negative conclusions about him if those folks opinions do not matter to the clients he is representing.

 

I think we are all pretty clear on the fact that he players (and the owners for that matter) really do not care what we think as long as we watch the game (which I know I plan to do as soon as they snap the ball).

[billsrcursed]

Let's see... People who made billions vs people who make money being athletes.

 

 

I'd say there is probably a very large intelligence gap between the two. Hell, Cromartie can't even remember the names of his own children.

 

I didn't see Cromartie at any of the hearings/meetings.

 

Also, as San Jose Bills Fan pointed out, having billions doesn't necessarily make you smart, just rich. Conversely, being an athelete doesn't make you less smart.

 

Just look at our starting QB. I'd compare his IQ to many, if not all, of the current NFL owners any day of the week and feel confident in AT LEAST equality.

[CowgirlsFan]

I didn't see Cromartie at any of the hearings/meetings.

 

Also, as San Jose Bills Fan pointed out, having billions doesn't necessarily make you smart, just rich. Conversely, being an athelete doesn't make you less smart.

 

Just look at our starting QB. I'd compare his IQ to many, if not all, of the current NFL owners any day of the week and feel confident in AT LEAST equality.

 

I agree. I wonder how many owners have graduated from or attended Harvard.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

Owners tried to slip things in

Typical business owners trying to screw their workers over.

[judman]

Both sides are bending us over as far as I'm concerned... They need to get this done.

[todd]

My take: The player's union lawyers got in the way and screwed it all up again. The union lawyers don't profit as much unless there is litigation.

 

The owners aren't faultless, but the players deserve a boatload of blame for putting their trust in a bunch of incompetent morons.

 

Owners tried to slip things in

[CSBill]

Just think about the average IQ level of the owners' side vs. that of the players' side. It's really an unfair fight.

 

 

I didn't see Cromartie at any of the hearings/meetings.

 

Also, as San Jose Bills Fan pointed out, having billions doesn't necessarily make you smart, just rich. Conversely, being an athelete doesn't make you less smart.

 

Just look at our starting QB. I'd compare his IQ to many, if not all, of the current NFL owners any day of the week and feel confident in AT LEAST equality.

 

"Also, as San Jose Bills Fan pointed out, having billions doesn't necessarily make you smart, just rich."

 

But given the option, what would you take????

 

Also, I would suggest it does take some "smarts" to hang on to those riches . . . Exhibit A: The endless supply of broke ex-NFL players

[K Gun Special]

My take: The player's union lawyers got in the way and screwed it all up again. The union lawyers don't profit as much unless there is litigation.

 

The owners aren't faultless, but the players deserve a boatload of blame for putting their trust in a bunch of incompetent morons.

 

 

Its a deal worth Billions of dollars with some of the best lawyers in the country working on both sides.

 

 

Has anyone on here read the reasons why the players havent voted yet? ? Like the owners including supp revenue sharing, a topic not discussed at the table, amongst others.

 

 

Would you sign a contract that big right away knowing there is language you hadnt negotiated?

 

This board is amazing in its reactionary tone..... everyone so quick to blame the players, Smith, or lawyers.

[mikef272002]

When they interviewed Heath Evans on NFL Network a few minutes ago, they asked him specifically what the owners slipped into the new agreement. He hemmed and hawed and generally couldn't offer ANY specifics.

 

He's just parroting the email D Smith sent out. I seriously doubt the vast majority of players have more than a cursory understanding of this supposed 300-400 page document.

 

I call BS on this.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

 

It was the same way when Josh Cribbs was interviewed on NFL Network last night, they kept asking him to be specific and and all he could say was " well you know" , Um no Josh we don't know.. Josh did say things unsettled are things like practice times, length of training camp, How long pads can be on, and how many two a days can be had...ARE YOU FREAKEN SERIOUS..! YOU NOT SIGNING THE DEAL BECAUSE OF THIS..! What a bunch of Diva babies the players have become, for christ sakes they make millions of dollars, get most of the summer off, and there whinning about how hard there boss pushes them...PAY MY MILLIONS and I'll do 3 a days with full pads...! Bunch of freaken babies..! OH, millionare babies..! I work my ass off to make pennies, and these guys make millions playing football, the guy on the bench makes $350,000..>! WHAT..! ... Sign the deal, go to work when your told to go, do what your told to do while your there and give 100%...!

[Delete This Account]

essentially, there's blame to be spread to both sides.

 

it was too much to ask the 32 player reps, who had been kept on the fringes for much of the talks, to digest a deal in 8 hours on Wednesday in DC that took 4 months to get done. the player reps should've been kept in the loop. and the union should have been more ready in preparing for the likelihood to recertify.

 

and the owners are to blame given that they failed to read the tea leaves. the fact that the players did not vote on Wednesday should have been a clear sign that this deal still wasn't completed. and yet, they went ahead with their "P.R. machine in full throttle" as Bills safety George Wilson told the AP last night, and voted to approve. the optics of that press conference were just wrong from the players' side.

 

and no, i'm told, the owners unlikely "slipped" things into the deal. though the fact that they voted on a CBA that the players had not had a chance to see certainly could have led some to assume that could happen.

 

jw

 

ADD: as the AP has reported, and the NFLPA ackowledged last night, one of the unresolved issues revolve around worker compensation claims. the NFL is asking the players to give up their rights to make those claims.

Edited July 22, 2011 by john wawrow

[Ghost of Rob Johnson]

ADD: as the AP has reported, and the NFLPA ackowledged last night, one of the unresolved issues revolve around worker compensation claims. the NFL is asking the players to give up their rights to make those claims.

Altogether? I had read they were trying to force the player to apply for comp in the state in which the injury occured, rather than in states where the comp laws are more beneficial for the employee (supposedly California).

 

John Ingold explains that NFL players who have played at least one game in California may file for workers’ compensation benefits under the extremely employee-friendly laws of the state that hosts the 49ers, Raiders, and Chargers.

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/06/13/nfl-players-prefer-pursuing-workers-compensation-claims-in-california Edited July 22, 2011 by Ghost of Rob Johnson

[Scrappy]

This was overblown by a reporter, there should be a vote today.

[Delete This Account]

 

Altogether? I had read they were trying to force the player to apply for comp in the state in which the injury occured, rather than in states where the comp laws are more beneficial for the employee (supposedly California).

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/06/13/nfl-players-prefer-pursuing-workers-compensation-claims-in-california

unsure, is my best answer.

 

jw

[Ghost of Rob Johnson]

Its a deal worth Billions of dollars with some of the best lawyers in the country working on both sides.

 

 

Has anyone on here read the reasons why the players havent voted yet? ? Like the owners including supp revenue sharing, a topic not discussed at the table, amongst others.

 

 

Would you sign a contract that big right away knowing there is language you hadnt negotiated?

 

This board is amazing in its reactionary tone..... everyone so quick to blame the players, Smith, or lawyers.

"There also was a problem with some of the NFLPAs complaints. For instance, Smith expressed concern that the owners had agreed on a new revenue-sharing plan on how to split money among teams. While Smith can express concern, its not the business of the NFLPA how the owners split the money they get among themselves. The NFLPA gets to only negotiate what its share of the overall pie can be." http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AsjZkVvEdJnwHZbpEDWpJApDubYF?slug=jc-cole_nflpa_cba_goodell_evans_smith072111

Edited July 22, 2011 by Ghost of Rob Johnson

[Hplarrm]

I think you give a reasonable summary which I am sure will provide context for your what happened articles on this. the couple of factoids which I think you might add to your context is:

 

1. Judgments of the actions of both the owners and of the players in this dispute should be base in the fact that the owners were the ones who used their contractual right to renegotiate the deal. The players are not only on record as not asking for this situation which bothers all fans, but also they are on record not demanding anything in this renegotiation but continuing the old deal.

 

It was the owners right to do what they did, but it should not be ignored that they were the sole party that created this situation. The NFLPA also had the right under the contract to renegotiate once the owners opened the door and ask for fair trades for anything that they gave up. They did not and I think any presentation which judges these actions should be based on this factual context.

 

2. One of the central complaints of owners (led by Mr. Ralph actually) last time was that the owners were presented with a complex deal with a incredibly limited time to accept or reject it. Is the claim here that the player reps need to do exactly the same thing as the owners found to produce such a bad result for them. This time for a 10 year deal without the re-opener that the owners used this time.

 

Again, I would think presentation of this fact when giving any judgments about whether either side is being reasonable or unreasonable in this should be presented.

 

Overall, I think that it is clear that there are three sides to this dispute team owners, player partners and us fans.

 

As far as it goes, the NFLPA does not represent my fan interests on this at all. However, the owners bear the lionshare of any blame for fan treatment in this debacle.

 

That's my 1 and a half cents

 

essentially, there's blame to be spread to both sides.

 

it was too much to ask the 32 player reps, who had been kept on the fringes for much of the talks, to digest a deal in 8 hours on Wednesday in DC that took 4 months to get done. the player reps should've been kept in the loop. and the union should have been more ready in preparing for the likelihood to recertify.

 

and the owners are to blame given that they failed to read the tea leaves. the fact that the players did not vote on Wednesday should have been a clear sign that this deal still wasn't completed. and yet, they went ahead with their "P.R. machine in full throttle" as Bills safety George Wilson told the AP last night, and voted to approve. the optics of that press conference were just wrong from the players' side.

 

and no, i'm told, the owners unlikely "slipped" things into the deal. though the fact that they voted on a CBA that the players had not had a chance to see certainly could have led some to assume that could happen.

 

jw

 

ADD: as the AP has reported, and the NFLPA ackowledged last night, one of the unresolved issues revolve around worker compensation claims. the NFL is asking the players to give up their rights to make those claims.

[Lurker]

You have no idea what you're talking about... unless of course you have test scores for both sides in your possesion... do you?

Yeah. Let's see the owners' Wonderlic scores...

[Beerball]

This piece by John Clayton sheds some light on the situation.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6791952/nfl-owners-put-all-blitz-players

 

"This was an obvious power play by owners, who want to pressure players into accepting their latest proposal and see how they respond to public pressure. On Thursday night, the NFL Players Association executive board and 32 player reps opted not to vote on the proposal. Players finally received a copy late Thursday of what the owners had passed, but their initial response wasn't favorable. They think they are being played."

Before I believe that oh great gazoo (clayton)...provide details of what was slipped in. If supplemental revenue sharing by the clubs is the issue then in my mind it's a non-issue and none of the players business. There is agreement on the overall revenue split between owners and players. There is a salary floor. There is a salary cap. What the owners do with their portion of the revenue is their business.