Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

All Encompassing Lockout Thread

They may have "kicked the attornies out" for the negotiating, but I doubt the sides will finalize anything without final OK by their attornies............that's where everything could be blown up again.
 
Sometimes I think people get caught up in being "right" more so than doing right for others. Call it ego, reputation or looking ahead to the next deal & maybe impressing someone.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
They may have "kicked the attornies out" for the negotiating, but I doubt the sides will finalize anything without final OK by their attornies............that's where everything could be blown up again.
Click to expand...

Well, now what exactly would a bunch of corporate lawyers have to gain by sabotaging and delaying a conclusion to the lockout?

rhetorical question of the day...you may all go about your business now.

All I know is that both sides need to let the lawyers know who is running the show. Otherwise, I say we throw the lawyers into the Black Hole and let Raiders Nation deal with them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TD
GP said:
Well, now what exactly would a bunch of corporate lawyers have to gain by sabotaging and delaying a conclusion to the lockout?

rhetorical question of the day...you may all go about your business now.

All I know is that both sides need to let the lawyers know who is running the show. Otherwise, I say we throw the lawyers into the Black Hole and let Raiders Nation deal with them.
Click to expand...

:spit:Must spread the rep.
 
:toropalm:

On Monday, Daniel Kaplan of SportsBusiness Journal reported that the NFLPA* annual report revealed an expenditure of $8.9 million in legal fees on the labor situation for the 12 months in the year that ended on February 28, 2011. Of that amount, Jeffrey Kessler’s firm received $2.87 million.

Bob Batterman’s firm undoubtedly billed the NFL in a similar amount over the same time period.

Surely, those number have grown since the lockout began, and likely at a much higher rate. The payments made through February 28 would reflect, at most, activity through January 31, 2011, given the manner in which most law firms create and submit their invoices. With the legal work spiking dramatically in February 2011 and even more in March, April, and May, an effort to track the legal fees likely looks something like the national debt clock.

Perhaps the post-lockout invoices from the various law firms have helped persuade the parties to focus on getting a deal done. With no money coming in, the last thing either side needs is millions of dollars in monthly legal fees.
Click to expand...
link
 
I have a feeling that any legal fees the NFL endures will be passed on to the fans in higher parking and concessions costs.
 
some owners reportedly are resisting the direction in which the talks are going.
Click to expand...

Per Adam Schefter of ESPN, a “handful” of owners don’t believe that the talks adequately address the concerns that prompted the decision to opt out early of the 2006 Collective Bargaining Agreement. Schefter says that the potential conversion of Tuesday’s one-day ownership meeting into a two-day affair arises from a desire to address these concerns and establish a clear consensus as talks continue.
Click to expand...

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/06/17/report-some-owners-are-resisting-potential-deal/

As llong as this handful of owners is less than 9...who cares
 
gwallaia said:
I have a feeling that any legal fees the NFL endures will be passed on to the fans in higher parking and concessions costs.
Click to expand...

Take it out of the "feeling" stage and bank on the fact that if the owners lose ANYTHING in this fiasco will be TEMPORARY..........and it will assuredly be recouped from fans in ways that you may not have even imagined possible.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
I would love to know WHO those resisting owners are........what they are resisting.............and if McNair (and his buddy Jerry) are in that "elite" group.
Click to expand...

That's the first thing that I thought, as well. Which owners are playing hardball, and if McNair is in that group. I have a gut feeling that he's not, though. Not sure why, but just a hunch on my part.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
I would love to know WHO those resisting owners are........what they are resisting.............and if McNair (and his buddy Jerry) are in that "elite" group.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that they want something that would cushion the blow if there was another economic crash of some sort. I guess they consider themselves better than the average joe.
 
HOU-TEX said:
My understanding is that they want something that would cushion the blow if there was another economic crash of some sort. I guess they consider themselves better than the average joe.
Click to expand...
So they should fail and suffer like rest of us? Oh please, give me a break already.
 
Arlen Specter calls for Congressional involvement in lockoutPosted by Mike Florio on June 17, 2011, 10:41 PM EDT

For months, one of the pre-asterisked NFLPA’s strategies for gaining leverage against a lockout came from generating political pressure. By lobbying Congress to squeeze the NFL via threats to its sacred broadcast antitrust exemption, the league in theory may have become less inclined to squeeze the players.

The tactic has not been effective, due in large part to gains made by the Republicans during the mid-term elections. Now, a former senator has argued that it’s time for Congress to get involved.

Arlen Specter, a long-time Republican who switched to the Democratic party in 2009 and lost his bid for re-election at the primary level in 2010, writes in an op-ed for the New York Times that Congress should force a resolution of the labor dispute. Specifically, Specter believes Congress should hinge the antitrust exemption upon the parties’ agreement to binding arbitration based on each side’s last, best offer. Under this approach, a third party would weigh the respective final offers, and choose one or the other.

The last 11 words from Specter, whose last involvement with the NFL involved extensive criticism of the league and the Patriots for the Spygate scandal, make the most sense; Specter concludes by pointing out that “even the mere threat of such legislation might induce a settlement.” But with all signs currently pointing to the strong possibility of a settlement, it’s still too early for Congress to become involved.

If/when the current talks disintegrate, it may be time for Specter’s suggestion to gain some steam.
Click to expand...
 
Report: NFL coaches anticipate labor deal in late July

Clark Judge of CBSSports.com reports that NFL coaches have been put on alert for a new Collective Bargaining Agreement to be reached in mid to late July.

Judge’s report cites two sources. Both of them, however, believe a late-July agreement is most likely.

“As long as we get six weeks to prepare for the season opener, we’ll be fine,” one unnamed NFL coach told Judge. “But I don’t think you’ll see anything happen before the end of July.”

Another source presented two scenarios to Judge. One involved coaches holding roughly five days of conditioning-based workouts before training camp, with free agency occurring during that period.

The other scenario would involve a “looser schedule,” with two weeks prior to training camp allowed for signings and OTA-like gatherings. For this scenario to happen, the source speculated that a new CBA would likely need to be struck by as soon as July 11.

The most recent CBA reports, which point to discord in negotiating issues among owners, would seem to indicate that the first scenario is more likely, with talks continuing deeper into summer.

One of Judge’s sources noted a key factor to consider:

“Coaches and players are concerned about the number of reps and practices. But owners are not.”

Owners, however, are very concerned about preseason games, and are not yet considering eliminating any portion of the exhibition schedule:

“I can’t see it happening,” the source told Judge. “There’s too much money that would be lost by sacrificing games.”
Click to expand...

Only a 5 DAY window for picking, negotiating and finalizing FA signings????? That should be fun to watch. Conditioning, preparing for football conditioning, learning positions, learning schemes. But the quality of the product, of course, will not decrease............nor will the price of a ticket.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Report: NFL coaches anticipate labor deal in late July



Only a 5 DAY window for picking, negotiating and finalizing FA signings????? That should be fun to watch. Conditioning, preparing for football conditioning, learning positions, learning schemes. But the quality of the product, of course, will not decrease............nor will the price of a ticket.
Click to expand...

So if a deal is this far along then lift the lock out so everyone can get back to work.

If I am not mistaken players don't don't actually receive check until the season starts right?
 
The resolution proposed by Specter should include this:

DEADLINE.

FOR EXAMPLE:

If the two sides do not have an executable agreement in place by July 15th, then they will all go home and await a decision by a 3rd Party Solution that delivers an executable agreement to be signed by both parties by July 22nd.

The 3rd Party Solution could begin, right now, looking at the numbers and deciding what is fair for both sides. That gives them several weeks to let the owners and players get their own deal accomplished...or, by July 15th they can all go swimming while someone else prepares their deal for them.

Court case dropped (regarding the lockout) and business back on by July 22nd, leaving them the last week of July and all of August to throw their teams together and get ready for first reg season week of 2011.

This, to me, is a situation of our already butt-hurt economy not needing another hit in the anus. The lack of NFL is a huge hit. Stadium workers, front office workers, maintenance crews, product and service technicians who support each team's operations (vendors, I.T. companies, etc.), tv production crews ranging from those on the field to the ones running the trucks and control boards etc, sales people at local stations who sell commercial time based on having the NFL as its lead product for men ages 18-99.

I think it is completely legitimate for the government to step in and dictate that a 3rd Party can solve this so that there is no delay in the Average Joe's paychecks that are derived form NFL business each fall. Screw what's "legal," and let's talk about what makes good, solid economic SENSE. IMO, there is too much legality mumbo-jumbo in our culture as it is. There's a reason there are so many lawyer jokes revolving around the issue of un-lubricated, forced anal sex. To a large degree, our culture is too litigious and it's crap like this lockout that only goes to further confirm such a claim.
 
gary said:
So they should fail and suffer like rest of us? Oh please, give me a break already.
Click to expand...

Huh?

I am not sure what you're saying here.

If the owners lose money due to having to concede certain points to the players, I don't think it's morally right for them to then say "Well, by golly, somebody HAS to pay to make up our losses. We'll tax the fan on Sundays. HE can pay $0.50 more for this and $1 more for that."

Do you think it's right for the owners to collude (which means to get together and agree that the fans will be up-charged) and decide to make YOU pay for whatever millions they lost to the players in order to get a deal done?

That's going to happen anyways, since prices only go UP every year, but it's going to happen more sharply if they want to make YOU carry the burden of lost money from the labor situation they're trying to solve right now.

I'm telling ya' what, guys and gals: You should just go and tailgate and then go home and DVR the game and watch it later. Hell, you can watch SundayTicket on your iPhone now via their web app.
 
There have been constant rumors flying in all directions in the last week or two and the NFL Lockout rollercoaster ride continues. Here is the collective emotion that we have felt as fans in the last 72 hours or so: we start the day out with hopes high that an agreement is almost complete and we're all at our team shop buying our new favorite rookie's jersey, and then only hours later, the wheels have completely fallen off of talks and we realize that we should all just become fans of the Arena League. By the time we've finished returning our jersey, throwing our hats on the ground, stomping on them in a fit of rage and swearing off the NFL all together, Adam Schefter leaks a nugget of optimism that gets us all back on board. That was last few days anyway.

For an update in the spirit of that rollercoaster, there have been rumblings today that suggest this recent rift or minority pushback in the owners group is actually a good thing, and could signal that talks are getting very close to wrapping up. Though this could simply be wishful thinking, it has been brought up in several places that we're starting to hear about the discord among owners because these owners have seen a settlement agreement on the table or at least been part of the talks in which their side offers concessions, and they don't like it. Thus, they leak their curmudgeonly paranoid opposition, citing the state of the economy and their poor investment portfolios as reasons to keep this thing going.

In reality, this group of owners aren't likely to agree to any deal that offers one cent in conciliatory money; they'll vote 'no' simply out of principal. The good news though is that according the Associated Press, this group of owners is still not large enough to make a difference. Per the Los Angeles Times, (AP):

"Getting the required 24 of 32 owners to agree on anything can be difficult, let alone something as complex as a collective bargaining agreement. And there has been enough pushback from owners familiar with those proposals that progress made recently might not lead to an agreement in the next few weeks.

Still, according to a person with knowledge of the negotiations, the faction of unhappy owners that exists is not yet large enough to derail an agreement. That could lead to heavy lobbying in Chicago at the first owners' meeting specifically scheduled to deal with the lockout."

Star-divide

Ray Ratto of CBS Sports brings up another point that hasn't really been talked about much during this lockout: the owners don't like each other much either. He says:

"The owners like each other far less than they like the players, and trust each other not at all. It's why all the reports of an imminent settlement always sound more like begging than fact-finding. The latest hint that the problems began, reside and will continue with the owners comes with the news that a number of owners have been balking at settlement developments for months now -- in part because they still harbor resentments over the 2006 deal, and because they want the revenue-sharing rules between themselves to be changed."

He continues,

"In short, this is an owners' problem and always has been. The argument is not about making or losing money, but how much more and how to limit or expand sharing of that money. Thus the reports that a number of owners already hate this new deal even though it is nowhere close to being done tell us that what we have always believed about the process is true:

Specifically, that the process is 32 rich guys fighting with each other over the nature and distribution of an immense pie that would feed them all five generations out."

So in other words, you shouldn't expect these owners to get on the same page anytime soon. As long as the majority of owners can vote on a settlement that will resolve this labor dispute, we shouldn't have to worry about the dissenters. It now becomes up to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to keep that majority together.

Per Yahoo's Jason Cole:

"There's a lot on the line [next] week," one owner said Friday. "I don't envy Roger's position because he has to make a lot of people happy. I think there's enough common sense out there that we'll get something done, but there are also some [owners] who still want to fight."

That's all I got for today regarding the soap opera that the NFL lockout has become.
http://www.fieldgulls.com/2011/6/18/2231033/nfl-lockout-update-progress-roger-goodell-settlement
 
The NFL standoff has gone over 100 days, but for most of us, the clock hasn't even started running yet. Not really.

That's what makes the next week or two so interesting and important. If you've paid only a passing interest in the legal strategies and the posturing up until now, you may want to start paying a bit closer attention now. This next stretch is the final opportunity for this thing to be settled before irreparable harm is done to the 2011 season.

Defining terms: The lack of player movement and practice time already has made a mark on the coming season, but it won't be a permanent stain until training camps are disrupted. Shorter camps, accompanied by two preseason games instead of four, won't ruin the season, but there will be some consequences. The more camp time is missed, the worse the damage will be.

Commissioner Roger Goodell acknowledged as much last month. Several months into the lockout, with tensions mounting, he wouldn't give a hard deadline for a resolution that doesn't jeopardize camps and preseason games. "But," he told reporters, "obviously that time is coming. . . . We're getting close enough now where those will have to be considerations."

That comment reinforces the belief that the league and its players went into this process without any real urgency to get a deal done. March, April, May, and June were always disposable. Lo and behold, they have been disposed of.

Now July is knocking. July was not, and is not, disposable.

This week, NFL owners will gather in Chicago to harrumph over whatever progress has been made in the "secret" (even though everyone knew where and when they occurred) negotiations between Goodell and a handful of owners on one side and DeMaurice Smith and a small group of players on the other. What happens in Chicago Tuesday and Wednesday could well determine whether this thing ends without serious bloodshed or things get really ugly.

The question is: Are the owners greedy, or are they determined to be the greediest pigs in the history of troughs?

The other question that will be answered is whether Goodell can be an effective commissioner. It was on his watch that the owners opted to tear up a collective bargaining agreement that they had negotiated and approved in 2006 - not because anyone was losing money, but because those darn players were getting too large a share of the revenue they generated.

If Goodell can't herd the pigs toward a resolution in this meeting, it's hard to see what value he has as commissioner. Then again, Bud Selig and Gary Bettman held onto their gigs after presiding over the '94 and '04 disasters.

There has been a lot of varied and contradictory reporting on the state of negotiations. That probably means no one is really getting hard information from the participants, who have agreed not to comment on the talks. Based on the identity of the negotiators, the length of the talks, and the elevated urgency of the timing, it is logical to assume some real progress has been made.

If that progress is undone by the owners' greed this week, this thing could spiral out of control. Goodell and the more reasonable among the owners can't allow that to happen. Another 100 days would be unforgivable.

Read more: http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/124165899.html#ixzz1PmKEuA4u
Watch sports videos you won't find anywhere else
 
infantrycak said:
There was a report early in this process that the players had already agreed on a rookie pay scale. But who knows.
Click to expand...

You're right. But, if I remember correctly, there was also an agreement that the NFLPA decertification would not enter into legal arguments. That certainly has gone to the wayside since then. It's hard to trust any "progress." Everyday is a new day.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
You're right. But, if I remember correctly, there was also an agreement that the NFLPA decertification would not enter into legal arguments. That certainly has gone to the wayside since then. It's hard to trust any "progress." Everyday is a new day.
Click to expand...

That was misreported if stated in that fashion. The agreement was the NFL would not use negotiations by the NFLPA after decertification as an example the NFLPA wasn't really decertified. The NFL never agreed to not argue the decertification itself was a sham.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
I guess this recent piece has confused me. http://www.indystar.com/article/20110612/OPINION03/106120325/NFL-s-labor-pains?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7COpinion%7Cp
Click to expand...

The media typically doesn't spend the time to really understand the issues. I can't believe the NFL would actually be stupid enough to stipulate the decertification itself didn't count given that it was an obvious sham.

Not saying what the law should be but this was an obvious sham under the current law.
 
Here’s what the CBA says at Article LVII, Section 3(b): “The Parties agree that, after the expiration of the express term of this Agreement, in the event that at that time or any time thereafter a majority of players indicate that they wish to end the collective bargaining status of the NFLPA on or after expiration of this Agreement, the NFL and its Clubs and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, representatives, agents, successors and assigns waive any rights they may have to assert any antitrust labor exemption defense based upon any claim that the termination by the NFLPA of its status as a collective bargaining representative is or would be a sham, pretext, ineffective, requires additional steps, or has not in fact occurred.”
Click to expand...

Linkage
 
Kraft, Ross have concerns about another economic downturn

It’s widely believed, as Mike Freeman of CBSSports.com recently explained, that Patriots owner Robert Kraft has emerged as a much-needed Wellington Mara/Dan Rooney figure in the ongoing labor talks. But that doesn’t mean Kraft is fully on board with the direction in which the process is heading.

Albert Breer of NFL Network reports that both Kraft and Dolphins owner Stephen Ross (who, from the standpoint of building bridges with players, has become the anti-Kraft) have concerns regarding the manner in which another economic downturn along with ever-rising unemployment could impact the next labor deal.

In our view, Kraft’s concerns possibly will result in what we’ll call a “true-down” — a device for reeling back the year-by-year salary cap in the event that performance comes in lower than projected. It’s a fair goose-gander point; if the players want to share in the upside (as they should), then they should be required to share in the risk of the pie shrinking. The current talks focus essentially on a guaranteed minimum (via a “pegged cap”) plus a share of the upside; perhaps to get a deal done, Kraft and the rest of the owners will seek, and receive, a commitment that a fully sliding scale will be used, both for better and for worse.
Click to expand...

Seems like this could get the participants closer to a "fair" deal.
 
I keep on clicking this thread every time i see a new post hoping for good news.

When will the good news come?
 
Snapped a screen shot of some good tweets by Mort of espn.go.com

Here's the first round of tweets (start at the bottom of this list):

mort-tweet-1.jpg
 
Be sure to check out my two posts where I re-post Mort's tweets on the NFL CBA situation.

1.) It seems Robert Kraft, owner of the Patriots, and Roger Goodell are trying to get the few irritated owners to sign onto a deal. Mort thinks those two guys are trying to quarterback the owners into solidifying a deal.

2.) Is Mort right when he says that only 24 of the 32 team owners need to be unified in order to get this thing done? This would mean the "handful of owners" that Schefter had recently said were upset and getting anxious over recent negotiations could be told to STFU if enough owners say it's time to get a deal done. ???

3.) Pre-season still seems available if a deal gets done in the next two weeks.

4.) 18-game season was a backburner item for owners (pre-lockout) and there's no certain word if it is being discussed AND if it is a possibility now or later in a later year of the CBA.
 
Last edited:
I want Mort to be my children's godfather.

Easily the most consistent performer at ESPN, in terms of providing NFL news and insight.

The tweets have been better than anything else put out there by other columnists, IMO.
 
Schefter's Twitter:

More at ESPN: If and when agreement is reached, all players with 4, 5 and 6 years of service are expected to be unrestricted free agents.
Click to expand...

It's going to be absolute pandemonium when a deal is struck and FA opens.
 
Details are now leaking on purposed new CBA deal.

In the previous collective bargaining agreement, players received approximately 60 percent of "total revenue" but that did not include $1 billion that was designated as an expense credit off the top of the $9 billion revenue model. Owners initially were seeking another $1 billion in credit only to reduce that amount substantially before exercising the lockout on March 13.

Ultimately, the two sides have decided to simplify the formula, which will eliminate some tedious accounting audits of the credit the players have allowed in the previous deal. NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith has stated that players were actually receiving around 53 percent of all revenues instead of the much advertised 60 percent.

Owners still will get some expense credits that will allow funding for new stadium construction, sources said.

A rookie wage scale will be part of the new deal but is still being "tweaked," and the much-discussed 18-game regular season will be designated only as a negotiable item with the players and at no point is mandated in a potential agreement. A new 16-game Thursday night TV package beginning in 2012 will be the source of new revenue.

As revenues are projected to possibly double by 2016 to $18 billion annually, retired players will benefit from improved health and pension funding that is expected to increase significantly.

Players believe they can justify a 48 percent take because of the projected revenue growth, as well as built-in mechanisms that require teams to spend close to 100 percent of the salary cap, a source told ESPN.com's John Clayton. The mandatory minimum spending increase is an element that concerns lower-revenue clubs, sources say.

For example, if the 2011 salary cap were to be at $120 million, a team would have to have a cash payroll of close to $120 million. In the previous collective bargaining agreement, the team payroll floor was less than 90 percent of the salary cap and was only in cap figures, not cash.

The higher floor proposal could cause some problems for the lower revenue teams such as the Cincinnati Bengals and the Buffalo Bills. Along with the salary cap, teams have to pay an average of about $27 million a year in benefits.

A league source told ESPN's Sal Paolantonio that there will not be a vote on a new collective bargaining agreement Tuesday.

"This is strictly informational. There is nothing to vote on," the source told ESPN.

The negotiating teams for the owners and players, led by Goodell and Smith, are expected to return to the table most likely Wednesday and Thursday in Boston, hoping to build off the momentum of three strong weeks of talks under the supervision of a court-appointed mediator, U.S. Magistrate Judge Arthur Boylan.

Cautious expectations on the two sides reaching an agreement in principle are varied, ranging from one-to-three weeks with the hopes of beginning a new league year (free agency, etc.) by mid-July.

If and when an agreement is reached, all players whose contracts have expired and have four or more years of experience are expected to be unrestricted free agents, sources familiar with the talks told ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter. Certain tags will be retained but that still is being discussed.

Players are willing to commit to at least a 10-year labor agreement if the sides can agree on the terms, sources told Clayton.

Any breakdown in talks could result in the loss of preseason games and threaten the opening of the regular season. The first preseason game, at the Pro Football Hall of Fame, is scheduled for Aug. 7.

"This is the season to get a deal," Indianapolis Colts owner Jim Irsay said before entering the conference room where representatives from all 32 teams were being updated by Goodell and his negotiating committee. "I think the logic that you're pushing on both sides is saying why get a deal Oct. 1, or whenever, when you could have had July 7, or whatever."

Tuesday marks Day 98 of the lockout, the NFL's first work stoppage since 1987 and the longest in NFL history.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6687485
 
Ryan said:
Does that affect any Texans?
Click to expand...

The Texans tendered 7 players:

  • Owen Daniel - Already Signed (But it would have been 6 years)
  • Jacoby Jones - 4 years
  • Mark Anderson - 5 Years
  • Mike Brisiel - 3 Years
  • Matt Leinart - 5 Years
  • Rashad Butler - 5 Years
  • Arian Foster - 2 Years (Exclusive Rights FA)

The years experience listed in the above list is from the Texans Website.

Basically, unless the tweet from Scheffter ends up being off base - or changes with further negotiations, it appears the only tenders the Texans made that will matter are going to be Foster and Brisiel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top