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

All Encompassing Lockout Thread

Peter King is painting a GRIM picture, guys.

This article is basically saying the players are supremely pissed off, especially at what COULD be an extra little "new" item the owners stashed into the agreement. Then there is an issue with several smaller items, like drug testing rules, etc., that the players are up in arms about--Not because it's been decided and they disagree, but rather because those items will STILL need to be negotiated and decided upon even with a new agreement in place.

It's easier to get 31 teams to vote yes than it is 1900 players.

Here's the article, and I don't know if Peter King is sensationalizing this stuff or if the players and De Smith are genuinely hacked off:

ATLANTA -- In less than two hours Thursday, euphoria over the 38-month labor dispute between National Football League players and owners being over began turning sour.

At 7:02 p.m. ET at an airport hotel here, after the league's owners voted 31-0 with one abstention (surprise -- the Raiders balked), the full roster of owners gave a standing ovation to Commissioner Roger Goodell and the negotiating team that got the deal done. But then USA Today reported the players were rejecting the deal, the union denied it, and SI's Jim Trotter reported union boss DeMaurice Smith emailed his executive board: "There is no agreement between the NFL and the players at this time."

That's the kind of day Thursday was, a crazy one with more twists and turns than a Stieg Larsson novel. And it's not over yet.

There were two long conversations between Smith and Goodell, an attempt to build a bridge that would result in a dual vote late in the day -- first by the owners here, next by the board of player representatives from the union offices in Washington -- resulting in a deal. The league, attempting to end a 132-day lockout of players and to stave off the first missed regular-season games in the league since 1987, slam-dunked the ratification of a 10-year collective bargaining agreement with players.

"We have crafted a long-term agreement that is good for the game of football," Goodell said 20 minutes after the vote was taken. "We are anxious to get back to football. It is time to get back to football. That is what everybody here wants to do."

"It's been long, it's been at times very, very difficult," the chair of the league's labor committee, Carolina owner Jerry Richardson, said of the long negotiation period. "We are confident the players and the teams have arrived at a good place."

Unlike the last deal, there would be no opt-outs in this deal. If approved by the players, there would be no labor interruptions, should the players ratify the agreement, until at least the summer of 2021.

Cries of "Hallelujah" could be heard throughout the land. Then just plain crying could be heard. Soon after the vote, player sources began saying they felt the deal had been shoved down their throats by the owners. Though the ownership side said every point had been discussed at length with the players, Smith, in the email Trotter saw, said otherwise. He [De Smith] wrote of the owners: "They apparently approved a supplemental revenue sharing proposal. Obviously, we have not been a part of those discussions. As you know ... issues that need to be collectively bargained remain open. Other issues such as workers compensation, economic issues and end of deal terms remain unresolved."

It sounded very much like the good-feeling balloon was bursting, but as of 9 p.m. ET, players were still on the conference call and the final result uncertain.

"I have no comment," said Dallas owner Jerry Jones, one of the last owners to leave the hotel. (translation: Jerry is pissed off -- Edit by GP)

How could he? The entire agreement was in limbo.

(Here's the scary part -- Edit by GP) Owners gave the decertified union until Wednesday to recertify, or else the deal would be pulled. Apparently, the players won't need until Wednesday to decide. If they weren't going to vote to kill it Thursday night -- FOX's Jay Glazer reported that was so -- there appeared to be significant opposition to it.

The rules the owners agreed to would have canceled the first preseason game of the year -- the Hall of Fame Game between St. Louis and Chicago Aug. 7 -- but kept the rest of the $800 million preseason intact. (That's how much revenue is generated by the preseason, a management source said.) If the players were to ratify the agreement, team facilities would open Saturday, undrafted rookies could be signed beginning Sunday at 2 p.m. ET, and the official league year would begin Wednesday at 2 p.m. ET, with free-agency kicking off then.

In another win for the owners, NFL legal counsel Jeff Pash said there be would no judicial oversight of this collective bargaining agreement by the federal judiciary, as there was in the last CBA, when owners were angered by several decisions by a federal judge, David Doty. Now appeals would be made in the more traditional ways of sports leagues-through independent special masters.

But then the monkey wrench got thrown in. The players had to recertify as a union to officially end the stalemate because the NFL can't institute important terms of the deal like a drug policy or disciplinary tenets without the players having a collective bargaining unit. That was part of the owners' vote -- that all unsigned players are free to sign with NFL teams, but with the proviso that if players do not approve the deal by Wednesday, the contracts wouldn't be valid.

A weekend of mayhem appears certain. That's the only certainty on the immediate horizon for the NFL.
Click to expand...
 
For some reason, I figured the owners would rush to present "a deal," and then put the spotlight on the players and make the players appear to be "on the clock" in the perception of the fans.

Another P.R. move, IMO. It's the owners crossing the finish line, high-fiving each other, getting that image seared into our minds...and now they're going to trash talk (in subtle ways) and essentially act like the players are just dragging their feet on accepting the deal.

I was under the impression that both sides were crafting the deal, together, via their lawyers, and then it would present situation where a final document is produced that each side would have to AGREE is representative/reflective of what was crafted for the past month or so.

But Peter King is saying that De Smith found something NOT originally agreed upon by his side (an item of "supplemental revenue sharing") according to the words of De Smith.

All I can hope for is that De Smith and his crew are so tired that they are mis-interpreting some language, and maybe it's just a mixup or bad language in the crafting of the legal mumbo jumbo. In short: He's trying to make triple-sure that the players are not getting hosed without knowing it.

I can see how he's trying to be very strict about it. His reputation is on the line for the next 10 years if the owners go "Nanny nanny boo boo! We tricked you!" on certain parts of the "deal that's good for football."

Agree? Or disagree?
 
IMO the NFLPA is just blowing a bunch of smoke after somebody convinced them that the owners were trying to pull one over on them. The worst was Heath Evans interview on NFLN, he was all over the map and basically made completely contradictory statements, complete with a two-year owner conspiracy theory.

Look the owners said we agree with the deal, we can't negotiate some of the small issues until there is a re-certified union to negotiate with. If we don't want to cancel pre-season games we have to get it done by this date.

The players heard "WE DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR ISSUES, YOU MUST RECONSTITUTE YOUR UNION WHEN WE SAY OR ELSE!!!!" Then they fired up their twitter accounts and blabbed with a bunch of propaganda and mixed facts. And of course the squeaky wheels get the grease. They weren't helped by a letter from an anonymous source (*cough that sounds like Lawyer Jeff Kessler*) that claimed the owners were violating the law by putting a re-certification date down.

Tomorrow everyone will calm it down, they'll figure out the ending punctuation, and it will all go down just fine.

PS. NFLN and ESPN's live analysis was terribly painful and mistake ridden. The worst was Adam Schefter claiming that the doors wouldn't open on Saturday if the Union didn't occur....this was the exact opposite of the truth.
 
GP said:
But Peter King is saying that De Smith found something NOT originally agreed upon by his side (an item of "supplemental revenue sharing") according to the words of De Smith.
Click to expand...

The revenue sharing agreement has nothing to do with the Player's Union. This is how the Teams split up their piece of the revenue pie. The NFLPA already has a strict cap max and cap min that sets their piece.

My favorite claim is the players claim that "We did not have a copy of the deal they approved to vote on" while at the same time claiming "There are items that the Owners slipped into the deal they approved." Well which is it??? Did you have a copy or not???

Every player that was asked "What did the owners slip in to the deal?" backed up and couldn't provide a specific item.
 
The players group has terrible leadership who have not communicated properly with its members. They are now trying to cover up this terrible leadership by placing the blame at the feet of the owners.

Plain and simple.
 
cland said:
IMO the NFLPA is just blowing a bunch of smoke after somebody convinced them that the owners were trying to pull one over on them. The worst was Heath Evans interview on NFLN, he was all over the map and basically made completely contradictory statements, complete with a two-year owner conspiracy theory.

Look the owners said we agree with the deal, we can't negotiate some of the small issues until there is a re-certified union to negotiate with. If we don't want to cancel pre-season games we have to get it done by this date.

The players heard "WE DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR ISSUES, YOU MUST RECONSTITUTE YOUR UNION WHEN WE SAY OR ELSE!!!!" Then they fired up their twitter accounts and blabbed with a bunch of propaganda and mixed facts. And of course the squeaky wheels get the grease. They weren't helped by a letter from an anonymous source (*cough that sounds like Lawyer Jeff Kessler*) that claimed the owners were violating the law by putting a re-certification date down.

Tomorrow everyone will calm it down, they'll figure out the ending punctuation, and it will all go down just fine.

PS. NFLN and ESPN's live analysis was terribly painful and mistake ridden. The worst was Adam Schefter claiming that the doors wouldn't open on Saturday if the Union didn't occur....this was the exact opposite of the truth.
Click to expand...

As I stated in my post, which I think coincides with your thoughts on this, it could very well be that some people need to get some sleep and have a nice breakfast and some coffee in the morning...to clear the cob webs and be clear-headed.

We all know that we get very unreasonable after having remained zeroed-in on something that's high pressure like this CBA deal is. You THINK you're at the finish line, but voices tell you that you're missing a key piece or you're overlooking a detail on something. So you wig out.

I'm hoping this is overblown. And Peter King, man I don't know about that guy, because I've just never been down with his stuff.
 
Am I the only one that is bothered by the fact that there is no HOF game? I know it's only preseason and I normally don't pay attention to the whole game, but it signalizes the start of the football season. Now that's going to be postponed. Now I'm annoyed even more.
 
cland said:
The revenue sharing agreement has nothing to do with the Player's Union. This is how the Teams split up their piece of the revenue pie. The NFLPA already has a strict cap max and cap min that sets their piece.

My favorite claim is the players claim that "We did not have a copy of the deal they approved to vote on" while at the same time claiming "There are items that the Owners slipped into the deal they approved." Well which is it???

Every player that was asked "What did the owners slip in to the deal?" backed up and couldn't provide a specific item.
Click to expand...

Uh, it could be an issue if the revenue sharing eats into the PLAYERS entitlement--For all we know, the owners found a subtle way of siphoning off from the players' take and it shouldn't have been included in the deal.

THIS is the sort of thing that mayyyybe De Smith thinks he's found in the language the owners have provided. Maybe he's wrong. Maybe he's not. But he's not going to say "Done deal" until they feel everything is in order. An extra day or two will not bust the season.

You don't know anymore than I do. For all BOTH of us know, the players have either (a) poorly worded a section of the deal, or (b) intentionally re-worded a section and it affects the players in some capacity.

Try to have a dialogue here, instead of acting like you're in on the talks yourself. De Smith is apparently making damn sure that there's not a whoopie cushion being placed in the seats of his clients. I kind of appreciate that he's not just there in the room with the owners, high fiving them when the owners crossed their own finish line. He's dead dog serious, and he either has his wires crossed or he's found something legitimately odd in the deal.
 
now the players backs are against the wall! if they dont vote tomorrow everyone will pin them as the bad guys in this whole situation!
 
cland said:
IMO the NFLPA is just blowing a bunch of smoke after somebody convinced them that the owners were trying to pull one over on them. The worst was Heath Evans interview on NFLN, he was all over the map and basically made completely contradictory statements, complete with a two-year owner conspiracy theory.

Look the owners said we agree with the deal, we can't negotiate some of the small issues until there is a re-certified union to negotiate with. If we don't want to cancel pre-season games we have to get it done by this date.

The players heard "WE DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR ISSUES, YOU MUST RECONSTITUTE YOUR UNION WHEN WE SAY OR ELSE!!!!" Then they fired up their twitter accounts and blabbed with a bunch of propaganda and mixed facts. And of course the squeaky wheels get the grease. They weren't helped by a letter from an anonymous source (*cough that sounds like Lawyer Jeff Kessler*) that claimed the owners were violating the law by putting a re-certification date down.

Tomorrow everyone will calm it down, they'll figure out the ending punctuation, and it will all go down just fine.

PS. NFLN and ESPN's live analysis was terribly painful and mistake ridden. The worst was Adam Schefter claiming that the doors wouldn't open on Saturday if the Union didn't occur....this was the exact opposite of the truth.
Click to expand...

Yeah I think it is disingenous of the players to cry power play when they know full well the sticking points have to be collectively bargained. You can't collectively bargain without a union. The owners are merely proposing a timeline and voted on what they thought was a handshake deal. They adopted the proposal as an act of good faith knowing some issues still had to be settled.
 
hot pickle said:
now the players backs are against the wall! if they dont vote tomorrow everyone will pin them as the bad guys in this whole situation!
Click to expand...

Yeah, isn't it weird that way? It's almost as if the owners knew this.

I stated awhile back (a week or so ago) that the owners started floating out a "schedule of events," such as free agency dates, so that they could wrangle the players and make the PLAYERS look like they are the ones holding up the stagecoach and making everybody poorer AND late to the station.

Now look what's happening! The owners celebrated, according to Peter King's article I posted, like it was midnight at a New Year's Eve party. To them, they figure they are just going to sit back and watch the players be put on the clock now.

I don't necessarily think the players are getting screwed. I just think the celebratory environment by the owners was a bad move. Should have been solemn and acting like they lost their pet dog and they found him dead in the road. Instead, their reaction(s) might have poured salt in the wound of what De Smith thinks is questionable language in the deal.

More "hard work" to be done? Maybe, maybe not. I hope it's just a case of everybody's cranky and it's the last gasp effort to make sure nobody slipped the other side a mickey.
 
Foster doing his part...

x2_74c2079
 
Just got home from making rounds..............to find that exactly what I THOUGHT would happen WOULD happen! Let's just say that it was predictable that fools and stubborn people on both sides of the fence would make the lawyers richer.

Now, the word of the day, from which all roads lead, will now have become the vicious cycle of "REVENGE."

revenge.gif
 
Pantherstang84 said:
Yeah I think it is disingenous of the players to cry power play when they know full well the sticking points have to be collectively bargained. You can't collectively bargain without a union. The owners are merely proposing a timeline and voted on what they thought was a handshake deal. They adopted the proposal as an act of good faith knowing some issues still had to be settled.
Click to expand...

I think the extra negotiation items is a minor item that doesn't really stir the pot with De Smith and the players. It's being mentioned so that people know there is not a 100% certified "deal" yet.

The big news item is this part of the contract where De Smith is having trouble understanding if the section is just merely lawyer language that's confusing or if it's purposely trying to get more than what the "gentlemen's agreement" had spelled out before today. By De Smith's reaction, he thinks he's found some underhanded language that was not agreed upon previously.
 
GP said:
For some reason, I figured the owners would rush to present "a deal," and then put the spotlight on the players and make the players appear to be "on the clock" in the perception of the fans.

Another P.R. move, IMO. It's the owners crossing the finish line, high-fiving each other, getting that image seared into our minds...and now they're going to trash talk (in subtle ways) and essentially act like the players are just dragging their feet on accepting the deal.

I was under the impression that both sides were crafting the deal, together, via their lawyers, and then it would present situation where a final document is produced that each side would have to AGREE is representative/reflective of what was crafted for the past month or so.

But Peter King is saying that De Smith found something NOT originally agreed upon by his side (an item of "supplemental revenue sharing") according to the words of De Smith.

All I can hope for is that De Smith and his crew are so tired that they are mis-interpreting some language, and maybe it's just a mixup or bad language in the crafting of the legal mumbo jumbo. In short: He's trying to make triple-sure that the players are not getting hosed without knowing it.

I can see how he's trying to be very strict about it. His reputation is on the line for the next 10 years if the owners go "Nanny nanny boo boo! We tricked you!" on certain parts of the "deal that's good for football."

Agree? Or disagree?
Click to expand...

Totally agree. The owners whipped this new deal up knowing it was in their favor and placed all the pressure on the players to make them look like the "bad guy." The players already knew the owners were trying to make them look bad, that's why they kept emphasizing how they were not looking towards a deadline but making sure the right deal was in place.

Good point GP!
 
Cjeremy635 said:
Am I the only one that is bothered by the fact that there is no HOF game? I know it's only preseason and I normally don't pay attention to the whole game, but it signalizes the start of the football season. Now that's going to be postponed. Now I'm annoyed even more.
Click to expand...

Yea, me too. Not to mention this years class of HOF'ers are kinda getting the shaft. Hope the league does the classy thing and invites them back to next years game.
 
I have a feeling that Monday or Tuesday will be make-or-break day.

I have a feeling that De Smith (and his side) will take Friday AND the weekend to review and consult and plan whatever response they feel is necessary--Whether it be a VOTE by players or a statement to the press that expresses there will not be an agreement until items A, B, and C are agreed upon and the contract is reflective of those agreements.

I could be wrong. He could wake up tomorrow, meet with Goodell over breakfast, and have his doubts removed.

I just wonder how the Kraft funeral will impact the timeline. Not saying I am mad about it, so nobody call me insensitive OK? I'm just saying that it might take longer than usual if Goodell and other higher-ups are out of town for the funeral of Mrs. Kraft.

It could be that Monday or Tuesday is a better day for everyone.
 
Tonaaayyyy said:
Totally agree. The owners whipped this new deal up knowing it was in their favor and placed all the pressure on the players to make them look like the "bad guy." The players already knew the owners were trying to make them look bad, that's why they kept emphasizing how they were not looking towards a deadline but making sure the right deal was in place.

Good point GP!
Click to expand...

Just to clarify: This COULD be a minor misunderstanding by De Smith. He COULD somehow be guilty of being overly cautious and thinking he's found something there that's not really "there."

Or, it COULD be that the owners tried one small move that they thought would not be caught or be as big of a deal as they initially thought.

I think they need a good night's rest, some orange juice and an English muffin in the morning, and down a good cup of coffee to start their day tomorrow. Roll up their sleeves, discuss the sticking point(s) and go from there.

It might require a new contract (amended wording) and a new owner's vote, though??? And again: Will the funeral provide a day or two of pause???
 
why the hell are the players so worried? They each have the 200,000 dollar insurance deal if no season so they get paid :kitten:
 
Nawzer said:
Chris Mortensen on ESPN just reported that the NFLPA got the whole document from the owners side and they don't think any of the areas of contention are major issues. He said that they will vote on this tomorrow and there is a good chance that the players will agree to this deal. I don't know what the big deal was anyway, why would the players sign a deal without reading the whole thing? Seems like the owners tried to sneak a few things in, but nothing I think that will prevent a vote.
Click to expand...

Nice 1000th post in the thread :fingergun:
 
From NFL.com

NFLPA shows displeasure with league in email to player reps

By Albert Breer NFL Network
NFL Network Reporter


ATLANTA -- In the hours following NFL owners' 31-0 vote to ratify a settlement proposal that would end the four-month-old lockout, NFL Players Association general counsel Richard Berthelsen sent an email to player representatives Thursday night detailing the issues with the potential deal.

NFL Network obtained a copy of the email, which took issue with the league setting a rough timetable for the NFLPA to reform as a union.

"In addition to depriving the players of the time needed to consider forming a union and making needed changes to the old agreement, this proposed procedure would, in my view, also violate federal labor laws," Berthelsen said in the email. "Those laws prohibit employers from coercing their employees into forming a union and could result in any agreement reached through the procedure being declared null and void."

Berthelsen's email said the league "demands that the players reform as a union and provide evidence by Tuesday, July 26, that a majority of players have signed union authorization cards."

It also said that the new CBA includes "virtually all provisions of the old CBA" and that, after voting on it, by July 26, the players would have just three days to bargain changes in terms. The agreement, the email goes on, "would become final on Saturday, July 30. If the NFL does not agree to the players' proposed changes, the old CBA terms on benefits, discipline, safety, etc., will remain unchanged for another 10 years."
Click to expand...
 
Wolf said:
why the hell are the players so worried? They each have the 200,000 dollar insurance deal if no season so they get paid :kitten:
Click to expand...

De Smith might write that number down on a piece of paper:

"Psst...just wanted to remind you: $200K-per-player is in place. Just sayin'..."

And then slide that piece of paper over to Goodell at the breakfast table.

ya' never know.....
 
GP said:
I think the extra negotiation items is a minor item that doesn't really stir the pot with De Smith and the players. It's being mentioned so that people know there is not a 100% certified "deal" yet.

The big news item is this part of the contract where De Smith is having trouble understanding if the section is just merely lawyer language that's confusing or if it's purposely trying to get more than what the "gentlemen's agreement" had spelled out before today. By De Smith's reaction, he thinks he's found some underhanded language that was not agreed upon previously.
Click to expand...

Then he needs to put up or shut up. Call a press conference show the language he agreed to and the language that was "slipped in". Otherwise he needs to do his job and sell the deal he shook hands on.

However, the time for posturing is over. The players are whining that the owners are trying to force them to recertify. Everyone knows they are going to recertify. So they just need to shut up about that. The owners only said "Hey. If this deal is agreeable and you recertify so the remaining issues can be settled, we'll unlock the doors this Saturday." But SOMEHOW the players find this offensive.

They just need to realize they have lost the PR war so just zip it. Show the fans where the owners slipped them a mickey or get back to work.
 
So we have conflicting reports.

Nawzer is saying Mortensen is saying it's no big problem.

CND has a report saying there is definitely a problem.

Hmm......
 
GP said:
Just to clarify: This COULD be a minor misunderstanding by De Smith. He COULD somehow be guilty of being overly cautious and thinking he's found something there that's not really "there."

Or, it COULD be that the owners tried one small move that they thought would not be caught or be as big of a deal as they initially thought.

I think they need a good night's rest, some orange juice and an English muffin in the morning, and down a good cup of coffee to start their day tomorrow. Roll up their sleeves, discuss the sticking point(s) and go from there.

It might require a new contract (amended wording) and a new owner's vote, though??? And again: Will the funeral provide a day or two of pause???
Click to expand...

I hope De Smith read it the wrong way...
 
Pantherstang84 said:
Then he needs to put up or shut up. Call a press conference show the language he agreed to and the language that was "slipped in". Otherwise he needs to do his job and sell the deal he shook hands on.

However, the time for posturing is over. The players are whining that the owners are trying to force them to recertify. Everyone knows they are going to recertify. So they just need to shut up about that. The owners only said "Hey. If this deal is agreeable and you recertify so the remaining issues can be settled, we'll unlock the doors this Saturday." But SOMEHOW the players find this offensive.

They just need to realize they have lost the PR war so just zip it. Show the fans where the owners slipped them a mickey or get back to work.
Click to expand...

Agree 100% man.
 
Pantherstang84 said:
Then he needs to put up or shut up. Call a press conference show the language he agreed to and the language that was "slipped in". Otherwise he needs to do his job and sell the deal he shook hands on.

However, the time for posturing is over. The players are whining that the owners are trying to force them to recertify. Everyone knows they are going to recertify. So they just need to shut up about that. The owners only said "Hey. If this deal is agreeable and you recertify so the remaining issues can be settled, we'll unlock the doors this Saturday." But SOMEHOW the players find this offensive.

They just need to realize they have lost the PR war so just zip it. Show the fans where the owners slipped them a mickey or get back to work.
Click to expand...

Well, it's not like De Smith and his side had any daylight left in the media cycle to do what you're saying. The owner's vote didn't take place at 10 a.m.

In fact, I question why the vote by owners happened so late in the first place? Seems odd to me. It had the feeling of everybody showing up at 4:59 p.m. and all of a sudden everyone's headed for the showers a few minutes later.

Plus, you ought to know that De Smith is not going to let the next 10 years of his life be constantly judged over whether he "showed proof" on the same day as the owner's vote or even by the next day. Or even by the third day.

He's going to do what lawyers do: Sit down, read and re-read, and get counsel from his team, and ask his old college professor to look at it, and maybe even have his high school English teacher look at it, etc. You get the drift.

Everybody's so ramped up about having football again that it appears the owners COULD be guilty of pushing too quickly. You have to ask for that goodnight kiss, you can't just force it on her.
 
1. Sleep.

2. Have a GOOD breakfast, not a slice of re-heated pizza.

3. Take a deep breath: In through the nostrils, out through the mouth.

4. Wait for another statement by one, or both, sides.

Life is good. Life is short. "Football is but a distraction or diversion," to quote a few guys on here who have had to help me and others gain perspective.
 
Chris Mortensen
Good news. Players wrapped call, then leadership received final details. Reviewing. A vote can come tomorrow if they can satisfy a finishing detail or 2. Players want lockout lifted if/after they vote yes, then sign player union cards at team facility, collected by reps and regional directors
Click to expand...
 
GP said:
Uh, it could be an issue if the revenue sharing eats into the PLAYERS entitlement--For all we know, the owners found a subtle way of siphoning off from the players' take and it shouldn't have been included in the deal.

THIS is the sort of thing that mayyyybe De Smith thinks he's found in the language the owners have provided. Maybe he's wrong. Maybe he's not. But he's not going to say "Done deal" until they feel everything is in order. An extra day or two will not bust the season.

You don't know anymore than I do. For all BOTH of us know, the players have either (a) poorly worded a section of the deal, or (b) intentionally re-worded a section and it affects the players in some capacity.

Try to have a dialogue here, instead of acting like you're in on the talks yourself. De Smith is apparently making damn sure that there's not a whoopie cushion being placed in the seats of his clients. I kind of appreciate that he's not just there in the room with the owners, high fiving them when the owners crossed their own finish line. He's dead dog serious, and he either has his wires crossed or he's found something legitimately odd in the deal.
Click to expand...

Revenue sharing is how the teams spread their part of the revenue to equalize income from big market and small market teams. You'll notice that it was an additional agreement, independent of the proposed CBA. The CBA contols the revenue split between the Owners and Players. The revenue split controls how teams share their part of the revenue. So it is impossible that it affects or "siphons" player revenue.

De Smith's comments:
“As you know the Owners have ratified their proposal to settle our differences,” the e-mail states. “It is my understanding they are forwarding it to us. As you may have heard, they apparently approved a supplemental revenue sharing proposal. Obviously, we have not been a part of those discussions. As you know from yesterday, issues that need to be collectively bargained remain open other issues such as workers compensation, economic issues and end of deal terms remain unresolved. There is no agreement between the NFL and the Players at this time. I look forward to our call tonight.”
Click to expand...

The comment "Obviously, we have not been a part of those discussions." can be interpreted that they don't have any reason to be part of the Owner's revenue sharing. The "issues that need to be collectively bargained" indicates that the union must re-certify before they can be addressed (re-certifying is the only way they CAN collectively bargain.)

He also doesn't make the claim that suspicious language was used in the owners proposed CBA. And then he states that there is no agreement, which is of course true before the union votes for agreement with the new CBA.
 
I like Mort. I really do.

You guys know I have posted his tweets. A lot.

But I feel like I'm the only one who isn't buying one side or the other. I can see where confusion could have been felt on the players' side.

They watched the reports of the owners getting a unanimous vote and then celebrating it. And now it's their turn. And couple that with what might have been questionably terminology that De Smith or part of his counsel had concerns with. Everybody is shoving mics and cameras into the faces of De Smith, asking them when THEY will vote...since it's now "up to them," so to speak.

i just gotta' say that I think it's understandable if you look at it objectively.
 
Bills player rep said they need time to review the document and go over with the players. What in the world have they been doing the past months?

Makes it sound like the owners pulled an all nighter and churned a 500 page document overnight without any input from players. LOL
 
cland said:
Revenue sharing is how the teams spread their part of the revenue to equalize income from big market and small market teams. You'll notice that it was an additional agreement, independent of the proposed CBA. The CBA contols the revenue split between the Owners and Players. The revenue split controls how teams share there part of the revenue. So it is impossible that it affects or "siphons" player revenue.

De Smith's comments:

The comment "Obviously, we have not been a part of those discussions." can be read that they don't have any reason to be part of the revenue sharing. The "issues that need to be collectively bargained" indicates that the union must re-certify before they can be addressed (re-certifying is the only way they CAN collectively bargain.)

He also doesn't make the claim that suspicious language was used in the owners proposed CBA. And then he states that there is no agreement, which is of course true before the union votes for agreement with the new CBA.
Click to expand...

You're leaving out the part where he says there is an issue with a "supplemental revenue sharing" section. Go back and read Peter King. If you have a problem with that, contact Peter King--He's the one who has De Smith quoted on it. I doubt De Smith would be quoted on it if it were not pertaining to something that HIS side of the table needs to be in agreement with.

I know full well that revenue sharing is how teams "share revenue," but the revenue is partly attained by the players playing in the games and producing the product you and I see every week. Therefore, it's p-o-s-s-i-b-l-e that De Smith saw something tied to revenue sharing that causes him to take pause and want to examine further.

I'm not going to keep on with this. I'm not the best communicator in the world, but I think I've done a fairly good job of showing how it's p-o-s-s-i-b-l-e that the contract wording is confusing OR there is something there that good guys like Mortensen or Schefter or King or any other reporter does not see in full detail like De Smith does.

I'm trying to be fair and balanced. I won't hang one side or the other, though I do find it funny how the league presented the timeframe in great detail...and they got their vote over with as fast as they could...and they are putting a Wednesday deadline on the players....etc. Doesn't look good, if you connect a few dots--Especially the big dot that De Smith might be talking about.
 
dtran04 said:
Bills player rep said they need time to review the document and go over with the players. What in the world have they been doing the past months?

Makes it sound like the owners pulled an all nighter and churned a 500 page document overnight without any input from players. LOL
Click to expand...

You'd do the due diligence, too, I bet.

Making sure that one small section didn't get bad/confusing language put into it. Or worse: A total re-write.

I've had situations where I negotiated a deal with a car salesmen, came back later that afternoon to sign the papers after the in-house financing team drew up the papers, and I made double-dog sure that I had every word spelled out to me and I was assured that I was signing off on what me and the salesman and his manager agreed upon.

The back automatic sliding glass of my Ford F-150 Lariat wasn't sliding, so I had them write into the contract that I could brig it back anytime and have it replaced/fixed. I go to them a few weeks later, after they had called me and said they had the part, and I dropped off the truck with the service guys. I looked right at the service manager, as I dropped the key in his hand, and said "If you review the papers on file, you'll see that I had it written into the contract that you guys will fix that item and it was not deemed an As Is item when I bought this truck. I don't want to come back here to pick up my truck and be presented with a bill." He said "No problem, sir. I'll double check the documents and contact you myself if I don't find everything in order. And I'll do it before we perform the work." I had no problems. Some extra time, some extra language, probably saved me having to jump someone's ass for a big repair bill I wasn't responsible for.

You have to do the due diligence up front. Yeah, it sucks. You come off as maybe being an ass to a few people, but at the end of the day it's my $369.00-per-month I'm spending. MINE.

Now think about being De Smith and you've got 10 years of future media speculation and expose style journalism trying to uproot why you didn't do the due diligence and why you didn't slow down and spend an extra day just to make sure of things.

You guys are looking at this through fan glasses, not through the owners or the players' glasses or the reps for both sides. This is big time stuff. This is the BIGGEST professional sports league, with the best product, the best future of any sport (maybe outside of UFC), and the pressure is insane.
 
The player side should go back and change something to their favor. That would be hilarious. Then it can go back and forth until the preseason is over.
 
I've been one of the very patient fans. If they don't get this thing hammered out in the next day or two then I will pretty pissed off. Make it happen.
 
Even though Mort's been reporting that there is a good chance that the NFLPA will vote and ratify the new CBA by tomorrow night, I no longer share his optimism. In all honesty, I haven't been following this lockout situation as closely as most of you are. Most of my sports attention has been diverted towards the soccer transfer period and all the tournaments going on right now. Anyway, today was the first day I decided to follow this story seriously mainly because the owners voted for the CBA. I thought this thing was going to be over by tomorrow afternoon or something. But after watching and reading a lot of these player rep comments, I don't think there will be a vote tomorrow. Bills player rep George Wilson made it really clear that there is no schedule on the table for them to get this deal done. They obviously want to and need to get it done asap, but they will not be hurried into signing something they haven't carefully gone over. Once Demaurice Smith, lawyers, and player reps have gone over the whole thing (500 pages apparently) they will then decide to vote. I don't think this is a bad thing necessarily because from the players perspective this is a 10 year deal that you can't change it or back out of it once it's ratified. There are small issues still and I think they will get solved once the CBA is agreed upon. I think if there is a vote tomorrow it would surprise me. I think tomorrow we'll see more meetings, conference calls, and things of that nature to make sure all all the players or at least most of them agree to the deal. I'm guessing on Monday they take a vote and the lockout will end.
 
Nothing is going to happen BEFORE the players recertify. The owners are not going to end to the lockout before the players reconstitute their union and vote to OK the deal. Obtaining player signatures at team facilities (which means that the lockout was essentially lifted) is not going to be accepted by the owners. Once the lockout is lifted, the owners lose their ability to force players to recertify. To try to do so at that point would open up the antitrust lawsuit avenue all over again. Furthermore, the recertification has to have occurred before CBA subjects such as drug testing and discipline and some safety issues can be negotiated. The bottom line is that neither side trusts the other..........and truthfully, from recent past history, they don't have much reason to do so.........and thus hope for even the proposed half-assed season prep time is quickly fading away.
 
This email was sent out by the Bengal to all of their season ticket holders, immediately after the NFL vote yesterday..........Misrepresentative of the facts and disengenuous at very least.

We are excited to let you know that the NFL has reached a new Collective Bargaining Agreement that allows the entire NFL season to be played this year.

The NFL is the most popular sport in America. Our games are intense, unifying and meaningful to fans in the stadium and to those watching at home. We are thrilled to have a labor deal in place that will provide fans with a decade of certainty and that will allow us to focus all our energies where they ought to be – on the playing field. The upcoming 2011 season will surely be exciting, and football work will begin shortly. Our coaches will begin meeting with players, and the Club will welcome back talented veterans along with exciting rookies from the April NFL Draft, like top picks A.J. Green and Andy Dalton. Whether all of that will take place in Cincinnati or Georgetown, Kentucky, will be decided shortly once we receive the NFL’s operating schedule.

Two years ago, our football team swept the AFC North-one of the toughest divisions in football-and many key components of that team remain, including defensive coordinator Mike Zimmer and a defense that ranked in the top half of the NFL for three straight seasons. The area of the team that will change the most will be the offense with a new direction under offensive coordinator Jay Gruden and new faces at quarterback and wide receiver. The mix of veterans and rookies should return our offense to the top level we need, and we are excited by the challenge.

This year-like others before it-we will focus our energies on returning to the Super Bowl again. That’s what we want and that’s what our fans want, and our franchise has been blessed with great support from fans for decades. Last season we reached a record-setting 57th straight sellout-a string we hope to restart soon-and our games have been the most-watched television program in the local market for the last applicable 96 ratings weeks. This is great football country, and incredibly: 95% of the Cincinnati population watched an NFL game during the 2009 season (third highest ranking among NFL markets).

We are very grateful to our fans, we thank you for your patience during the labor stoppage, and now we look forward to a great season together. Who Dey!

Sincerely,

Katie Blackburn

Marvin Lewis
Click to expand...

An act of desparation or just plain stupidity.......of course, this IS the Bungles.
 
All this talk about a so-called "PR battle" cracks me up. Does anyone honestly think the fans - you know, the objects of the so-called "PR battle" - have any say in any of this?

It's not like an election, where each side needs more supporters than the other side. What do the owners care if fans are on their side or not? Fans will herd to games to spend their hard-earned money regardless if they like the owners or not.

There is no "PR battle". There might be a perception of one, but really look at it objectively and ask yourself what difference does it make what side the fans are on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top