PDA

View Full Version : Players Letter to Roger Goodell



steelerkeylargo
03-19-2011, 02:20 PM
http://thenationalfootballreport.com/20 ... r-goodell/ (http://thenationalfootballreport.com/2011/03/19/players-draft-a-letter-to-roger-goodell/)

hawaiiansteel
03-19-2011, 03:14 PM
Pash responds to NFLPA* letter

Posted by Mike Florio on March 19, 2011

http://nbcprofootballtalk.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/jeffpashgregaiellogetty.jpg?w=250


As we were writing a blurb urging the owners to respond to the letter from the NFLPA* by taking the high road, the league was issuing a public response from general counsel Jeff Pash.

It would have been better to do it privately. Fortunately, the content of Pash’s message isn’t inflammatory.

“We are pleased now to have received a reply to the comprehensive proposal that we made eight days ago,” Pash says. “The points made in the players’ letter are precisely the kind of points that collective bargaining is intended to address. Debating the merits of the offer in this fashion is what collective bargaining is all about. But we would note that three facts we have consistently identified over the past week are ignored and we therefore assume acknowledged. First, the proposal called for player costs of between $19 and $20 billion over the next four seasons; second, the player cost figure in 2011 was above the actual cash spending for 2009 and 2010; and third, the economic offer, combined with other elements of the proposal, was a substantial move by the clubs to keep negotiations going and avoid a work stoppage and related litigation.

“This letter again proves that the most sensible step for everyone is to get back to bargaining. So we again accept Mike Vrabel’s suggestion that the union’s executive committee meet with our negotiating team, including Jerry Richardson, Robert Kraft and Jerry Jones, to resume bargaining. If Mike will let us know when and where he and his colleagues would like to meet, we will be there. We are ready.”

The final paragraph ignores the portion of the letter in which the NFLPA* invites the NFL to contact class counsel to continue talks. Though the owners almost uniformly despise Jeffrey Kessler (which means he’s doing something right), they need to hold their collective noses and make the call and start the process.

As Packers president and CEO Mark Murphy acknowledged several days ago on PFT Live, there’s a way to involve the NFLPA* without jeopardizing the players’ position as to the validity of the decertification of the union. Still, the process must commence with the NFL’s lawyers calling Kessler or Barbara Berens or one of the other various attorneys named on the complaint filed on March 11.

So have David Boies call Kessler and begin the process of working out terms of continued discussions. And then get back to work. The back-and-forth nonsense is turning people off. The two sides need to find a way to turn the negotiations back on.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... pa-letter/ (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/19/pash-responds-to-nflpa-letter/)

RuthlessBurgher
03-19-2011, 03:38 PM
The way these two sides talk at each other, spewing the same rhetoric endlessly, without either side really listening to what the other is truly saying is reminiscent of the Crash v. Steelers43 pointless message board banter.

steelerkeylargo
03-19-2011, 03:54 PM
The way these two sides talk at each other, spewing the same rhetoric endlessly, without either side really listening to what the other is truly saying is reminiscent of the Crash v. Steelers43 pointless message board banter.

:lol: :Agree :stirpot

hawaiiansteel
03-20-2011, 12:14 AM
Until NFL, players start talking, nobody's playing football

By Clark Judge
CBSSports.com Senior Writer
March 18, 2011


MARCO ISLAND, Fla. -- Most people want to know when we'll have pro football again. Me? I want to know when the NFL and its players talk again because until they do there can be no football.

So let's see what we have here. The league insists it will resume negotiations if players are willing to return to the table. In fact, in a letter commissioner Roger Goodell sent players Thursday he declared "we have said publicly, told the federal mediator, and say to you that we are prepared to resume those negotiations at any time."

Great. So when is that time? Someone? Anyone?

"Anytime they want to reach out," said the Cowboys' Bradie James.

But I thought Goodell just did that. Players don't, and until or unless they do there can be no conversations.

What we have here, folks, is a failure to communicate ... again ... and the problem this time is that Goodell's letter angered and insulted players assembled here for their annual meeting -- with Pittsburgh player representative Ryan Clark charging it was meant "to create confusion and to create dissension."

I don't know about that. But I do know that players aren't going to budge until someone other than Goodell reaches out to them. And that someone would be Jeff Pash, the NFL's lead negotiator. Only they don't want to hear from him. They want their attorneys to hear from him, and if you're wondering why we're in an NFL shutdown you’re getting warm.

The two sides can't even agree on how to correspond with each other, with NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith on Friday saying Goodell's letter did not represent a "good-faith" gesture to resume talks.

And you were expecting progress? Please.

This, people, is why the NFL and its players aren't expected to resume talking until called into a U.S. federal court on April 6. That doesn't mean they can't return to negotiations. It just means that based on what you hear from the two sides these days there's a better chance of finding the Pittsburgh Pirates in this year's World Series.

"The question," said Smith, "is: Is it possible for class counsel on behalf of the Players Association to negotiate with the National Football League with respect to the outstanding case that is pending in Minnesota? Absolutely. The league understands and knows that class counsel and the class of the players can have discussions with representatives or lawyers from the National Football League."

Translation: Smith wants to hear from Pash. The players don't want to hear from Goodell.

In fact, players stood in front of reporters Friday to express disappointment and outrage with his letter, partly because they disagreed with its "key elements" and mostly because they believe -- or, at least, said they believe -- Goodell's intentions aren't sincere. If they were, they suggested, he wouldn't have appealed to them; Pash would've appealed to their attorneys, and by now you should be getting a picture of a Great Divide.

Players even dissected Goodell's letter to the last paragraph where he referred to "your Union" when, they insisted, he and NFL attorneys know there is no union. They're right, of course. So why would he make a mistake like that? Their contention is he wouldn't; that it wasn't a mistake and that it's all part of a plan to deceive and divide, and now you know why we need to hear from the courts.

"Roger was in the [negotiating] meetings for the last 16 days," said James, "and he clearly knows we're a players association and not a union. That fact alone culminates everything that's going on ... That may seem very small to other people, but to us that's the fight we're in."

Right again. It does seem small. But not to NFL players who feel they're getting the short end of the stick when talks get around to a new CBA. They contend that owners drove them to decertify because, basically, players tired of waiting on them to deliver a meaningful proposal.

Only the league counters its proposal was meaningful and that it wasn't the owners who left the negotiating table; it was the players. Furthermore, it says it wasn't the owners who refused to negotiate; it was the players.

I give up. Somewhere in there is the truth, and leave it to the courts to decide.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/1482 ... g-football (http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/14829737/as-long-as-nfl-players-arent-talking-nobodys-playing-football)

Discipline of Steel
03-20-2011, 07:00 AM
At the end of the letter i found out Charlie Batch will be a founding father of the new CBA!! He must be on the players negotiating commitee.

IDK, whats wrong with the 50/50 split they have now? Owner 'risk' their capital to support the league. (risk in parentheses because which owner is really losing money?) Player risk their long term health to support the league. (this risk is more substantive, look at the leagues own actions regarding player safely)

I think the players deserve more.

Oviedo
03-20-2011, 09:34 AM
At the end of the letter i found out Charlie Batch will be a founding father of the new CBA!! He must be on the players negotiating commitee.

IDK, whats wrong with the 50/50 split they have now? Owner 'risk' their capital to support the league. (risk in parentheses because which owner is really losing money?) Player risk their long term health to support the league. (this risk is more substantive, look at the leagues own actions regarding player safely)

I think the players deserve more.

Batch is just preparing himself for his career in politics.

feltdizz
03-20-2011, 12:59 PM
I don't see how anyone can side with the owners. I know we respect the Rooneys but they are responsible for putting Goodell in charge.

Given Goodells popularity its hard to believe people think he isn't the owners mouth piece. All the rule changes, power moves etc being done at the request of the owners. Anyone who thinks Goodell is acting alone is sadly mistaken. The game isn't being ruined by Goodell, its being ruined by the owners. They want the cash, longer seasons, 2 hand tag for their primary investments and a billion more dollars

Sure, its their business so they can run it as they please but can anyone really defend they road this league is going down? Everytime a business gets to the top of the mountain there is now where to go but down. NFL had a good run but like all things, once it gets on top the bullsh#t starts.

More money more problems

BURGH86STEEL
03-20-2011, 01:57 PM
At the end of the letter i found out Charlie Batch will be a founding father of the new CBA!! He must be on the players negotiating commitee.

IDK, whats wrong with the 50/50 split they have now? Owner 'risk' their capital to support the league. (risk in parentheses because which owner is really losing money?) Player risk their long term health to support the league. (this risk is more substantive, look at the leagues own actions regarding player safely)

I think the players deserve more.

The split they had was 60% for players and 40% for the owners. The owners were entitled to 1 billion before the 60/40 split of revenues under the previous agreement.

From what I understand, the owners want to take another billion away from the players before any revenues are split. I am uncertain if they want to change the percentage of revenue shared. Players have a right to be skeptical about the situation. If we were in the player's position, I don't believe any of us would give up another billion without a fight.

hawaiiansteel
03-20-2011, 03:00 PM
Locked out NFL players are poised to stick together

By Clark Judge
CBSSports.com Senior Writer
March 19, 2011


MARCO ISLAND, Fla. -- The last time there was a labor stoppage in the NFL, veteran players couldn't wait to cross the picket line and return to work. But now there are no picket lines because there is no strike. There's a lockout. And you know something? That could be good for the players.

Let me explain. If there are no picket lines -- or "barricades to cross," as former player and permanent player rep Pete Kendall put it -- there's no temptation to return to work. And with no temptation, there are no defections.

Meaning? Meaning no one breaks ranks to join the other side.

OK, let's be honest: There's always the temptation to return to work -- especially if you have to pay a mortgage or assume health insurance or deal with an expense requiring a certified check. And there's certainly the temptation to return to the lucrative business of pro football, with players at this weekend's annual meetings reiterating how much they want to get back to what they do.

"What have we done wrong?" asked New England assistant player rep Alge Crumpler, "What we want to do is get back on the field. Everybody, if they don't know, they should know that."

My guess is that owners know that. Or should. Players crossed picket lines in 1974, and they crossed in 1987, and it doesn't take an Einstein to figure out what it all means -- namely, that the longer players are out of work, the less likely they are to stick together. That doesn't mean they can't; it means they probably won't, and don't tell me owners don't know that.

Only there's a difference now for a couple of reasons: 1) Players are better informed than they were in the past, especially if you're talking about a 1987 strike, and 2) they have no choice but to stick together. Even if they wanted to defect or were compelled to cross to the other side, they can't -- and, strange as it might seem, that could help their ability not just to preach solidarity but to maintain it.

Granted, players might not have to wait that long. They're suing the NFL to end the lockout, with the case to be heard April 6, and if they win they're back to work. But if they lose ... ah, nothing changes, and we're back to one side waiting out the other all over again.

"It is such a different dynamic this time around," New England player rep Matt Light said. "I heard [former NFL player] Don Hasselbeck ... tell the stories and the guys who are still angry with guys who crossed the lines. That was a real problem. That obviously is not the problem now.

"Look, I'll tell you as a rep that I don't have to deal with that issue. Over the last two years the number-one message coming out of 'D' [NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith] and all of our advocates ... it's always been about sticking together and understanding the issues and education."

It was about sticking together in 1987, too, but that didn't work out so well -- largely because the NFL produced a shrewd plan to produce football without its union, hiring replacement players -- OK, scabs -- to work three games. But that was then, and this is now, and now players insist that can't happen again because times are different, and so is communication.

"Guys are more informed than they've ever been," said Cleveland player rep Scott Fujita, one of 10 plaintiffs in an antitrust lawsuit vs. the NFL. "I've been in the league 10 years now, and it's in stark contrast to what it was three or four years ago. It's just that guys are engaged."

OK, I'll buy that. But being "engaged" doesn't pay the bills, and this is where players are at a considerable disadvantage. They can insist that they're the side that's more honest, sincere and willing to negotiate, but in the end it doesn't matter. What does is who blinks first, and, in past NFL work stoppages, that hasn't been the owners.

The reason is simple economics. Owners have deeper pockets, which means they're better prepared to withstand prolonged strikes, lockouts, you name it, than their adversaries. In fact, one agent at the annual NFL scouting combine said the real pressure here won't come until players start missing game checks, which is what happened in 1987 and 1982.

But remember: There's no picket line to cross this time around. Players can't go back to work because there's no work to go back to. Plus, players insist they're ready for a war of attrition, with Smith suggesting a lockout fund already is in place to deal with players' financial needs.

But that's not all. At Saturday's closed-door meetings, one quarterback suggested that veterans consider pooling money to contribute to a fund to aid players -- particularly young players -- with future financial needs. No action was taken, but it was something that at least had players thinking.

"I don't know," one player rep said, "but if I were asked to contribute $50,000, I might do it. I mean, if you multiply that by, let's say, 200 players, that's $10 million, and that could last awhile."

Players could use it. What they don't need is another picket line to cross. Good thing for them there isn't one.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/1483 ... k-together (http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/14833837/locked-out-nfl-players-are-poised-to-stick-together)