Jeff-Pash-reacts-to-DeMaurice-Smiths-criticism-of-NFLs-last-offer

[gbgary]

here is a copy of the commish's letter...

http://a.espncdn.com/media/pdf/11031..._3_17_2011.pdf

here is a copy of the player's response to it...

http://www.nfllockout.com/2011/03/19...ond/#more-1245

[rbaloha1]

here is a copy of the commish's letter...

http://a.espncdn.com/media/pdf/11031..._3_17_2011.pdf

here is a copy of the player's response to it...

http://www.nfllockout.com/2011/03/19...ond/#more-1245

I heard about this on espn radio with John Clayton and Andrew Brandt. Brandt contends the owner's latest "proposal" are the "easy give" items in terms of pension and player safety. Revenue split will always remain the key and most contentious issue.

Currently only counsel from each side can negotiate until the April 6 hearing. Brandt stated litigation speeds up the process as opposed to negotiation only. According to Brandt

Lockout illegal -- 2010 contract remains and the 2011 season can start. Negotiations concurrently restart for a new CBA . Thank goodness Gov. Walker is involved.
Lockout legal -- Negotiations for a new CBA can resume ASAP.

[Patler]

here is a copy of the commish's letter...

http://a.espncdn.com/media/pdf/11031..._3_17_2011.pdf

here is a copy of the player's response to it...

http://www.nfllockout.com/2011/03/19...ond/#more-1245

WOW! I am absolutely flabbergasted at the players response! If anyone needed more evidence that the NFLPA was not negotiating, but stalling, this letter is proof.

All players did was complain, criticize and demean offers put on the table by the owners. Not so much as a comment about a counteroffer from the players. Nothing that the players did in an effort to narrow the gap. It appears the "negotiations" went like this:

Players: "Make an offer"
Owners: "Here's a proposed framework."
Players: "Not good enough. Make a better offer."
Owners: "How about this?"
Players: "Nope, still not acceptable."
Owners: "Maybe this?"
Players: "Still not good enough. See you in court."

I would have expected the players to respond by explaining how they, in good faith, had tried to work toward a settlement. They offered absolutely no evidence of that.

[SkinBasket]

WOW! I am absolutely flabbergasted at the players response! If anyone needed more evidence that the NFLPA was not negotiating, but stalling, this letter is proof.

All players did was complain, criticize and demean offers put on the table by the owners. Not so much as a comment about a counteroffer from the players. Nothing that the players did in an effort to narrow the gap. It appears the "negotiations" went like this:

Players: "Make an offer"
Owners: "Here's a proposed framework."
Players: "Not good enough. Make a better offer."
Owners: "How about this?"
Players: "Nope, still not acceptable."
Owners: "Maybe this?"
Players: "Still not good enough. See you in court."

I would have expected the players to respond by explaining how they, in good faith, had tried to work toward a settlement. They offered absolutely no evidence of that.

Once again, it really appears that neither the players or their representatives had the mental capacity to negotiate. This letter evidences that the player position has been little more than "you didn't give us what we demanded." I don't think it was a communication problem, as someone suggested earlier. I think it was a understanding problem on the players part, of what exactly was being offered, what the consequences of the offer or litigation are (just like a couple folks here), and that when they broke from negotiations, they needed a plan to move forward that didn't involve making idiots out of themselves and their position on a daily basis. Like I said, like dealing with monkeys. Greedy monkeys.

[swede]

Like I said, like dealing with monkeys. Greedy monkeys.

Simian Rice?

[ThunderDan]

here is a copy of the commish's letter...

http://a.espncdn.com/media/pdf/11031..._3_17_2011.pdf

here is a copy of the player's response to it...

http://www.nfllockout.com/2011/03/19...ond/#more-1245

What complete shit by Goodell. Writing a letter to the players telling them this stuff. There was one reason Goodell wrote this letter and one reason only, he is trying to set the players against themselves.

When someone starts a letter the way Goodell did and then starts lecturing about all the OWNERS were giving up you can tell it's a BS piece of garbage. The NFLPA shouldn't have even responded with a letter. They should have written a letter to the players addressing the points and said nothing to the owners.

Goodell states in the letter that their is only one way to resolve the differences and that is in goodfaith. That there needs to be mutual respect and open communication. But the owners make claims on how the are losing profitablility but will only the show the players a fraction of the total financial picture from their books and records. If the owners are truely losing their ability to make profit show the players. As long as the players are only able to negotiate while knowing part of the picture the commish's letter and promous rhetoric is simply puffery. Empty words hoping to sway public opinion and split the players.

[Pugger]

What complete shit by Goodell. Writing a letter to the players telling them this stuff. There was one reason Goodell wrote this letter and one reason only, he is trying to set the players against themselves.

When someone starts a letter the way Goodell did and then starts lecturing about all the OWNERS were giving up you can tell it's a BS piece of garbage. The NFLPA shouldn't have even responded with a letter. They should have written a letter to the players addressing the points and said nothing to the owners.

Goodell states in the letter that their is only one way to resolve the differences and that is in goodfaith. That there needs to be mutual respect and open communication. But the owners make claims on how the are losing profitablility but will only the show the players a fraction of the total financial picture from their books and records. If the owners are truely losing their ability to make profit show the players. As long as the players are only able to negotiate while knowing part of the picture the commish's letter and promous rhetoric is simply puffery. Empty words hoping to sway public opinion and split the players.

Isn't going to litigation a way for the players and their reps to get the OWNERS against themselves?

I truly do not give a rat's azz about either side - I only care about what will help the only team in the NFL that I give a damn about stay competitive in the future and bring home more Lombardi trophies.

[Guiness]

Isn't going to litigation a way for the players and their reps to get the OWNERS against themselves?

I truly do not give a rat's azz about either side - I only care about what will help the only team in the NFL that I give a damn about stay competitive in the future and bring home more Lombardi trophies.

That's a different take, Pugger. Nice to see some different conjecture.

It's no secret that Jerry Jones and some of the other owners of rich franchises begrudge the revenue sharing. Put the owners in a room, and they'll tear each other to pieces. If the CBA was thrown out in its entirety, its possible the owners would not come to another similar agreement, and the NFL could end up with a MLB-like system. Certainly in that situation, some players would stand to make a lot more.

Here's another thought on the hidden agenda bandwagon. What about guaranteed contracts? The NFL is unlike other pro-sports leagues in that they don't guarantee contracts. That is certainly something that would be desirable to the players.

[Patler]

Here's another thought on the hidden agenda bandwagon. What about guaranteed contracts? The NFL is unlike other pro-sports leagues in that they don't guarantee contracts. That is certainly something that would be desirable to the players.

I'm not sure how much of an issue that really is for the union. It would not change how much is spent on the players, it would just alter who gets the money that is spent. Presumably, in the current situation, money saved on a terminated contract that is not guaranteed ends up being spent on signing another player.

That said, the owners last proposal did offer some significant compensation for players the year after they are cut. Sort of a transition payment back to the real world.