lockout/decertfication

[PFanCan]

According to the initial information being shown on what the owners were offering, it seems to me that they caved on most of the union demands. But, not all.

Apparently, for the union, it was all or nothing...

 

[armand34]

This CBA/DISERT of PLAYERS/RUMORS/LIES/ is straight up AGGRAVATING!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

From D. SMITH (Players REP), the bottom line requirement from the former PA was they wanted justification of NFL CLUBS' finances to illustrate why they wanted to opt out of the contract...SUPPOSEDLY the owners agreed to relinquish 5 years of the FINANCE HISTORY, SUPPOSEDLY the former PA wants 10 years of FINANCIAL HISTORY from the clubs...supposedly they denied that request and have dodged this option multiple times.

NFL CLUBS may have to be forced to show their books if this gets taken into an expensive legal process...they don't want to do that...but, from what I'm interpreting throughout this process is that D.SMITH will not agree to JACK**** unless they produce their requested financial history of 10 years...

I think both sides have both been at high degrees of being UNCOOPERATIVE

how does this effect me personally?

As a fan I'm beyond annoyed and as a Packers fan...I'm pissed...I don't really care about who makes what kind of money. I just want to see FOOTBALL played and I want MY DEFENDING SUPERBOWL PACKERS to be working hard at a repeat. This completely kills that. This delay of the game, delay of the offseason, delay of free agency...is KILLING a great opportunity for the PACKERS. 2nd youngest team in the NFL, DEFENDING SUPERBOWL CHAMPS, HIGH IN DEPTH, TRADE-ABLE PLAYERS for picks...all of which can not be done b/c the OWNERS weren't getting a BIG enough piece of the PIE. So, they opted out...frankly in my opinion MANY INDIVIDUALS are capable of doing the job of the OWNER...why should they be so OVERLY compensated??? Very few people in the WORLD can do what these players do and what former players have done. SO JUSTIFY FOR ME...why the OWNERS need to take away money from these players PAST PRESENT & FUTURE?!

Oh they want to build and upgrade their stadiums...no problem...that's what the additonal $800,000,000 per year was for that the PLAYERS originally agreed on

Owners want 18 games, more revenue...I don't want 18 games, who's to say that those extra 2 games don't mean diddly for playoff teams and they basically start the likes of Matt Flynn & Sage Rosenfels in a season finale of GIANTS PACKERS...EWW!

Answer me this, why does this FUTURE CBA have to have SO MANY CHANGES, can't they make small steps towards a FINAL RESULT...why does ALL THE "PROBLEMS" need to be fixed in 16 days? Who can pull that off? Obviously neither side can!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

PS: just moved so I've been out of the loop around here, trying to work my way back in the forum again...LOTTA TOPICS to get a hold of!

 

[longtimefan]

Owners want 18 games, more revenue...I don't want 18 games, who's to say that those extra 2 games don't mean diddly for playoff teams and they basically start the likes of Matt Flynn & Sage Rosenfels in a season finale of GIANTS PACKERS...EWW!

Answer me this, why does this FUTURE CBA have to have SO MANY CHANGES, can't they make small steps towards a FINAL RESULT...why does ALL THE "PROBLEMS" need to be fixed in 16 days? Who can pull that off? Obviously neither side can!

Owners didnt want 18 games,for at least 2 years look at the Goodell letter

 

[longtimefan]

NFL Players Association decertifies, takes labor dispute to court - Michael McCann - SI.com

Now that the NFL Players Association has decided to decertify, here's a road map of what might happen next.
1. The NFL will immediately file a grievance with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in an attempt to block the decertification. The NFL will argue that the NFLPA is acting in bad faith and that the NFLPA's true goal is to get the NFL exposed to antitrust litigation as a way of grabbing owners' money.
2. The NLRB takes no immediate action on the NFL's grievance over the weekend as its offices will be closed. The NFLPA proceeds as if it has decertified. Monday comes along and the NLRB schedules a hearing, possibly for later in the week, to review the NFLPA's decertification.

Read more: NFL Players Association decertifies, takes labor dispute to court - Michael McCann - SI.com
​

 

[Incubes12]

I believe Goodell over the players. Drew Brees tweeted that the players "don't want more money." That's a complete lie, as why else would you sue if you didn't want more money? Coming from a guy who couldn't beat a 7-9 team in the playoffs. Right now my full anger is at the players, because they made the move to decertify - not the owners.

Agreed, I have no sympathy for the players. I just don't think they have any right to ask for what they are asking. As a result of their stubbornness, we don't get any football next year.

 

[neilfii]

frankly in my opinion MANY INDIVIDUALS are capable of doing the job of the OWNER...why should they be so OVERLY compensated??? Very few people in the WORLD can do what these players do and what former players have done.

Seriously!? Many individuals could do what the owners do? What multi-million dollar a year corporation with all the complexities associated with the NFL have you ever run? If it were that easy MANY individuals would be doing it. Many may be able to do it, but clearly not at the level these owners do AND exactly the same can be said of the players: many can do what they do. Perhaps not at the level of these players, but many can do it. The truth is you or anyone else can do what the players do. Again, certainly not at the same level, but you could do it. Not more than a handful in these forums could do what the owners do (if that many).
Don't get me wrong, I think both sides are greedy. I think both sides are wrong. I think it is the fans alone who are the real losers. Perhaps the NFL should go back to what it once was: men playing the game for the sheer love of the game; not as paid mercenaries going to whatever team is willing to pay them the most money. Unfortunately there is not, and likely never will be, pure sport anymore.

 

[cheesehurdler]

Drew Brees is a liar... I have no respect for someone who has used the tragedy in New Orleans for his personal glory. He hasn't "saved" the city of New Orleans.

I've never heard of Drew Brees using Katrina for his own personal glory. As a matter of fact, I think Brees is a nice, selfless man who's a class act. I can't imagine him taking advantage of a disaster.

 

[DTown SBrown]

THe reason #1 the players pushed this issue: THE OWNERS refused to open the financial books to scrutiny. When they are saying they dont want more money, in part that is truth.

The players have asked for no extra money, they have asked the owners (who are pushing to pay less money to the players than the old 2007 CBA) to show them the books to prove that the current pay scale and model is not beneficial to the growth of the league. The owners are essentially telling the players and reps "hey, just take our word on it". Would you do that if you were were moving in with a buddy and he said, Oh, yeah, by the way, the cable bill doubled, so I need more of your $$$ to pay it"? No, you would want to see the bill, and you would be well within your rights to do so.

This is what the owners REFUSED to do, causing the decertification last evening. This is why the owners conceded EVERY other point in the deal, OTHER THAN to show the books. I side with the players over the owners, as the owners, if they have proof to back up their position, would already have a deal done with the NFLPA.

Does anyone else remember how big of a deal it was back in Jan when the Packers released their financial report? It is due to our team being publicly owned, and it allowed the players and reps to get a glimpse of operating costs for an NFL team year to year. NO OTHER owner has been willing to do this.

This is the ENTIRE ISSUE that has stopped football. Im of the belief that if the owners are telling the truth, they would show the proof to the players. The fact that they are refusing tells me they are being dishonest and moreover, greedy in their position.

 

[weeds]

Conversely, the Packers don't own private jets neither. How indicative are the Packers books compared to say.... Jerry Jones' books?

See... I have still never figured out how multi-millionaires should be negotiating from an "organized labor" standpoint against billionaires. THAT is way beyond my scope. On the flip side of that same coin, I fail to see how the NFL (the entity) should be exempt from federal anti-trust laws. Still, both are reality.

Now mind you, I'm not anti or pro-union ... I'm just saying that guys making the money the pro's are making (even at league minimum) shouldn't be negotiating like they're steamfitters.

To the best of anyone's knowledge, has Ford ever opened its books for the UAW?? This is what we're talking about here. When you get down to the raw basics of this thing...its ludicrous nature is laid bare.

 

[GreenBayGal]

The more I hear, the more peeved I'm becoming. Sounds like a lot of greed on both sides. I'm feeling kind of helpless with the future of one of my greatest passions in the hands of people who don't seem to care about ME! or the rest of dedicated fans. :Arrgghh:

 

[Ausnadian]

Since when has the owner of a franchise been able to see the books of the corporation?
example: You own a McDonalds, and you want the corporation to open its books to you so you can decide if they should be looking after you financially better than they may be now.
You think that will EVER happen?

 

[GreenBayGal]

If some of the player's pay is based on profiit of the league, shouldn't the books be open? Isn't that how their contract is written? (unlike other corporations)

 

[SpartaChris]

Can anyone with more knowledge on the situation (PackersRS?) explain to me how the players and the union have any sort of antitrust case against the NFL? It's not a monopoly, nor does it practice in a monopolistic manner. Isn't it technically non-profit too?

The American Needle case said that the 32 teams under the NFL Umbrella are not one entity, but are in fact 32 separate businesses. This ruling opens the door to an anti-trust suit against the league by the players, allowing them to claim unfair business practices by enforcing rules across all teams as a league.

Put another way, the players will contend each team must negotiate every single rule with every single player, or it will be considered in violation of anti-trust laws. They cannot have one single rule to govern all 32 teams, each instance will have to be negotiated separately.

I know most of us despise Florio for throwing Rodgers under the bus, but I would advise you to set that aside for now, hit up PFT and do a search for CBA. He's been absolutely crushing this whole situation all along, and has a TON of good, unbiased information. You'll find more info than you probably ever wanted to know.

 

[SpartaChris]

Somebody explain to my poor brain just what decertification even means!

I know what a lockout is.

Decertification means the players union is no longer a players union, as they dissolved the union. Since there's no players union, there's essentially no one to lock out. This tilts the odds of a favorable agreement to the side of the union as they can sue the league in court under anti-trust laws. That is, until the owners file a suit to block decertification, citing it as the sham that it is.

 

[SpartaChris]

Congratulations to Roger Goodell, DeMaurice Smith, and the greedy owners for running the most popular sport in America into the ground. Absolutely disgusting.

I'd like to point out two facts-

1) In the last CBA, the NFLPA agreed to allow the owners to terminate the agreement early. The owners merely exercised their right to do so.

2) The owners had what looked to be a pretty good deal on the table. The NFLPA opted to walk away and filed for decertification.

 

[SpartaChris]

From what I seen Drew Brees say is that all the players wanted is for the owners to show what they make and that was it

The owners offered audited profit and loss statements. The players refused. The owners also offered more information than they normally share with one another. The players also refused that, saying they wanted to see the whole books for the past 10 years.

The players request is unreasonable. The owners were offering the validated information to the players that they requested, but the players said no thanks. The rest is simply not their business. Plus, why 10 years? Why not go as far back as 2006, when the last CBA was agreed to?

 

[SpartaChris]

THe reason #1 the players pushed this issue: THE OWNERS refused to open the financial books to scrutiny. When they are saying they dont want more money, in part that is truth.

The players have asked for no extra money, they have asked the owners (who are pushing to pay less money to the players than the old 2007 CBA) to show them the books to prove that the current pay scale and model is not beneficial to the growth of the league. The owners are essentially telling the players and reps "hey, just take our word on it". Would you do that if you were were moving in with a buddy and he said, Oh, yeah, by the way, the cable bill doubled, so I need more of your $$$ to pay it"? No, you would want to see the bill, and you would be well within your rights to do so.

This is what the owners REFUSED to do, causing the decertification last evening. This is why the owners conceded EVERY other point in the deal, OTHER THAN to show the books. I side with the players over the owners, as the owners, if they have proof to back up their position, would already have a deal done with the NFLPA.

Does anyone else remember how big of a deal it was back in Jan when the Packers released their financial report? It is due to our team being publicly owned, and it allowed the players and reps to get a glimpse of operating costs for an NFL team year to year. NO OTHER owner has been willing to do this.

This is the ENTIRE ISSUE that has stopped football. Im of the belief that if the owners are telling the truth, they would show the proof to the players. The fact that they are refusing tells me they are being dishonest and moreover, greedy in their position.

Sorry, but you're wrong. The owners DID offer certified financial information, exactly the information the NFLPA has been asking for over the past two years. The NFLPA rejected it, demanding more and more information that frankly, they don't need anyway.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/12/nfl-statement-on-decertification-litigation-lockout/

The union was offered financial disclosure of audited league and club profitability information that is not even shared with the NFL clubs.

 

[SpartaChris]

If some of the player's pay is based on profiit of the league, shouldn't the books be open? Isn't that how their contract is written? (unlike other corporations)

It's not based on profit, it's based on total revenues. How much money did the league take in. The players have access to that already, they don't need the owners to crack the books open to get it.

 

[greenandgold]

Can't these idiots on both sides remember how much damage was done by the baseball strike? It has still not fully recovered from that.

The only sure losers so far are the fans.

 

[SpartaChris]

Here is an excellent, easy to read write up by Andy Freeland over at FootballPros.com about decertification, anti-trust and what it all means:

FP - The NFL and Antitrust

 

[Bogart]

If there is a lock out, I don't know what I'm going to do.

It's always WE the FANS that get the ****** end of a deal, no matter how much money we spend making their league rich.

 

[DTown SBrown]

Sorry, but you're wrong. The owners DID offer certified financial information, exactly the information the NFLPA has been asking for over the past two years. The NFLPA rejected it, demanding more and more information that frankly, they don't need anyway.

NFL statement on “‘decertification’-litigation-lockout” | ProFootballTalk

First off, I am absolutely correct. It has been stated over and over by numerous sources that the NFL offered a redacted, EXTREMELY simplified statement that was already available via Forbes articles and others about financial profitability that the teams provide.

To use the same reference material, go read the other sides statements :
The NFLPA* statement on issues preventing a new CBA | ProFootballTalk

“The NFL demanded a multi-billion dollar giveback and refused to provide any legitimate financial information to justify it. The NFL’s offer on March 7 to give the NFLPA a single sheet of numbers was NOT financial disclosure. The players’ accountants and bankers advised that the “offered” information was meaningless: only two numbers for each year.
The NFL wanted to turn the clock back on player compensation by four years, moving them back to where they were in 2007.
The NFL offered no proposal at all for long-term share of revenues.
NFL demanded 100% of all revenues which went above unrealistically low projections for the first four years.
The NFL refused to meet the players on significant changes to in-season, off-season or pre-season health and safety rules.
The NFL kept on the table its hypocritical demand for an 18-game season, despite its public claims to be working toward improving the heath and safety of players.
The NFL wanted cutbacks in payer workers’ compensation benefits for injured players.
The NFL sought to limit rookie compensation long after they become veterans — into players’ fourth and fifth years
THE PLAYERS WANT TO KEEP PLAYING
The players offered repeatedly to continue working under the existing CBA, but were rejected by the NFL five times.
Despite publicly admitting no club was losing money, that TV ratings, sponsorship money, etc. were at an all time high, the NFL continued to insist on an 18-percent rollback in the players’ share of revenues and continue to deny the NFLPA’s request for justification.”

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ms-labordisputebooks030911

"Last week, according to a well-placed source, the NFLPA’s executive committee informed the owners’ negotiating committee that it would not consider less than a 50-50 split of revenues (including those taken off the top under the current formula) unless the owners agreed to provide them with the full audited financial statements of all 32 clubs for the past decade. (The NFLPA received slightly more than the 50 percent figure during the final year of the expiring CBA and made the “50-50” offer last month.)
On Tuesday, the source said, the owners’ committee said it would provide only aggregate profit figures for the 32 teams collectively spanning the 2005-09 seasons – one number per year. No individual-club profits would be revealed, even if the name of the club in question was withheld. The league also said it would provide the union with the total number of teams that experienced a decline in profit from the previous year.
The union consulted a professional auditor and the investment-banking firm it has retained for the potential review of the owners’ statements and was told the information being offered by the NFL wasn’t nearly enough to justify the significant financial concessions sought by the league. Among the information to which the union wouldn’t have access was each team’s list of non-player costs; how much each particular franchise’s profits might have declined; whether overall-profit decreases on the league level were the result of one or multiple teams; and documentation of each team’s cash flow, balance sheets and expenses."

http://blogs.forbes.com/kurtbadenhausen/2011/03/03/nfl-math-does-not-add-up-with-lockout-looming/
http://www.forbes.com/2010/08/25/mo...ness-sports-football-valuations-10-intro.html

"But thanks to long-term television contracts negotiated before the recession, the NFL's profitability has never been stronger. National television revenue from CBS ( CBS - news - people ), NBC, ESPN and Fox increased $1.3 million per team to $95.8 million for each of the league's 32 franchises. NFL teams got a big boost when the league settled its long-running dispute with Comcast ( CMCSA - news - people ) last May concerning broadcasting the NFL Network. The 10-year deal pushed each team's take from its nonnetwork media contracts to $45.8 million, up $9.3 million (revenues from DirecTV ( DTV - news - people ) are the biggest component of this). Aggregate league revenue rose 5.8% to $8 billion."

This is all public released info: team controlled info. Why is it that the owners are saying they continue to lose money, but wont prove it? If you go to bankruptcy court, they make you PROVE that you cannot pay. Im not siding with anyone, as it has gotten a bit ridiculous on both sides, but the owners can fix this by allowing the deal that currently has been working continue to work, or allow for an independent auditor to come in and show that the current model cannot be sustained. They wont though, as it will show that they are operating efficiently and profitably. Just not as profitable as they want it to be. For them. The Billionaires.

 

[PackersRS]

You guys do realize that the Packers will be known in history as the last champions of the National Football League, right?

 

[VersusTheMoose]

I am siding with the players as well. They are willing to give up a percentage of revenue, meaning they are the side making the concessions. The NFL needs to open up the books and let the NFLPA see the numbers; not a simplified version of. The NFL has tricked many of you with their rhetoric but the simple fact is the players are the ones being more than fair in all of this. Yes, there needs to be some concessions on the players side (which they have done), but they have went far enough without seeing the books.

 

[Wood Chipper]

so basically this means i will watch baseball till october then watch basketball till march then baseball till october then basketball till march then the world will end cuz its 2012