macbob
  • macbob
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
14 years ago
http://packersnews.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20110319/PKR01/110319018/1057/PKR&located=rss 

So this is what the NFL and players are reduced to: Both sides are writing letters and issuing statements to and about each other, disputing facts and seeking to frame the back-and-forth about the sports first work stoppage since 1987.

The locked-out players wrote a letter to commissioner Roger Goodell on Saturday, responding to an email he sent them Thursday and telling him: Your statements are false.

In a four-page letter, the 11 members of the NFL Players Association executive committee told Goodell that, during labor negotiations, the leagues owners did not justify their demands for a massive giveback which would have resulted in the worst economic deal for players in major pro sports.

When Goodell wrote all active NFL players on Thursday, he outlined the leagues description of its last proposal, which was made March 11. That turned out to be the 16th and final day of mediated talks, and the old labor deal expired. Goodell ended his letter by saying: I hope you will encourage your union to return to the bargaining table and conclude a new collective bargaining agreement.

Players were upset by that line, particularly the reference to your union. When the NFLPA dissolved March 11, it renounced its status as a union that can bargain on behalf of its members and said it is now a trade association, which allowed players to sue the league under antitrust laws. The league calls that move a sham.

A hearing on the players request for a preliminary injunction to stop the lockout is scheduled for April 6 in Minnesota, and there appears little chance of a return to bargaining before then.

In a statement emailed to reporters by the league on Saturday, hours after the NFLPA released its letter to Goodell, NFL executive vice president Jeff Pash began: We are pleased now to have received a reply to the comprehensive proposal that we made eight days ago.

Pash, the leagues lead labor negotiator, also said: Debating the merits of the offer in this fashion is what collective bargaining is all about. ... This letter again proves that the most sensible step for everyone is to get back to bargaining.

As if anticipating that the league would seek to portray the players letter as a formal reply to the owners proposal, the NFLPA executive committee noted in its final paragraph: We no longer have the authority to collectively bargain on behalf of the NFL players. ...

Their letter began, Dear Roger, and closed with Sincerely, followed by the names of Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Charlie Batch, New Orleans Saints quarterback Drew Brees, Denver Broncos safety Brian Dawkins, Baltimore Ravens cornerback Domonique Foxworth, Cleveland Browns linebacker Scott Fujita, New York Jets fullback Tony Richardson, Indianapolis Colts center Jeff Saturday, Kansas City Chiefs linebacker Mike Vrabel, Chiefs guard Brian Waters and former players Sean Morey and Kevin Mawae, the NFLPA president.

We were due to respond, Fujita said Saturday at Marco Island, Fla., where the NFLPA is holding its annual convention for players. The letter gives a true testament to what went on, what the offer was, and what it meant to the players.

The owners begin two days of meetings Monday in New Orleans.

In Saturdays letter, the players went through various parts of the last NFL offer, including saying that the leagues salary-cap proposals were based on unrealistically low revenue projections.

You had ample time over the last two years to make a proposal that would be fair to both sides, but you failed to do so. During the last week of the mediation, we waited the entire week for the NFL to make a new economic proposal, the players wrote to Goodell. That proposal did not come until 12:30 (p.m.) on Friday, and, when we examined it, we found it was worse than the proposal the NFL had made the prior week when we agreed to extend the mediation.

They concluded their letter by telling Goodell that if he has any desire to discuss a settlement of the issues in the antitrust suit filed by 10 players including star quarterbacks Tom Brady, Peyton Manning and Brees he should contact their lawyers.

Read the players' letter
The letter sent Saturday by players to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, in response to a letter he sent players Thursday:

Dear Roger:

This responds to the letter you sent to all NFL players on March 17.

We start by reminding you that we were there at the negotiations and know the truth about what happened, which ultimately led the players to renounce the NFLPAs status as the collective bargaining representative of NFL players. The players took this step only as a last resort, and only after two years of trying to reach a reasonable collective bargaining agreement and three weeks of mediation with George Cohen of FMCS. At all times during the mediation session we had representatives at the table with the authority to make a deal. The NFL representatives at the mediation did not, and the owners were mostly absent.

The mediation was at the end of a two-year process started on May 18, 2009, when our Executive Director sent you a letter requesting audited financial statements to justify your opting out of the CBA (letter attached).

The NFLPA did all it could to reach a fair collective bargaining agreement and made numerous proposals to address the concerns raised by the owners. In response, the owners never justified their demands for a massive giveback which would have resulted in the worst economic deal for players in major league pro sports.

That is why we were very troubled to see your letter, and repeated press reports by yourself, Jeff Pash, and the owners, which claim that the owners met the players halfway in negotiations, and that the owners offered a fair deal to the players.

Your statements are false.

We will let the facts speak for themselves.

The proposal by the NFL was not an a la carte proposal. The changes in offseason workouts and other benefits to players were conditioned upon the players accepting an economic framework that was unjustified and unfair.

Your proposal called for a pegged amount for the salary cap plus benefits starting at 141M in 2011 and increasing to 161M in 2014, regardless of NFL revenues. These amounts by themselves would have set the players back years, and were based on unrealistically low revenue projections. Your proposal also would have given the owners 100 percent of all revenues above the low projections, including the first year of new TV contracts in 2014. Your offer did NOT meet the players halfway when it would have given 100 percent of the additional revenues to the owners.

As a result, the players share of NFL revenues would have suffered a massive decrease. This is clear by comparing your proposal to what the players would receive under the 50 percent share of all revenues they have had for the past twenty years.

If NFL revenues grow at 8 percent over the next four years (consistent with Moodys projections), which is the same growth rate it has been for the past decade, then the cap plus benefits with our historical share would be 159M in 2011 (18M more per team than your 141M proposal) and grow to 201M per team in 2014 (40M more per team than your 161M proposal).

Your proposal would have resulted in a league-wide giveback by the players of 576M in 2011 increasing to 1.2 BILLION in 2014, for a total of more than 3.6 BILLION for just the first four years. Even if revenues increased at a slower rate of only 5 percent, the players would still have lost over 2 BILLION over the next four years. These amounts would be even higher if your stadium deductions apply to the first four years (your proposal did not note any such limits on these deductions).

We believe these massive givebacks were not justified at all by the owners, especially given recent projections by Moodys that NFL media revenues are expected to double to about 8 BILLION per year during the next TV deal.

Given that you have repeatedly admitted that your clubs are not losing money, the billions of dollars in givebacks you proposed would have gone directly into the owners pockets. We understand why the owners would want to keep 100 percent of this additional money, but trying to sell it as a fair deal to the players is not truthful.

You proposed a CBA term of ten years. But you did not include any proposal on the players share of revenues after the first four years, which left open entirely how much more the owners would have taken from the players.

The owners continued to refuse any financial justification for these massive givebacks. Our auditors and bankers told us the extremely limited information you offered just a few days before the mediation ended would be meaningless.

Your rookie compensation proposal went far beyond addressing any problem of rookie busts, and amounted to severely restricting veteran salaries for all or most of their careers, since most players play less than 4 years. What your letter doesnt say is that you proposed to limit compensation long after rookies become veterans into players fourth and fifth years. As our player leadership told you and the owners time and again during the negotiations, the current players would not sell out their future teammates who will be veterans in a few short years.

Your proposal did not offer to return the 320M taken from players by the elimination of certain benefits in 2010. It also did not offer to compensate over 200 players who were adversely affected in 2010 by a change in the free agency rules. Your letter did not even address a finding by a federal judge that you orchestrated new television contracts to benefit the NFL during the lockout that you imposed.

You continued to ask for an 18 game season, offering to delay it for only one more year (you earlier said it could not be implemented in 2011 no matter what due to logistical issues). This was so even though the players and our medical experts warned you many times that increasing the season would increase the risk of player injury and shorten careers.

All of the other elements you offered in the mediation, which you claim the players should have been eager to accept, were conditioned on the players agreeing to a rollback of their traditional share of 50/50 of all revenues to what it was in the 1980s, which would have given up the successes the players fought for and won by asserting their rights in court, including the financial benefits of free agency the players won in the Freeman McNeil and Reggie White litigations more than 20 years ago.

The cap system for the past twenty years has always been one in which the players were guaranteed to share in revenue growth as partners. Your proposal would have shifted to a system in which players are told how much they will get, instead of knowing their share will grow with revenues, and end the partnership.

You had ample time over the last two years to make a proposal that would be fair to both sides, but you failed to do so. During the last week of the mediation, we waited the entire week for the NFL to make a new economic proposal. That proposal did not come until 12:30 on Friday, and, when we examined it, we found it was worse than the proposal the NFL had made the prior week when we agreed to extend the mediation. At that point it became clear to everyone that the NFL had no intention to make a good faith effort to resolve these issues in collective bargaining and the owners were determined to carry out the lockout strategy they decided on in 2007.

We thus had no choice except to conclude that it was in the best interests of all NFL players to renounce collective bargaining so the players could pursue their antitrust rights to stop the lockout. We no longer have the authority to collectively bargain on behalf of the NFL players, and are supporting the players who are asserting their antitrust rights in the Brady litigation. We have heard that you have offered to have discussions with representatives of the players. As you know, the players are represented by class counsel in the Brady litigation, with the NFLPA and its Executive Committee serving as an advisor to any such settlement discussions. If you have any desire to discuss a settlement of the issues in that case, you should contact Class Counsel.

Sincerely,
Kevin Mawae
Charlie Batch
Drew Brees
Brian Dawkins
Domonique Foxworth
Scott Fujita
Sean Morey
Tony Richardson
Jeff Saturday
Mike Vrabel
Brian Waters

CC: All NFL Players

GBPressGazette wrote:

Nonstopdrivel
14 years ago

Goodell says NFL's last CBA offer might not stay on bargaining table 

NEW ORLEANS (AP) -- Owners haven't talked about using replacement players if the NFL's first work stoppage since 1987 stretches on, Commissioner Roger Goodell said Tuesday, and the league might not keep its last contract offer on the table if bargaining doesn't resume soon.

"We have not had any discussions or consideration of replacement players," Goodell said at a news conference closing the annual owners meetings. "It hasn't been discussed, it hasn't been considered, and it's not in our plans."

He also said the Miami Dolphins and four other teams have been fined or been told the NFL is investigating them for violating offseason rules prohibiting contact with players. Goodell was asked specifically about the Dolphins; he did not reveal other teams involved.

NFL general counsel Jeff Pash said the violations aren't related to the league's lockout of players, which began March 12, hours after negotiations with the players broke off, and the union dissolved. Even during normal offseasons, from the end of one season until around March 15, NFL rules bar teams from holding organized workouts, practice or meetings, and don't allow position coaches to supervise players.

"It's a 'go home and relax' period," Pash said.

Since the lockout began, no contact between the league's 32 clubs and players has been allowed. Players don't get paid and can't negotiate new contracts; they aren't allowed to use team facilities.

Goodell said he hasn't spoken to NFL Players Association executive director DeMaurice Smith since March 11, when talks ended after 16 days of federal mediation.

Owners made a proposal that day that included an increase in their 2011 salary cap offer from $131 million to $141 million; the players had been seeking a $151 million cap for that year, plus a chance to earn a percentage of any higher-than-projected revenues above a certain threshold.

"Every day that goes by," Goodell said, "makes it harder and harder to keep the elements in that proposal."

Six days after that proposal was made, Goodell outlined some of the specifics in an e-mail sent to all active players.

Some players complained about Goodell's letter, saying it was meant to divide them. They also objected to the letter's suggestion that players push their "union to return to the bargaining table" - the NFLPA renounced its status as a union and says it is now a trade association. That, in turn, permitted players to sue the league in federal court under antitrust laws. A hearing is scheduled for April 6.

Asked Tuesday why he sent that letter, Goodell replied: "What the ownership wanted to make sure is that the players knew what their leadership had walked away from in the mediation process. So we sent that directly to the players. As you know, they're claiming not to be a union, but we think it was important to send that so the players understood what the owners had offered."

He repeated his hope that negotiations will resume - perhaps before the draft begins April 28 - and said owners want to have a complete 2011 season.

The "primary focus" of the two days of meetings in New Orleans, Goodell said, was "our labor dispute and our planning and preparation on that."

"We are certainly planning on having a full season," he said. "That's our objective, and we're going to work as hard as we can to make that become a reality."

Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/nfl/03/22/owners.meetings.roger.goodell.ap/index.html#ixzz1HocqMTEK 


UserPostedImage
StoicFire
14 years ago
Not nearly as thorough or helpful as the formal letter sent by players, but I thought I'd post Chris Kluwe's entertaining whiteboard pictograph responses to the whole ordeal from his twitter page:

[img_l]http://mit.zenfs.com/209/2011/03/yahoo_kluwe1.jpg[/img_l]
[img_l]http://mit.zenfs.com/209/2011/03/yahoo_kluwe2.jpg[/img_l]
"the Quarterback can run if he wants to, but with this rocket attached to your body... who would?" -Aaron Rodgers
djcubez
14 years ago
LOL those whiteboards are great.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (9h) : February 5, 2002 (age 23) ok no. packers.com is wrong
Zero2Cool (9h) : Micah Robinson is only 19??
Zero2Cool (11h) : 6 first rounders on Packers defense now
Zero2Cool (23h) : LB Isaiah Simmons. Signed. Called it!!! Oh yeah!
Martha Careful (23h) : ty bboystyle...fat fingers
bboystyle (23h) : Tom*
Martha Careful (28-Apr) : RIP Packer Safety Tim Brown
beast (27-Apr) : Yeah, but also some of the wording suggestions Jax only pranked called the QB, not the others... and if he had an open spreadsheet & 3 calls
beast (27-Apr) : Thank goodness he's not leaving the Turtle in the Red Tide
Mucky Tundra (27-Apr) : Cowboys 1st round pick Tyler Booker will indeed be bringing his pet turtle to Dallas with him
Mucky Tundra (27-Apr) : that contained all prospects info and contact
Mucky Tundra (27-Apr) : beast, according the Falcons statement Jax came across it on an ipad. If I had to guess, probably an open spread sheet or something
Zero2Cool (27-Apr) : Simmons put up an emoji with cheese.
beast (27-Apr) : Not sure anyone is interested in Isaiah Simmons... Collin Oliver might of taken his potential slot
beast (27-Apr) : I'm going with Jax Ulbrich is not telling the whole truth... he accidentally came across it? Why would a defensive coordinator have a QB #?
Zero2Cool (27-Apr) : He's not that great, but final piece of the script.\
Zero2Cool (27-Apr) : If we add Isaiah Simmons, book your Super Bowl tickets
Mucky Tundra (27-Apr) : Colts 1st round TE Tyler Warren also got prank called, was that Jax Ulbrich as well?
Zero2Cool (27-Apr) : Jax Ulbrich, Jeff Ulbrich’s son, released an apology for his role in the Shedeur Sanders prank call.
Martha Careful (27-Apr) : apparently he did not participate in practice or play on the east west shrine game nor the NFL combine. The kid was a mediocre spoiled brat
Mucky Tundra (27-Apr) : Yeah that one that was a super wounded duck that Sanders supporters are highlighting to prove a point
Zero2Cool (27-Apr) : Shough is the guy who missed guys at combine isn't he?
beast (27-Apr) : It's not official until I'm dead! I have a chance still! (Not really)
Mucky Tundra (27-Apr) : I could feel my body decomposing in real time when I read that
Mucky Tundra (27-Apr) : @MIKEYSAINRISTIL Tyler Shough will officially be the last person drafted to the NFL born in the 1900’s
Mucky Tundra (26-Apr) : saw the tweet, he meant the city
Mucky Tundra (26-Apr) : Was that for the team or the city?
Zero2Cool (26-Apr) : Adam Schefter @AdamSchefter · 3m Draft grade is in: Green Bay gets an A. The people, the city, the venue were all superb. NFL Draft’s next
Zero2Cool (26-Apr) : Matt LaFleur says Jaire Alexander is participating in #Packers offseason program, which has been conducted virtually during this first week
Zero2Cool (26-Apr) : ✅ ...
buckeyepackfan (26-Apr) : Check
Zero2Cool (26-Apr) : Matthew Golden cahanged 81 to 22??
TheKanataThrilla (26-Apr) : Sam Howell to Vikings...guess no Aaron
Martha Careful (26-Apr) : 1 round 7 min, with one extra minute if there is a trade. 2nd round 4 minutes, 3rd -3, 2 thereafter IMO
Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Agree
dfosterf (26-Apr) : Great idea imo
dfosterf (26-Apr) : 1st round to 7 minutes with one extension
dfosterf (26-Apr) : NFL comissioner wants to shorten the 2st
Mucky Tundra (26-Apr) : @jalenreagors They’re discussing if Sheduer can go back to college on NFL Network LMFAOOOOO
beast (26-Apr) : Great point Martha
beast (26-Apr) : Buddy Ryan used to say if a candy bar goes missing, there are two to blame, Rex and Rob 🤪 jk 😁
Martha Careful (26-Apr) : Bum Phillips used to say there are two ways to get better. Get better players or get players to play better. We have a new DL coach
Zero2Cool (26-Apr) : Yes. Look at the losses last year. They can win.
beast (26-Apr) : Can Packers win with their current DL?
bboystyle (26-Apr) : waiting for a pass rusher.
dfosterf (25-Apr) : 5 minutes between picks in the 3rd
dfosterf (25-Apr) : 3rd. Hate this phone
dfosterf (25-Apr) : 4rd
dfosterf (25-Apr) : 5 minutes in the 4
dfosterf (25-Apr) : 7 minutes between picks in the 2nd round
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
9m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

3h / Packers Draft Threads / Mucky Tundra

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

27-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / Mucky Tundra

27-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

27-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Apr / Around The NFL / bboystyle

27-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

27-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / wpr

27-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / wpr

27-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / wpr

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.