CBA Update

Arctic Dawgs

Arctic Dawgs

Well-Known Member
:hmmm:

My 1st post after decertifcation I mentioned Rookies being part of a anti-trust lawsuit. Was out for an hr. Just got back and heard something on NFLN that Von Miller has put his name on the lawsuit ?? Not sure, I didn't catch the whole thing.

Before you guys go off on him think about it. He is not a member of any union. Does not have to belong to a union, yet the Companies he would like to apply for work will not accept an aplication. Did that happen to any of you guys when you finished High School/ College ?? Don't be suprised if the draft is deemed illegal very soon under anti-trust
 
efactor

efactor

Coming at you
Smith strikes me as a showboat who is out of his league.

Negotiation is a long process and to ask for something you will NEVER get such as 10 years worth of records is foolish.

The NFL is a great business model. The players have been given some nice concessions from what I see. I know it's a brutal game with a short career span, but the money being made is beyond most peoples comprehension. Spent wisely, it will last a long time, but most players will have to work after football. Sorry if that's a source of contention, but most real people can't retire at age 35, so why should players get to? With the shift in our economy, millions have had to reinvent themselves in the workplace, but most players seem to think they are entitled to not have to work once their "careers" are over.

Hope both sides can work this out as the alternative will be a mess. This would have never happened if Gene Upshaw was alive and running things...........
 
Miller

Miller

Who Dey
Administrator
E is dead on here. I think Smith is turning this into a trainwreck. IMO he does not have the players best interests in mind, only his own. This is a launching pad job for him and he is trying to make a big name for himself IMO. The longer this goes and the more face time he gets, the better it is for him. Troy Vincent would have been a much better pick and everyone is going to find that out now.
 
R

Runnik's Hambones

Active Member
I actually think it may be the other way around, Miller. I'm sure that he believes that the more face time he gets, the more opportunity for success he might have, but I think the more we see his face, as fans and media, we hate him. There's no question that the NFL actually tried to be fair here, and it seems like the players were asking insanely high. With that said, I don't want to sit here and pretend that the owners and the League aren't scoundrels, themselves.

The way things are looking, this whole thing may backfire on Smith and he will end up being the bad guy.
 
Arctic Dawgs

Arctic Dawgs

Well-Known Member
2011 could be an uncapped year

At some point in the near future, the NFL is going to establish some rules for doing business in 2011. That point could be fairly soon if the injunction request issued by players in their antitrust lawsuit is granted.

In that case, league-wide business would resume (not quite business as usual, but business nonetheless). Most importantly, free agency would begin.

Mark Maske of the Washington Post writes, “Sources from throughout the sport on both sides of the dispute said over the weekend that the system the league would enact at that point would be very likely to be the same system that was in effect last season, when there was no salary cap in the final year of the just-expired labor agreement between the NFL and the players’ union.”

The 2010 uncapped rules would mean no salary floor, as well. Players with expired contracts would need six years of NFL service in order to reach unrestricted free agency, which means a significantly dwindled free agent class. Each team would also have an extra transition tag (in addition to the one franchise tag and transition tag) and teams that reached the divisional round of the 2010 postseason would have limitation places on their ability to sign free agents.

Maske writes, “The reason that system would be used, sources said, is that it might have a better chance of withstanding an antitrust challenge by the players, given that the union previously agreed to those rules for an uncapped year in collective bargaining.”
Click to expand...
 
Arctic Dawgs

Arctic Dawgs

Well-Known Member
1st chink in the owners fortress dunno:

Well, it might be a moot point now (or at least for now), but the NFLPA knows it can access at least two teams’ books: the Green Bay Packers (a publicly owned team whose books were opened months ago) and the Denver Broncos.

The union likely knew it could view the Broncos’ books during negotations last week; team president Joe Ellis told Mike Klis of the Denver Post that the club offered to show its financial data, but the union didn’t want to take a look.

"We offered to show the union league-wide and club profitability data," Ellis said. "Not only that it can be verified by a mutually agreed upon third-party auditor. This is the type of information we don't share with each other. In other words, we aren't allowed to see how other teams are doing specifically in terms of revenues and expenses. Everything is very formalized in terms of information we get from other clubs. Now the union didn't even want to look at it."

"If the league decides they want to open up the books of the Denver Broncos to present them to the union — I don't know if the league is into identifying individual clubs because they're private businesses," Ellis said. "But with a neutral (auditor) to verify the fact that certain teams haven't been operating as effectively as they did in the past, we're a willing and able participant.'”
Click to expand...
 
derringer007

derringer007

"Its An Outrage"
IMO Both sides (owners & players union) needed to keep at the negotiations right up to the NFL draft.

I read a blog saying the only way to reach an agreement was thru negotiations and not thru litigation, guess all involved dont agree or the talks would still be going.
 
Phicinfan

Phicinfan

Expert on nothing, opinionated on everything
Administrator
derringer007 said:
IMO Both sides (owners & players union) needed to keep at the negotiations right up to the NFL draft.

I read a blog saying the only way to reach an agreement was thru negotiations and not thru litigation, guess all involved dont agree or the talks would still be going.
Click to expand...
No, litigation won't create any CBA. All litigation will do is totally pen in one side or the other, which will force negotiations.

The NFL didn't want litigation, cause they could lose a ton of anti-trust protection they currently have. Same time this could totally blow up in the union's face. Only time will tell.
 
mudloggerone

mudloggerone

Outlaw
Administrator
mudloggerone

mudloggerone

Outlaw
Administrator
Rotoworld,
The agent for Adrian Peterson has produced a statement on his client's behalf, asking people not to take out of context Peterson's quote comparing the NFL's system to "modern-day slavery."
Peterson's comments were appallingly ignorant if also out of character. He repeated the slavery quote twice, so it's hard to buy the "out of context" card. While Peterson is to be commended for traveling to Africa this week as part of a Starkey Hearing Foundation mission, his comments may end up doing more to hurt the players in the public eye than any action undertaken thus far. Source: Minneapolis Star-Tribune
 
mudloggerone

mudloggerone

Outlaw
Administrator
A Hamilton County (OH) judge has ordered Chad Ochocinco to pay a Cincinnati area store $11,717.39 for clothing he obtained but never paid for.
Ochocinco failed to respond to the lawsuit or appear in court, so the judge ruled for the clothing company. Among the items Ocho signed for were two pairs of Alligator footwear, a $400 sweater, a $350 pair of jeans, and a $250 T-shirt. It's hard to imagine why the average Walmart shopper can't identify with the players during a labor dispute.




A $250.00 T-shirt? Come on man! Rich, spoiled, atheletes!
 
efactor

efactor

Coming at you
mudloggerone said:
A Hamilton County (OH) judge has ordered Chad Ochocinco to pay a Cincinnati area store $11,717.39 for clothing he obtained but never paid for.
Ochocinco failed to respond to the lawsuit or appear in court, so the judge ruled for the clothing company. Among the items Ocho signed for were two pairs of Alligator footwear, a $400 sweater, a $350 pair of jeans, and a $250 T-shirt. It's hard to imagine why the average Walmart shopper can't identify with the players during a labor dispute.




A $250.00 T-shirt? Come on man! Rich, spoiled, atheletes!
Click to expand...

I bought a pair of jeans and a couple t-shirts at Macys this weekend. Cost me about $60 bucks with tax. I look smooth too....................

Just think what the average person could do with the money that an idiot like that makes. Of course he had no intention of paying for it apparently, so I guess cost was no object. Just another NFL jerkoff with an amazing sense of entitlement.................
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top