The players respond to Goodell

[Deus Irae]

The full text of the letter isn't yet available that I can see, but nfllockout.com has jpegs of it, so I'll link to them:

http://www.nfllockout.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Letter-from-Executive-Committee-to-Roger-Goodell.jpg

http://www.nfllockout.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Letter-from-Executive-Committee-to-Roger-Goodell2.jpg

http://www.nfllockout.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Letter-from-Executive-Committee-to-Roger-Goodell3.jpg

http://www.nfllockout.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Letter-from-Executive-Committee-to-Roger-Goodell4.jpg

An attachment to the letter can also be found there:

NFLLockout.com Blog Archive The Players Respond

 

[Sciz]

Yeah, the owners were trying to get away with robbery here.

 

[Rob0729]

I see your spin and double down with our spin. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

 

[Deus Irae]

SMY has the text:

Players send response to Goodell - Extra Points - Boston.com

 

[BradyFTW!]

So can we officially start referring to Goodell's commissioner tenure as a failure yet? Has this guy gotten anything right since he stepped in?

 

[Frezo]

This is ALL Gisele's fault!

 

[JMarr]

So can we officially start referring to Goodell's commissioner tenure as a failure yet? Has this guy gotten anything right since he stepped in?

I'm completely baffled as to how the owners came to think that this blue-blood bufoon was anywhere near commissioner, much less upper management-type material. Any other private company's board of directors would have booted his ***** within the first 6 months of his tenure.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

I'm completely baffled as to how the owners came to think that this blue-blood bufoon was anywhere near commissioner, much less upper management-type material. Any other private company's board of directors would have booted his ***** within the first 6 months of his tenure.

Disagree, not about his failure but about private BODs. They're most often too reluctant to fire their good ol boy buddies that they hired as CEO and when they finally do fire the CEO under extreme lack of earnings pressure, they give away huge golden parachutes. Go figure.

 

[PrairiePat]

Good thing we had that 1-week extension of the negotiations. It's clear they were on the verge of a deal.....

:singing:

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

I wonder how Gene Upshaw would have handled this situation had he still been alive and head of the NFLPA.... I think him and Goodell would have had some serious issues - Upshaw was a tough guy ON and OFF the field.

 

[Deus Irae]

Pash has responded. It should be noted that he doesn't dispute any of the claims made by the players.

Pash responds to NFLPA* letter | ProFootballTalk

 

[West Philly Patriot]

The Players will prevail in the end of all of this. The owners are the reason we wont be watching football come september. They are the ones who opted out and refuse to furnish proof for the reason they themselves provided.

The longest nfl career imaginable would be a little over 20+ years. You can be an owner till death. Keep this in mind. Players need to maximize earning potential. The Players have never asked for more money, this is fact.

The NFL is the most popular sport in North America, you have to question the owners when they say their profits are being cut into by expenses. They have shown to be less than forthright already, why would anyone take their word for it. These men did not become as rich and powerful as they are by not chopping a few heads along the way.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Say what you want about Goodell's letter, but it did what it was intended to do...

Generate a response from the NFLPA

Now let's hope both sides keep talking. This stands a much better chance of being settled in negotiation rather than litigation (where an army of lawyers billing half a grand per hour help decide how long this will go on for.)

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Pash has responded. It should be noted that he doesn't dispute any of the claims made by the players.

Pash responds to NFLPA* letter | ProFootballTalk

Pash re-states the owners mantra about wanting to negotiate. It's clear that come legal proceedings the owners will contend that those bad, bad other guys would not negotiate in good faith. Their strategy is obvious.

 

[Deus Irae]

Pash re-states the owners mantra about wanting to negotiate. It's clear that come legal proceedings the owners will contend that those bad, bad other guys would not negotiate in good faith. Their strategy is obvious.

Pash also continued to be disingenuous while trying to win the P.R. battle. The reference to the "the actual cash spending for 2009 and 2010" is going to be a burr under the players' saddles, because it's actually saying something like "You know how we failed to reach agreed upon minimums and used accounting gimmicks to avoid paying out the money in 2009 and 2010, so we ended up paying, relatively speaking, only a portion of the money you could have gotten? We'll pay you a little bit more this time than than we paid you those years. Honest."

It's a stupid strategy if you're serious about negotiating. It's designed solely for public consumption and the hope of external pressure being placed upon the players by the ignorant. The league seems to have decided that it'll deal with the courts while trying to wait out the players. It's a strategy that's worked for them in the past.

 

[Rob0729]

I wonder how Gene Upshaw would have handled this situation had he still been alive and head of the NFLPA.... I think him and Goodell would have had some serious issues - Upshaw was a tough guy ON and OFF the field.

If Upshaw was still NFLPA President, there would be a deal in place. He has a long history of giving in to the the owners. He would just caved on the rookie cap and told the owners to take the money they propose going to the the retired players and giving it to the veteran active players.

 

[Rob0729]

Let's face it. Both sides are spinning the truth to win the PR war. Pash isn't going to dispute each claim by the players because he is winning the PR battle in the public (virtually every poll conducted has the players more at fault than the owners) and the public perception is that the onwers are trying to negotiate and the players are trying to litigate. Besides, just disputing the players' points is just going to infuriate the players more and create more rifts. Just recently the players realized that that tact is hurting them in the public and trying to change their message into they want to negotiate, but just without Goodell, Pash, and company.


The fact of the matter is neither side's stance is true reality. Both sides are spinning and I think a lot of them believe their own spin. Until both sides stop with the spinning and get serious about negiating, they will be at standstill for two more weeks.

 

[Miguel]

Pash has responded. It should be noted that he doesn't dispute any of the claims made by the players.

Pash responds to NFLPA* letter | ProFootballTalk

Pash wrote "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;". The players in their letter wrote "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".

Someone please tell me how the players' response ignored the owners' player cost figure.

 

[DaBruinz]

The Players will prevail in the end of all of this. The owners are the reason we wont be watching football come september. They are the ones who opted out and refuse to furnish proof for the reason they themselves provided.

The longest nfl career imaginable would be a little over 20+ years. You can be an owner till death. Keep this in mind. Players need to maximize earning potential. The Players have never asked for more money, this is fact.

The NFL is the most popular sport in North America, you have to question the owners when they say their profits are being cut into by expenses. They have shown to be less than forthright already, why would anyone take their word for it. These men did not become as rich and powerful as they are by not chopping a few heads along the way.

Sorry, but thinking that the Players are going to prevail in this is just silly.

First off, the owners did not need a reason to opt out of the previous CBA. And they have a reason. It wasn't financially supportable going further.

Secondly, no, you don't have to question owners when they say that profits are being cut into by expenses. One only needs to look at the Green Bay financials to see that is the case.

Third, the players said they wanted pro-rated pay raises if the league went to an 18 game schedule. That sure as hell is asking for more money. No matter how you look at it.


But lets address some things that the players are asking for:

Compensation for the 200 players who were "adversely affected by a change in free agency rules". Hmm.. seems like they want more money.

A return of 320 M in benefits that they lost due to the uncapped 2010 season. Hmm.. seems like they want more money.

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 1980′s, 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. This has got to be the biggest line of BS that they've spewed. The proposal would take away the financial benefits of free agency?? WHAT.. Sorry.. no it wouldn't.


I notice that they didn't bother to mention anything about what Moody's projections for costs were going to be. And they ignored numerous things that the players had been asking for and got.

Last I looked, negotiations meant that both sides had to give.. So far, I only see the owners giving and the players saying "It's not enough."

Also, it was clear that the league wanted to use the last offer as a new starting point, yet the players couldn't be bothered to see it like that. They just said, "To hell with it" and de-certified when they could have asked for another extension.

 

[lamafist]

Pash wrote "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;". The players in their letter wrote "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".

Someone please tell me how the players' response ignored the owners' player cost figure.

Also, does Pash want us to apply the same "silence indicates consent" principle to his response to the players' letter? Because in that case, the league is confessing to some really shady moves.