Vrabel ruined it for the NFLPA!

[KDPPatsfan85]

NFLPA* gets a taste of the downside of decertification | ProFootballTalk

“We’re players here to represent players and De works for us,” Vrabel told Albert Breer of NFL Network. “They do [have a seat]. And if they’re unhappy with that seat, we have to vote in a new executive committee, and a new board of reps.”

Vrabel maybe had one to many at the meeting!!

 

[JoeSixPat]

NFLPA* gets a taste of the downside of decertification | ProFootballTalk


Vrabel maybe had one to many at the meeting!!

Oops - that may come back to haunt him and the NFLPA*

Of course, part of the reason negotiations are going no where is because both sides are convinced they'll prevail in court. Maybe if someone gets the feeling they may lose it will prompt a new look at negotiations while mediation is suspended until mid May?

Hopeful thinking perhaps - and beyond that in a legal sense, hasn't the Judge heard the arguments already? Can this statement be admissible in the judge's current considerations at this point? (My guess is officially it cannot - but unofficially what truly influences a judges ruling could include things beyond the official record)

 

[upstater1]

A much bigger concern than what Vrabel said, for the players, is that some other lawyers have their hooks into other players. Those players are nuts if they think Brady and Manning are in it for themselves. They could easily pull a Montana and leave the others behind.

 

[Triumph]

I dont see what is so wrong with Vrabels comments.

Its my understanding that the NFLPA is now a trade association. They still exist, but with different power such as to not collectively bargain.

 

[IllegalContact]

A much bigger concern than what Vrabel said, for the players, is that some other lawyers have their hooks into other players. Those players are nuts if they think Brady and Manning are in it for themselves. They could easily pull a Montana and leave the others behind.

the notion that the brady lawsuit puts forward does not address the needs of the majority of players........so yeah, there's a certain amount of the stars being in it for themselves.

 

[IllegalContact]

vrabel's comments are no biggie.......

 

[Rob0729]

A much bigger concern than what Vrabel said, for the players, is that some other lawyers have their hooks into other players. Those players are nuts if they think Brady and Manning are in it for themselves. They could easily pull a Montana and leave the others behind.

Well, there is a questions on whether the union has everyone's interest in heart just as there are questions if the owners have all the teams' best interest at heart.

The antitrust lawsuit if goes to the brink screws over the low earning players because there would be no cap on what you could play players, but there would also be no floor. So yes, there would be players who would be making $30-40 million a year, but there would also be players making $50k. I'm sure the owners don't like paying $300k a year to a guy who never dresses on Sunday and is nothing more than a body in practice and a pure free market system the money to pay the top players obscene amounts of money would have to come from somewhere. That money would come from low and mid tier players. Like we see in the real world, there would be a huge chasm between the rich and poor in the NFL players. The mid-tier guys know that and Jeffrey Kessler (who is one of key players on the players' side) wants this system.

It is impossible to satisfy everyone in something this large. The question is whether they are putting more emphasis to satisfy one group of players' needs more than another. It is a valid question. Just as you gotta ask whether the owners are more concerned with satisfying one group of owners over another. It is easier for the owners to satisfy everyone since they are dealing with 32 teams rather than a few thousand players.

 

[Rob0729]

vrabel's comments are no biggie.......

I agree with that. The bigger issue is the players are showing cracks in their solidarity.

 

[upstater1]

I have to disagree with some of you on Brady and Manning's interests, etc. They are maxing out their cap right now. They are earning approximately 20% of the cap already. I'm not sure they could be paid more than $25 million a year given revenue sharing (I'm assuming with no cap that the owners will still revenue share). That means that the top clubs will still have a $150 million to spend, and no more, given their obligations to other teams. I don't see Brady and Manning's pay rising too much.

But I could be wrong, given that Daniel Snyder is in the group. He might willingly pay Manning $35 million a year.

 

[Rob0729]

I have to disagree with some of you on Brady and Manning's interests, etc. They are maxing out their cap right now. They are earning approximately 20% of the cap already. I'm not sure they could be paid more than $25 million a year given revenue sharing (I'm assuming with no cap that the owners will still revenue share). That means that the top clubs will still have a $150 million to spend, and no more, given their obligations to other teams. I don't see Brady and Manning's pay rising too much.

But I could be wrong, given that Daniel Snyder is in the group. He might willingly pay Manning $35 million a year.

First, you are assuming that there aren't some people on the players' side in the negotiations who are trying to win in court and not seriously negotiate and create a free market system. Jeffrey Kessler who is the players' outside attorney wants a free market system and has been trying to get that since the last CBA negotiations, but overruled by Gene Upshaw. In that system, the mid-level players will get screwed.

Second, the objective may not be to get more for the top talent, but avoiding from getting less. Any negotiated deal will likely have a slower cap growth and possibly an initial restriction. The Brady's of the world (not Brady specifically, but top tier players) may still want to make sure they get record breaking deals. If that happens, someone has to get less whether it is the mid-tier guys, low-tier guys, rookies, or veterans or a combination. So even with the top tier guys not getting more, they could be screwing over another group.

It is all speculation since we do not know what the players' leadership strategy is.

 

[crowell33]

Too much stolen beer from the man who once again had zero sacks and zero interceptions.