Good News! Jeffrey Kessler is trying to sabotage the talks again

[lamafist]

Re: Good New! Jeffrey Kessler is trying to sabotage the talks again

LOL! Did you read DaBruinz post where he quoted Schefter specifically said that Kessler and Quinn was the problem and Smith had to tell them to stand down? I'll post it again:

Lockout: Talks 'almost blew up' Tuesday, source says - ESPN

Of course any unbiased person would read this and see that Kessler and Quinn were being cordial and agreeable and Smith needed to pull them out of there because the evil owners were taking advantage of their good nature.

Seriously, any unbiased person would read that piece and believe what I said. They would disagree with you. The report doesn't say that the owners had to have their lawyers "stand down". Besides, Kessler has a long history of this from back when Upshaw was alive. There is plenty history backing up my assertions of Kessler.

Come clean! You really are Michael Felger. I swear you posts are his thoughts word for word. I don't get why you hate that guy because I swear you guys are the same person.

BTW, I will get to the rest of your post later when I have time. I am not avoiding it.

Seems to me like far too much is being read into one anecdote that Schefter had related to him second- or third-hand, especially since we've also had a few reported incidents of tensions boiling over between certain players and owners. Negotiations get heated; these things are bound to happen.

Most of the over-aggressive speculation on this is coming from Florio over at PFT, who seems determined to push the "lawyers=bad" storyline as much as possible. Makes sense -- he's made several posts venting his spleen about commenters accusing him of having an anti-player or an anti-owner agenda at about a 50/50 clip. The lawyers make a convenient scapegoat for his polemic style.

I don't really buy the whole argument that the lawyers on either side would want to drag out the process to wring more money out of their clients. These guys all have their names on letterhead at big-time law firms. They have plenty of less high-publicity clients they can bleed for billable hours without risking bad PR for their firm. They also certainly understand that failing to get a deal done in time to save the season would be considered a huge failure for everyone involved -- themselves included. It would be very damaging for any of the lawyers' profiles to be seen as queering a deal and leading his clients into a mutually harmful impasse with their opponents.

 

[Shelterdog]

Re: Good New! Jeffrey Kessler is trying to sabotage the talks again

I don't really buy the whole argument that the lawyers on either side would want to drag out the process to wring more money out of their clients. These guys all have their names on letterhead at big-time law firms. They have plenty of less high-publicity clients they can bleed for billable hours without risking bad PR for their firm. They also certainly understand that failing to get a deal done in time to save the season would be considered a huge failure for everyone involved -- themselves included. It would be very damaging for any of the lawyers' profiles to be seen as queering a deal and leading his clients into a mutually harmful impasse with their opponents.

It's not that they'd drag it out on purpose (although that does happen), it's that there are a million ways that lawyers encourage fighting. They lawyers might exagerrate their chances of winning, might honestly believe they can win, want to have a big fight where they reap rewards in fees but the clients pay the bill if they lose, litigators are paid to be tenacious on even little stuff and they can't shut it down, etc., etc., etc.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Re: Good New! Jeffrey Kessler is trying to sabotage the talks again

Dead wrong Townsie, It is the Lawyers responsibility to give the client advise that is to the CLIENT'S benefit. not his OWN. You say it yourself later in your post that you think Kessler is giving the players BAD advise. CLEARLY, T. this guy has a SPECIFIC agenda that covers 2 separate sports. An agenda that obviously conflicts with the best interests of his CURRENT clients.

I think you misread the point pretty severely. Rob said that it was not the lawyers' job to give advice. Townes disagreed, and by your own words so do you. The real issue, you seem to agree, is whose benefit the advice is for, and you both seem to agree on the answer to that as well. I have no idea where you managed to get "dead wrong" out of that.

 

[Observer]

You're not on the list.


It generally takes a lot for me to put someone on the list, and I clear it (or most of it) with an 'amnesty' every year around draft time.

So that you don't miss the real highlights of the year?

 

[BlueThunder]

If true that both sides are in meetings all week ...is it possible that they are really close to finalizing things and making announcements after the holiday?


DAM..I sure hope so :singing:

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Good New! Jeffrey Kessler is trying to sabotage the talks again

Seems to me like far too much is being read into one anecdote that Schefter had related to him second- or third-hand, especially since we've also had a few reported incidents of tensions boiling over between certain players and owners. Negotiations get heated; these things are bound to happen.

Most of the over-aggressive speculation on this is coming from Florio over at PFT, who seems determined to push the "lawyers=bad" storyline as much as possible. Makes sense -- he's made several posts venting his spleen about commenters accusing him of having an anti-player or an anti-owner agenda at about a 50/50 clip. The lawyers make a convenient scapegoat for his polemic style.

I don't really buy the whole argument that the lawyers on either side would want to drag out the process to wring more money out of their clients. These guys all have their names on letterhead at big-time law firms. They have plenty of less high-publicity clients they can bleed for billable hours without risking bad PR for their firm. They also certainly understand that failing to get a deal done in time to save the season would be considered a huge failure for everyone involved -- themselves included. It would be very damaging for any of the lawyers' profiles to be seen as queering a deal and leading his clients into a mutually harmful impasse with their opponents.

You do realize Mike Florio is a lawyer? That was his profession before he bought PFT and I am pretty sure he still practices. Unless he is a self hating lawyer, I seriously doubt he is trying to spread the "Lawyers = Bad" stereotype.

Also, he wrote an article today stating that his sources say the CBA would have been done last week if it was not for THE OWNERS. His sources say that they think they are bargaining at a position of strength and have been trying to haggle over a lot of issues to squeeze the players as much as possible. Of course the anti-owners people (not directed to you per sea, just stating this in this post because Florio's report is a good rebutal to your claim of him just being anti-lawyer) on this board will take that report as gospel after dismissing the Kessler as a roadblock reports.

Since then, we’ve learned from a source with knowledge of the dynamics on both sides of the table that the process remains, relatively speaking, far from over. And the blame for the delay is being placed on the owners.
Per the source, a deal could have been done a week or two ago, but the owners have been playing games with some of the numbers, possibly relying upon the emergence and strengthening sense that the players are ready to get a deal done in order to squeeze the players on some of the smaller issues.

Onus falls on owners to get deal done | ProFootballTalk

Let me save the anti-owners crowd some time and start it off. Schefter report was a clear indication that both sides were a problem, but this report just shows the owners are evil.

Personally, I believe both reports and I think the owners are wrong this time and should pull their heads out of their arses and stop nickle and diming the players, but I still believe Kessler was the problem last week and the other time when he was in the room.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Good New! Jeffrey Kessler is trying to sabotage the talks again

You do realize Mike Florio is a lawyer? That was his profession before he bought PFT and I am pretty sure he still practices. Unless he is a self hating lawyer, I seriously doubt he is trying to spread the "Lawyers = Bad" stereotype.

Also, he wrote an article today stating that his sources say the CBA would have been done last week if it was not for THE OWNERS. His sources say that they think they are bargaining at a position of strength and have been trying to haggle over a lot of issues to squeeze the players as much as possible. Of course the anti-owners people (not directed to you per sea, just stating this in this post because Florio's report is a good rebutal to your claim of him just being anti-lawyer) on this board will take that report as gospel after dismissing the Kessler as a roadblock reports.


Onus falls on owners to get deal done | ProFootballTalk

Let me save the anti-owners crowd some time and start it off. Schefter report was a clear indication that both sides were a problem, but this report just shows the owners are evil.

Personally, I believe both reports and I think the owners are wrong this time and should pull their heads out of their arses and stop nickle and diming the players, but I still believe Kessler was the problem last week and the other time when he was in the room.

You made a horribly speculative O.P. based upon nothing substantial, and nothing that was even remotely something that could be called as news. It was based upon the editorial comments of Florio. Now you're trying to equate that with something that's supposedly news gotten by Florio, from sources.

This was your mistake from the beginning of the thread. Don't go turning your screw up into yet another attempt to bash those who don't buy into the owners' side of things on this. You could have just said something along the lines of "Oh, yeah, you guys are right. This was just Florio editorializing, and not news." Instead, you doubled down.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Good New! Jeffrey Kessler is trying to sabotage the talks again

You made a horribly speculative O.P. based upon nothing substantial, and nothing that was even remotely something that could be called as news. It was based upon the editorial comments of Florio. Now you're trying to equate that with something that's supposedly news gotten by Florio, from sources.

Don't go blaming people who are "anti-owners". Blame yourself.

LOL! If you practiced what you preached, you wouldn't have anything to do on this board.

BTW, so speculation by sources that the deal would have been done a week or two ago if it wasn't for the owners is news. Because there is no guarantee that if the owners didn't pull this strategy that we would be any closer to a deal. It is their OPINION that it would and I am willing to take that opinion as accurate until I hear otherwise. But the only difference between this and any Florio speculation is that it is a slightly more informed opinion, but it might be a lot more biased depending on who the source is.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Good New! Jeffrey Kessler is trying to sabotage the talks again

This was your mistake from the beginning of the thread. Don't go turning your screw up into yet another attempt to bash those who don't buy into the owners' side of things on this. You could have just said something along the lines of "Oh, yeah, you guys are right. This was just Florio editorializing, and not news." Instead, you doubled down.

Well, since you changed your post. I will not respond.

I screwed up?!? How?!? Funny, I thought I was showing that I am not a hypocrite by posting a story that blames the other side for a lot of the delays. It doesn't absolve Kessler one bit of anything. It just shows that the owners are just as culpable as he is. I never said they weren't.

There you go Felgerizing an argument. I trying to be fair and give the other side of the argument and turn it self-righteous, I am better than you and you cannot admit you are wrong crap.

For the record, I don't think I was wrong. I whole heartily think Kessler has been a hinderance to this process and his agenda has been well publicized long before this CBA discussion. I only posted the article blaming the owners because I have and will continue to blame both sides for this mess. I just blame Kessler more than most.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Good New! Jeffrey Kessler is trying to sabotage the talks again

LOL! If you practiced what you preached, you wouldn't have anything to do on this board.

Instead of making yet another accusation without evidence, please go back into my comments from, say, the end of the season forward, and show me where I've done what you have done here (take an editorial from a writer and use it as the news item itself, and titling a thread the way you did). If I'm doing as you claim in your response here, you should be able to find all sorts of examples.

BTW, so speculation by sources that the deal would have been done a week or two ago if it wasn't for the owners is news. Because there is no guarantee that if the owners didn't pull this strategy that we would be any closer to a deal. It is their OPINION that it would and I am willing to take that opinion as accurate until I hear otherwise. But the only difference between this and any Florio speculation is that it is a slightly more informed opinion, but it might be a lot more biased depending on who the source is.

Reporting speculation by other sources is news. Editorializing by the author of the piece is not the same thing, as you certainly know.

You screwed up. Instead of just admitting it, you doubled down on your position. Now you're doubling down, yet again.


Keep going, the train wreck is amusing.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Good New! Jeffrey Kessler is trying to sabotage the talks again

Instead of making yet another accusation without evidence, please go back into my comments from, say, the end of the season forward, and show me where I've done what you have done here (take an editorial from a writer and use it as the news item itself). If I'm doing as you claim in your response here, you should be able to find all sorts of examples.

Jesus, do I have to go through hundreds of your posts to show proof. Maybe I will do that later.

Reporting speculation by other sources is news. Editorializing by the author of the piece is not the same thing, as you certainly know.

It's news, but no more accurate than editorizing in many cases. In fact, depending on the source, it could be nothing more than propaganda by one side to make the other side look bad with very little truth to the opinion. I am at least being consistent and taking all informed opinions the same.

It is funny though since you consider the sources' opinions that the owners have delayed the CBA by a week or two as news while you have spent weeks dismissing Schefter's report of Smith admonishing Kessler in the media as an innoculous remark.

You screwed up. Instead of just admitting it, you doubled down on your position. Now you're doubling down, yet again.

Felger is that you? You even repeat yourself like him.

Not doubling down at all. Just because you cannot comprehend someone actually being able to not see things in black and white and that there can be more than one villian in a situation like this, doesn't mean I am doing anything. I stand by every one of my posts in this thread unless I admit I am wrong. And unlike you, I am not afraid to admit I am wrong when I am.

If I felt I was wrong in any way, I would admit it. If I wasn't man enough to admit it, I would never have posted an article showing the owners were holding up the process to give you any ammunition.

Keep going, the train wreck is amusing.

I'm glad I amuse you. After years of moronically contrianian arguments from you that have annoyed most of the people on this board, I am glad to return the favor.

 

[BlueThunder]

I'm running out of popcorn.....

 

[lamafist]

Re: Good New! Jeffrey Kessler is trying to sabotage the talks again

You do realize Mike Florio is a lawyer? That was his profession before he bought PFT and I am pretty sure he still practices. Unless he is a self hating lawyer, I seriously doubt he is trying to spread the "Lawyers = Bad" stereotype.

...

Also, he wrote an article today stating that his sources say the CBA would have been done last week if it was not for THE OWNERS. His sources say that they think they are bargaining at a position of strength and have been trying to haggle over a lot of issues to squeeze the players as much as possible. Of course the anti-owners people (not directed to you per sea, just stating this in this post because Florio's report is a good rebutal to your claim of him just being anti-lawyer) on this board will take that report as gospel after dismissing the Kessler as a roadblock reports.


Onus falls on owners to get deal done | ProFootballTalk

Let me save the anti-owners crowd some time and start it off. Schefter report was a clear indication that both sides were a problem, but this report just shows the owners are evil.

Personally, I believe both reports and I think the owners are wrong this time and should pull their heads out of their arses and stop nickle and diming the players, but I still believe Kessler was the problem last week and the other time when he was in the room.

I know that Florio is/was an attorney. The phrase "there's no zealot like a convert" springs to mind. Seriously, though, I don't think Florio hates lawyers or has any anti-lawyer agenda he wants to spread. I think it's all just rhetoric for him. Florio loves to play to the crowd. Inciting condemnation and outrage is his schtick, and what's built him such a wide readership so rapidly.

I never intended to suggest he'd ever refrain from reporting something anti-owner or anti-player, I'm just saying he's been saving most of his soap-box preaching for condemning the lawyers. Even the post you reference is fairly free of bombast, though that could be as much out of a desire to remain optimistic as anything else.

Still, it wouldn't be a Florio post if it didn't frame things in the most normative, black/white way possible. If the owners are in fact responsible for a hold-up, I think he's being very uncharitable in his portrayal of their likely motives. From what we've heard of the new CBA, there are legitimate questions about the degree to which the low-revenue owners' concerns have been addressed. The league has been working so hard to present a unified front to the NFLPA that it doesn't seem like there was much occasion to work out any of the inter-ownership issues at play, and they are legion.

Anyway, as to the question of the lawyers' culpability -- I believe Schefters' report that De Smith had to ask them to stand down. I defer to Bob Krafts' wisdom and business acumen about the utility of getting the lawyers out of the rooms to get the negotiations moving. I believe that Florio hears what he says he hears from sources, though I suspect that they might play things up a bit when they pitch them to Florio, who in turns play them up further in his posts.

I don't think any of this really suggests that the lawyers are playing an unusually obstructive role in this case. I think a lot of it is just reacting to an ugly process we don't usually observe under such a magnifying glass. I think there's probably too much focus on the process -- how things are being done, whose fault which holdup is, who's being more inflammatory -- which is really all just window-dressing the actual issues and stakes.

 

[lamafist]

Re: Good New! Jeffrey Kessler is trying to sabotage the talks again

... Schefter's report of Smith admonishing Kessler in the media as an innoculous remark.

Smith admonished Kessler in the media?

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Good New! Jeffrey Kessler is trying to sabotage the talks again

Jesus, do I have to go through hundreds of your posts to show proof. Maybe I will do that later.

Why would you have to go through hundreds of posts if it's all I do?

LOL! If you practiced what you preached, you wouldn't have anything to do on this board.

It's news, but no more accurate than editorizing in many cases. In fact, depending on the source, it could be nothing more than propaganda by one side to make the other side look bad with very little truth to the opinion. I am at least being consistent and taking all informed opinions the same.

Well, now you're just shoveling the bull with 2 hands. One is a sourced story, based upon someone that the writer calls

a source with knowledge of the dynamics on both sides of the table

The other is just an editorial by that writer. You know there's a difference. You've sunk pretty low to try making this claim.

It is funny though since you consider the sources' opinions that the owners have delayed the CBA by a week or two as news while you have spent weeks dismissing Schefter's report of Smith admonishing Kessler in the media as an innoculous remark.

Really? Where did I spend weeks doing that? How about some links over time for this one, while you're at it?

Felger is that you? You even repeat yourself like him.

And, once again, you go with the idiotic personal stuff that's completely irrelevant to the discussion.

Not doubling down at all. Just because you cannot comprehend someone actually being able to not see things in black and white and that there can be more than one villian in a situation like this, doesn't mean I am doing anything. I stand by every one of my posts in this thread unless I admit I am wrong. And unlike you, I am not afraid to admit I am wrong when I am.

If I felt I was wrong in any way, I would admit it. If I wasn't man enough to admit it, I would never have posted an article showing the owners were holding up the process to give you any ammunition.

How do you not see the irony in this load of bull that your posting? You got the story wrong and won't admit it. Yet, somehow, you're making the claim that you aren't afraid to admit you're wrong.

I'm glad I amuse you. After years of moronically contrianian arguments from you that have annoyed most of the people on this board, I am glad to return the favor.

Rob, you either don't know the definition of "contrarian", or you can't understand how to apply it (which puts you in good company with most of the homers who like to throw it around here). Then again, you can't can't seem to grasp "news" vs. "editorial" either.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Good New! Jeffrey Kessler is trying to sabotage the talks again

Smith admonished Kessler in the media?

I meant meeting. Sorry about that.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Good New! Jeffrey Kessler is trying to sabotage the talks again

Why would you have to go through hundreds of posts if it's all I do?





Well, now you're just shoveling the bull with 2 hands. One is a sourced story, based upon someone that the writer calls



The other is just an editorial by that writer. You know there's a difference. You've sunk pretty low to try making this claim.



Really? Where did I spend weeks doing that? How about some links over time for this one, while you're at it?



And, once again, you go with the idiotic personal stuff that's completely irrelevant to the discussion.

How do you not see the irony in this load of bull that your posting? You got the story wrong and won't admit it. Yet, somehow, you're making the claim that you aren't afraid to admit you're wrong.



Rob, you either don't know the definition of "contrarian", or you can't understand how to apply it (which puts you in good company with most of the homers who like to throw it around here). Then again, you can't can't seem to grasp "news" vs. "editorial" either.

I'm done arguing this off topic crap. I will let you have the last word because this will never end otherwise.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Good New! Jeffrey Kessler is trying to sabotage the talks again

I know that Florio is/was an attorney. The phrase "there's no zealot like a convert" springs to mind. Seriously, though, I don't think Florio hates lawyers or has any anti-lawyer agenda he wants to spread. I think it's all just rhetoric for him. Florio loves to play to the crowd. Inciting condemnation and outrage is his schtick, and what's built him such a wide readership so rapidly.

I never intended to suggest he'd ever refrain from reporting something anti-owner or anti-player, I'm just saying he's been saving most of his soap-box preaching for condemning the lawyers. Even the post you reference is fairly free of bombast, though that could be as much out of a desire to remain optimistic as anything else.

Still, it wouldn't be a Florio post if it didn't frame things in the most normative, black/white way possible. If the owners are in fact responsible for a hold-up, I think he's being very uncharitable in his portrayal of their likely motives. From what we've heard of the new CBA, there are legitimate questions about the degree to which the low-revenue owners' concerns have been addressed. The league has been working so hard to present a unified front to the NFLPA that it doesn't seem like there was much occasion to work out any of the inter-ownership issues at play, and they are legion.

Anyway, as to the question of the lawyers' culpability -- I believe Schefters' report that De Smith had to ask them to stand down. I defer to Bob Krafts' wisdom and business acumen about the utility of getting the lawyers out of the rooms to get the negotiations moving. I believe that Florio hears what he says he hears from sources, though I suspect that they might play things up a bit when they pitch them to Florio, who in turns play them up further in his posts.

I don't think any of this really suggests that the lawyers are playing an unusually obstructive role in this case. I think a lot of it is just reacting to an ugly process we don't usually observe under such a magnifying glass. I think there's probably too much focus on the process -- how things are being done, whose fault which holdup is, who's being more inflammatory -- which is really all just window-dressing the actual issues and stakes.

Forget Florio. He isn't the only one making comments about Kessler and his long history of being a roadblock to get a deal. Rich Eisen has said the same thing that back in the day, Upshaw had to keep him on a leash because he was pushing for a free market NFL through the courts. Daniel Kaplan from Sports Business Journal has echoed similiar sentiments. I have heard people on Sirius NFL radio repeatly say it.

Florio is just one voice of many. He does focus on Kessler a lot because he is genuinely one of the bad guys in this. He is not the only bad guy and there are bad guys on the owner's side as well. He has an agenda and unfortunately his agenda could destroy the NFL. The owners have their own agendas and many of them have negative impacts towards the NFL. But no one has a worse agenda and up until the Florio report today no one has been reported to be more disruptive in the meetings (along with Quinn).

 

[BlueThunder]

WHEW...Thanks Rob !

 

[RussFrancis]

Anyone not accepting what Kessler's basic goal here has been all along just needs to google Marvin Miller. And I doubt most of us really need to do that to know who and what Miller meant and still represent to the history of American sports. Kessler will be largely forgotten by NFL fans in a couple of weeks, despite his best efforts. And it pains me to see people still bickering back and forth, wasting any effort whatsoever, discussing the guy. These next two weeks cant pass by soon enough.