Welcome to PatsFans.com

Report: NFL owners refuse to meet with players' attorneys

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Deus Irae, Apr 3, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    41,438
    Likes Received:
    283
    Ratings:
    +724 / 44 / -47

    Disable Jersey

    NFL: John Elway of the Denver Broncos appears to have serious interest in this year's QB class - ESPN
  2. jsull87

    jsull87 Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2008
    Messages:
    2,548
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

  3. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    41,438
    Likes Received:
    283
    Ratings:
    +724 / 44 / -47

    Disable Jersey

    It's a mailbag. Scan to the bottom. It's in Clayton's answer to the last question.

    As to the "sham" comment, I'll simply note that a lot of people have confused tactics with purpose (whether you're one of them is something I don't know, since I haven't read enough of your posts on the subject to find out), and leave it at that.
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2011
  4. Brady_to_Moss

    Brady_to_Moss Revis Island is here PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2007
    Messages:
    17,047
    Likes Received:
    89
    Ratings:
    +212 / 3 / -1

    #95 Jersey

    Wake me up when this BS is over..i just want F'in football
  5. PatsWickedPissah

    PatsWickedPissah PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Messages:
    22,987
    Likes Received:
    329
    Ratings:
    +706 / 8 / -9

    Disable Jersey

    Ownership's position is that the decertification is a sham. They're simply being consistent with their position before it's heard in court. Contradicting your legal position isn't a wise move.

    If the players want a union, they had one. They're posturing for the unthinking press.

    This is simply Kabuki theater that Clayton, no deep thinker, misinterprets.
  6. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0

    The owners having gone this far (the CBA of 1993 that resulted from a settlement agreement that injected the courts in the form of Judge Doty into the mix for the last 18 years has now expired theoretically ending court envolvement going forward) are not interested in entering into another SSA that can be interpreted to supercede ensuing CBA's. Most CBA's have an arbitration clause that is binding on the the participants. The CBA of 1993 had one and law professor Steven Burbank was the arbitor chosen by joint agreement to rule on any disputes between the NFLPA and the NFL concerning the NFL CBA. Only his rulings were frequently overturned on appeal to Judge Doty, which was only the process due to the existence of a SSA.

    The owners want to operate under the same labor law rules that other union companies operate under. They don't want court oversight from some judge in Minnesota ad nauseum.
  7. DW Toys

    DW Toys Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2007
    Messages:
    2,832
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +11 / 1 / -2

    Very astute observation Cousin. I appreciate the background information I and perhaps some others here was not aware of.
    DW Toys
  8. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    29,689
    Likes Received:
    194
    Ratings:
    +423 / 5 / -1

    And one of the player representive, Hunter Hillenmeyer, admitted last week that players refused to accept the owners' financial information they offered solely because the players didn't want to look bad in the PR war.

    Hillenmeyer admits players refused financial info for P.R. reasons | ProFootballTalk

    Both sides are wrong in this battle. I don't know why everyone wants to paint one side as the innocent victim and the other side as the evil aggressor. Both sides are being idiots, greedy bastards, and inflexible.
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2011
  9. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    41,438
    Likes Received:
    283
    Ratings:
    +724 / 44 / -47

    Disable Jersey

    The players were right to reject that offer. It would have been stupid of them to accept. There's a clear "wrong" in this battle, and it's the owners. Their words and actions have made it clear that they understand this, and they don't care. They are out to "take back" the league by their own admission, not to work out a legitimate compromise.
  10. DEVIOUS 1

    DEVIOUS 1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Soooooooo, don't believe the propaganda of the owners, only believe the propaganda of the players, because thats the side your backing? Ok, got it!

    I'm with Robo. There is an equal share to this blame pie, but plenty of opinion to paint one side as the villain, and the other side as the hero. Spare me.

    Both sides are dug in to deeply, and are to consumed with a combination of greed/pride to compromise and get anything done.

    Both sides have in one way or another, lied or mislead the public in an effort to win a fruitless PR battle.

    But the bottom line to me, is that they are all dopes.

    Just like the people who try to convince me one side is more wrong then the other. Dopes.

    I believe the expression that applies is: Two wrongs don't make a right.
  11. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    41,438
    Likes Received:
    283
    Ratings:
    +724 / 44 / -47

    Disable Jersey

    Actually, I didn't say anything of the kind.

    Go back and read "Robo" for his positions on this over time.

    It was the owners who dropped out of the previous CBA, the owners who deliberately framed the broadcast contracts to prepare for a lockout and screwing the players in the process, it was the owners demanding huge revenue rollbacks without providing justification, and it was the owners blowing off meetings and negotiations.

    You can pretend that there's been equal culpability. You might as well pretend that Superman is real and screwing Lois Lane while they both work at the Daily Planet while you're at it.
  12. PatsWickedPissah

    PatsWickedPissah PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Messages:
    22,987
    Likes Received:
    329
    Ratings:
    +706 / 8 / -9

    Disable Jersey

    Superman would never do that! :eek:
  13. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    29,689
    Likes Received:
    194
    Ratings:
    +423 / 5 / -1

    My position over time hasn't changed. I have always said both sides are to blame for this. Even when I appeared to be one sided, I have gone back and clarified my original post like the thread I started and morphed into something else. Still believe it. Nothing has changed. I have also said both sides are spinning the truth and neither side can be believed in total.

    This is the real world where people aren't black and white. There is a lot of shades of gray and both sides of this issue have been in the right or in the wrong depending on the time and the issue.

    To frame this as the players are innocent victims and the owners just greedy is a bogus. To frame this the other way is just as bogus. The reality is that both sides are being stubborn in a lot of cases and are more interested in making the other side look bad than get a resolution. Neither side is interested in making sure the public get the truth. They are interested in making sure the public get their spin on the truth.

    I am sure the owners believe they have a legitimate reason for not negotiating with the lawyers and it is very different than what John Clayton's story claims. Just like the players probably have a very different take on why they were pressuring the rookies to avoid the draft which made them look very petty the way it was spun in the press.

    As for who ended this process, it was both sides. DeMarcus Smith said either give them the financials they were looking by the end of the day of the last negotiations or the players would decertify. Once the players won the lockout insurance case, they seemed pretty determined to get the CBA situation resolved in court. That said, the owners were planning to use the lockout to sweat the players out. Neither side really wanted to negotiate in good faith.
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2011
  14. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    29,689
    Likes Received:
    194
    Ratings:
    +423 / 5 / -1

    The owners deny that they refused to negotiate with the lawyers. So it is a case of "he said, she said" without knowing who it telling the truth. Although the owners probably would have rejected such a meeting if offered considering their statement.

    League denies report of refusal to negotiate last week | ProFootballTalk

    Let's face it. The players want a ligitation negotiation because the process favors them. If the process favored the owners, the roles would be reversed. It is all PR spin and gamesmanship. The players want to make the negotiation process and final outcome to have the deck stacked in their favor. Same goes for the owners. They will dance until one side gets the advantage and there is no chance for the other side to reclaim the advantage.
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2011
  15. jsull87

    jsull87 Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2008
    Messages:
    2,548
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    Not really trying to say anything other than if i was negotiating with the NFLPA then they decertified then wanted to attend negotiations as advisers i'd probably have taken the same action. Once again none of us have the full information i guess so it's hard to draw a definitive opinion.
  16. DaBruinz

    DaBruinz Pats, B's, Sox PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    24,060
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +207 / 16 / -38

    #50 Jersey

    No, there isn't a clear "WRONG" in this battle. You saying otherwise is just foolish. As it has been since day one.

    What you and those players ignore was that the owners were using that as a starting point. Not as the be all end all. They even said so. Yet, instead of actually negotiating, the players said "F U" and decertified.

    There were MANY points in that offer that increased iteams to the players. Things that wouldn't come out of the players side of things. Yet, the Players refuse to acknowledge that.

    The players have been gorging themselves on the money over the last 18 years to the point of abuse and now, when one side that was hit much harder by the financial crisis (the owners) wants both sides to show some fiscal responsibility, the players are having a tantrum.
  17. DaBruinz

    DaBruinz Pats, B's, Sox PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    24,060
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +207 / 16 / -38

    #50 Jersey

    You're the cheap sh!t that the players are selling. You've been doing it from day 1. Unlike you, others like myself realize that BOTH are at fault. And you prove it every single time you post on the subject.
  18. JoeSixPat

    JoeSixPat Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    9,852
    Likes Received:
    27
    Ratings:
    +46 / 2 / -0

    Actually at this point I think BOTH sides believe that there's a good chance they'll prevail in court, and we've simply all been witnessing posturing and re-posturing by each side to show the other one to be the bad guy on "litigation vs. negotiation"

    There was, certainly, an opportunity to negotiate a settlement a few weeks ago but at the time the players felt litigation was their best bet. Either they changed their mind about their chances and truly want to negotiate, or this was yet another layer of posturing.

    At this point we'll have to see what chess moves are available once we have a court ruling. This has the potential to get dragged out for a very long time.
  19. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    22,115
    Likes Received:
    75
    Ratings:
    +252 / 13 / -8

    Just wondering what the argument is that suggests it would be in the owners best interest to have the union decertifiy in order to sue them, then negotiate with the union, and sign a get out of jail free card so that they cannot be considered acting as a union while they are negotiating as one, so that they are still able to sue the owners if they wish.
    Is there really someone on the planet who would advise the owners that is smart?
  20. NEGoldenAge

    NEGoldenAge Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Are you serious...... a starting point offered at noon on the last day of an extention? :eek: I have a bridge for sale. Are you interested?
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2011
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>