Court Cancels Mediation, Settlement Negotiations Continue

Upshaw went the litigation route against the league, decertified the union, and also dragged the players through the '87 strike. Just saying D. Smith isn't exactly blazing any new trails here.

True, however the deal Upshaw got was significantly better than their existing situation. I don't think that it is possible for DSmith to greatly improve the players standing via litigation like Upshaw did. The risk/reward calculation was no where near the same in my mind. It's kinda like digging a brand new panama canal after one already exists, there better be a real good reason to start from scratch rather than upgrade the existing one.

But time will tell. maybe this was the right time and place for this battle, I tend to think not...

It appeared to me to be a reasonable offer, and as BHA said, merited at least a counter-offer. It seemed to be a "split the baby" kind of offer with several concessions to the players.

Am I missing something? Are you of the opinion that it was a bad offer or one that was just being made as a sop to public opinion and, if so, why?

Really, I am just trying to understand why it didn't merit at least a counter-offer. You may have covered it in earlier posts and, if so, just point me to them.

Just saying that for over a year before fans really started caring about this whole labor mess (March 2011) the players made repeated offers to the league, only to be flatly denied over and over again. So why should I blast D. Smith for rejecting the owners' offer and they repeatedly rebuffed the players' offers?

http://www.thewarpath.net/804607-post191.html

Just saying that for over a year before fans really started caring about this whole labor mess (March 2011) the players made repeated offers to the league, only to be flatly denied over and over again. So why should I blast D. Smith for rejecting the owners' offer and they repeatedly rebuffed the players' offers?

http://www.thewarpath.net/804607-post191.html

Nooooooooooooo. I want it to be be black and whiteeeeeeeeeee.

mediation is what they do when they are being forced to talk through a neutral 3rd party. This is good news. This means they are able to discuss the hard issues directly with one another. Which indicates a certain level of flexibility.

Just saying that for over a year before fans really started caring about this whole labor mess (March 2011) the players made repeated offers to the league, only to be flatly denied over and over again. So why should I blast D. Smith for rejecting the owners' offer and they repeatedly rebuffed the players' offers? http://www.thewarpath.net/804607-post191.html

Yes that was the post I was thinking of and it was one that had me rethinking my position a little bit.

I have no problem with rejecting an offer, it was the ineffectual posturing that put me off. Looking back over the articles from your link, yes - the NFL rejected the offers but seem to give reasons (which people may or may not agree with) for the rejection which, if not an actual counter offer, did point to factors where a middle ground might be found.

D.Smith's trashing of the NFL's last offers did not seem to point to a middle ground and, instead of 'powering down' to allow cooler heads to prevail, it seemed to me that he was stoking the litigation fires. Of course, knowing that Smith seemed litigation bound, perhaps the Owners' offer was just part their public opinion strategy which they knew Smith would reject. If so, Smith's public comments played right into their hands. Quite frankly, IMO, Smith, in his litigation strategy, is either a douche or is getting played like a fiddle.

Hopefully it is changing, but it seems to me BOTH sides are determined to cut off their noses to spite their face - the Owners by trying to milk every last penny out of the players AND get an ounce or two of blood in the process through the negiotiating table and the players by travelling down this all or nothing litigation path.

Again, not "blasting Smith" for rejecting the offer but, rather, for the manner in which he did it.

Well, it's not a simple game to the people truly involved in this

The game will always be simple....the greed needs help.

I know in my line of work anytime both parties are talking settlement, it's because both sides realize that litigation is not going to result in the best possible outcome and it's better to settle before the court has the final say.

Yes that was the post I was thinking of and it was one that had me rethinking my position a little bit.

I have no problem with rejecting an offer, it was the ineffectual posturing that put me off. Looking back over the articles from your link, yes - the NFL rejected the offers but seem to give reasons (which people may or may not agree with) for the rejection which, if not an actual counter offer, did point to factors where a middle ground might be found.

D.Smith's trashing of the NFL's last offers did not seem to point to a middle ground and, instead of 'powering down' to allow cooler heads to prevail, it seemed to me that he was stoking the litigation fires. Of course, knowing that Smith seemed litigation bound, perhaps the Owners' offer was just part their public opinion strategy which they knew Smith would reject. If so, Smith's public comments played right into their hands. Quite frankly, IMO, Smith, in his litigation strategy, is either a douche or is getting played like a fiddle.

Hopefully it is changing, but it seems to me BOTH sides are determined to cut off their noses to spite their face - the Owners by trying to milk every last penny out of the players AND get an ounce or two of blood in the process through the negiotiating table and the players by travelling down this all or nothing litigation path.

Again, not "blasting Smith" for rejecting the offer but, rather, for the manner in which he did it.

Fair enough. But don't confuse Smith's public posturing (which I agree seems a bit unnecessary at times) with his private conversations with Goodell

dkaplanSBJ daniel kaplan
Smith just went up and shook the hands of some league executives. Never seen him do that before.
21 minutes ago

It really sounds to me like some positive things may be happening in the backrooms. I hope that is true.

Fair enough. But don't confuse Smith's public posturing (which I agree seems a bit unnecessary at times) with his private conversations with Goodell

A different "insider" that posts on the cowboys board has insinuated that DSmith was very stubborn at the mediation by Cohen, and that Cohen was upset by his behavior. I am just wondering if you heard any inkling of that SS? I certainly can't verify it, so I am not saying its true, but the guy is usually reputable.