|
Pages :
1
2
3
4
[ 5]
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
SmootSmack 07-21-2011, 10:14 PM Yes.
If the owners did include substantial provisions not agreed upon then I retract everything. The should be lined up and shot proverbially.
I don't know the full specific details, but as I understand it, there were some elements that were not agreed upon that the owners inserted as if a done deal, and others elements that the players feel need to be agreed upon that were not included.
I mean this is not the same situation, of course. But when we negotiate contracts with the NFL (and other leagues) it's not at all uncommon to see something slid into a proposed agreement at the last minute. It's common practice to try to get that one last piece in.
But I think the big thing here is the NFLPA doesn't have the entire agreement yet and this is a deal that impacts the next decade so I believe they are making sure they thoroughly review everything.
I believe by no later than Saturday the players will approve. But there's as much a PR play here by both sides. Owners are saying "Deal is done!" and players are saying "Well, maybe we'll agree to this. But we want everyone to know it's not an ideal proposal" As in "we're making sacrifices for the sake of the sport"
skinsfaninok 07-21-2011, 11:05 PM This is about to get ugly.
Hope not, but that's my prediction.
this
tryfuhl 07-21-2011, 11:17 PM Yes. They hired someone to negotiate a CBA for them. They should rubber stamp it plain and simple or fire Smith. Either they trust him or not. They certainly don't need to come in at the last minute and derail the whole thing. Their asses needed to be involved to be able to say anything in my opinion.
so the owners shouldn't care what RG negotiated for them, just stamp on it ?
CRedskinsRule 07-21-2011, 11:25 PM so the owners shouldn't care what RG negotiated for them, just stamp on it ?
moreso, they should have kept up with it and made sure the terms were staying within acceptable limits. And I think it's clear that the owners were all kept in a basic loop of knowledge, so that any major issues were worked out and agreed on in timely fashions.
If they did that, then this vote should have been fairly simple, as opposed to 32 reps (or 1900 players) having to read a 600 or so page document.
When you purchase or sell a house, you may give your realtor or attorney basic powers, but you still expect to be made aware of any progress that is being made. That's just due diligence.
CRedskinsRule 07-21-2011, 11:29 PM Greg_A_Bedard Greg A. Bedard
by FO_DougFarrar
High-ranking NFLPA source told me 45 min ago: "Tell everyone to calm down. Haven't come this far to derail a deal."
Hope this is true
SmootSmack 07-22-2011, 12:39 AM Good breakdown by Andrew Brandt
We have a (proposed) deal | National Football Post (http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/We-have-a-proposed-deal.html)
SBXVII 07-22-2011, 02:15 AM I'm slightly confused.....
During this whole process the owners had Goodell to negotiate terms for them, different owners sat in on meetings at different times, yesterday when the owners showed up and had their meeting I'd guess each owner was given the proposal to peruse over night and I'd presume they talked about the issue's and changes today.... then voted on it.
The players had D.Smith negotiating for them, and just like the owners the players had different player reps sitting in on meetings at different times, no different then how the owners handled their proposal meeting and vote the players should have done the same. Yet we get word that one player rep didn't get the proposal until today? that they want time to digest the material? and then there is " the owners are trying to push us into a corner" and " the owners are trying to slip/sneak items into the CBA"? WTF?
The best one was.... ”We hadn’t even seen the deal the owners voted on today." Is it not the same effing proposal the players are supposed to be looking at and digesting just like the owners? What games are the players playing?
Then the players mentioned they were concerned about how they will become a Union again?
#1- that has nothing to do with the owners.
#2- the NFLPA* should have already been making plans for that prior to now.
#3- they don't have to wait until all the players are back at their facilities to sign some idiot card in order to become a union. Their simply trying to make sure they have the majority vote to become a Union again, so all the "Reps" should be making contact with all the players from their organizations with the simple question "do you want to become part of a Union again?" If each "Rep" returns with a majority vote of yes then reinstate the damn union and the "Reps" should be able to agree to the proposal.
Lockout can be lifted, when the players report next week the NFLPA can request the players to sign the stupid card for accountability, and all parties can wait for the "Final Draft" so they can sign them. If everyone is going to have to wait till the "Final Draft" is typed up and signed by the owners before the players will vote and sign then you can figure on the season not starting until Oct. or Nov.
Giantone 07-22-2011, 03:48 AM If all that's lost out of this is the HOF game, it's a win for all.
...except the people going "into" the Hall.
GTripp0012 07-22-2011, 08:27 AM This was the most encouraging thing I saw last night:
Jeremy Jarmon gets it | Rich Tandler's Real Redskins (http://realredskins.com/2011/07/jeremy-jarmon-gets-it/)
If you don't follow Jarmon on Twitter, you're missing out. The guy is really smart. May not help him make the roster in the end, but the NFLPA needs more leadership like him.
GTripp0012 07-22-2011, 08:36 AM I feel bad for the players, who obviously couldn't have voted on a document they haven't read. But the NFLPA pays its lawyers to do the same thing the NFL pays its lawyers for. Only, as far as I can tell, both sides lawyers hammered out these solutions in record time, while the NFLPAs group has consistently kept the people they work for in the dark.
These allegations of the Owners making a power play on the Players are unfortunate, but are only possible because the players couldn't wrap up their end of the bargain on Wednesday. And I don't think it was for lack of desire. I think the NFLPA did a piss poor job getting the 32 player reps adequately prepared to vote on a deal.
I fully expect the players to be the "bigger man" and do what it takes to bring us football, but that wouldn't have had to happen if their leadership had just done their jobs starting last Saturday and expedited the process of a deal. But there were just too many other motives out there for the NFLPA non-players.
|