Twitter burns as Owners ratify

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Sorry, but if the players are coming in at this point and crying because they don't know what is in it, that is their own fault. They should have been questioning and demanding better info throughout the process. Mankins had his rep come out and say


The players have consistently claimed they are in the dark about these negotiations, and that fault lays in their leadership.

Now, the owners have approved a solution that contains the framework that the players leadership has been negotiation day in day out, and if they can't accept it, then I don't see why the owners would ever expect that a final deal could be reached.

True. Fault also lies in the judge who issued the gag order, so that everyone on both sides who was not in the room has to play catch-up now.

[Alvin Walton]

Wow.....fecking lame.

[CRedskinsRule]

Here is our rep. Doesn't sound good from his tweet:

therealholliday Vonnie Holliday
by CindyBoren
Look guys I have no reason to lie! The truth of the matter is we got tricked, duped, led astray, hoodwinked, bamboozled!
13 minutes ago

I wish we could get a vote from the full players as opposed to 32 reps that have been seething through this whole thing...(seething is obviously my opinion)

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Lotus

True. Fault also lies in the judge who issued the gag order, so that everyone on both sides who was not in the room has to play catch-up now.

sorry, but I can't believe that the gag order extends to potential members of a class. I think that the players' leadership didn't want to risk leaks (can't particularly blame the leadership for fearing leaks). They should have had a system in place (and could have confirmed with judges that it didn't violate the gag order) that gave the players a reasonable understanding as these negotiations progressed.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

sorry, but I can't believe that the gag order extends to potential members of a class. I think that the players' leadership didn't want to risk leaks (can't particularly blame the leadership for fearing leaks). They should have had a system in place (and could have confirmed with judges that it didn't violate the gag order) that gave the players a reasonable understanding as these negotiations progressed.

Agreed. It was a bit bizarre that folks who had million-dollar stakes had little knowledge of what was being negotiated on their behalf.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I probably shouldn't have said Smith thinks it's a fair deal, that's not entirely accurate. My understanding is he thinks it's a better deal than previous proposals. But still there's a ways to go.

They have, I believe, until Tuesday.

Did they not have a handshake deal?

[SmootSmack]

Who owners and players?

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Who owners and players?

Yes.

If the owners did include substantial provisions not agreed upon then I retract everything. The should be lined up and shot proverbially.

[wilsowilso]

This is about to get ugly.

Hope not, but that's my prediction.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm absolutely on the players's side. The owners ratified their own deal, including in it some terms the players had said they would not agree to. Maybe the players will agree to them, but they certainly won't (and shouldn't) approve anything they haven't seen.

Players have been getting information piecemeal, some like what they heard others didn't. Now the players reps are looking over the proposal, and likely won't vote on it tonight. But, as much as all of us wish they would agree to the deal and get on with it, that's not a fair or realistic expectation. They've been locked out for over four months. They have every right not to be pressured into anything.

I'm 100% with you.. This is a straight bully move by Goodell and the owners. Great job by them of making the players (an easy target) look like the bad guys but some very simple facts remain unchanged and unchallenged:
1. The owners opted out of an existing CBA
2. The owners locked the players out

How the players are getting blamed for anything is baffling to me (not really, there is a rather obvious reason but I won't go there) other than the owners doing a better job of painting the picture of good vs. bad in this scenario.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

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]

Originally Posted by wilsowilso

This is about to get ugly.

Hope not, but that's my prediction.

this

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

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]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

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]

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