DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement Part Deux

Quote:

---

it isn't as if this is the ONLY football league that players can seek to work in,

---

Donald Trump would have been better served to try his rival league now than years ago! In fact, if anyone was going to start a rival fall league, now would be the time.

I think it a key barginning chip.....but they aren't close enough to a deal to stop it from happening. I think they're too close to setting the bad things in motion to stop. This is going to get very, very ugly soon.

American Needle: High Court Delivers 9-0 Shutout Against NFL.


Wow. Turns out the big antitrust case of the 2009-2010 Supreme Court term, American Needle v. NFL, didn’t provide much of a matchup.

American Needle clobbered the league, in a unanimous 9-0 decision penned by Justice John Paul Stevens. We had no dissents and no concurrences. This was an unadulterated blowout. This was the 1940 NFL Championship game; the 1986 Super Bowl.

The case pitted American Needle, Inc., an apparel manufacturer, against the NFL. The dispute started back in 2000 when the NFL signed an exclusive apparel licensing deal with Reebok International, now a unit of Adidas AG.

American Needle, which had individual licensing deals with NFL teams, sued, arguing the NFL’s exclusive deal with Reebok violated antitrust rules. The NFL argued that it is a single entity with 32 teams that compete with each other in football but not in business, where the teams collectively compete with other sports and forms of entertainment. American Needle countered by arguing that the league was actually a collection of 32 independent entities — i.e., all the teams.

The Seventh Circuit in 2008 ruled for the NFL, prompting the appeal.

The Supreme Court on Monday essentially ruled that the NFL is composed of 32 separate business entities.

Each of the teams is a substantial, independently owned, and independently managed business. . . . Directly relevant to this case, the teams compete in the market for intellectual property. To a firm making hats, the Saints and the Colts are two potentially competing suppliers of valuable trademarks. When each NFL team licenses its intellectual property, it is not pursuing the “common interests of the whole” league but is instead pursuing interests of each “corporation itself,”. . . teams are acting as “separate economic actors pursuing separate economic interests,” and each team therefore is a potential “independent cente[r] of decisionmaking” [Citations omitted].

Therefore, the Court ruled that Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act applies to the NFL, and ruled that any unilateral decision made by the NFL that affect all the teams shall be viewed under the so-called “Rule of Reason” for antitrust purposes. Under the “Rule of Reason,” a lower court has to examine all of the circumstances to determine whether and to what degree the action is anticompetitive.

The win, while a big one for American Needle, doesn’t end the case. The lower court will now examine the case in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling.
web page

thanks. thought that one was still going on.

Here's some negative speculation to cheer everyone up . . .

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/41881898/ns/sports-nfl/

Which teams would be hurt most by lockout?
Colts, Packers would be OK, but Titans, Broncos, Browns won't be as lucky

By Gregg Rosenthal
NBCSports.com
updated 12:57 a.m. ET March 3, 2011

I lost hope in Indianapolis.

At the NFL Scouting Combine, those behind the scenes no longer questioned the NFL work stoppage. It was assumed, just part of the schedule. The only question left was how long and how painful the lockout would be.

(The average over/under for a new collective bargaining agreement: Let’s guess late August. The truth is no one has a clue.)

Publicly, NFL coaches and generals managers said things were business as usual.

“Whatever the rules are, there will be the same rules for 32 teams,” Chiefs G.M. Scott Pioli said.

That’s true, but not all 32 teams face the same challenges. Pioli’s Chiefs are relatively well situated to handle a summer off. Others aren’t so lucky. Let’s rank what teams will be hurt most by the lockout. (And what teams may actually benefit.)

1. Titans
Tennessee faces the trifecta of uncertainty: They have two new coordinators and absolutely no option to start at quarterback. (Uh, Rusty Smith??)

2. Broncos
This is the wrong offseason to break in a newbie football czar (John Elway) and a new defensive scheme under John Fox. Trading Kyle Orton could be nearly impossible, and Tim Tebow will miss valuable practice time.

3. Browns
Browns football czar Mike Holmgren will pay for delaying the end of the Eric Mangini era. Presumptive starting quarterback Colt McCoy won’t get to learn his new scheme and the defensive players don’t fit the team’s new 3-4 defense. With a first-time coach in Pat Shurmur, it’s like they are starting all over again.

4. Panthers
Notice a trend atop the rankings? Teams with new coaches are going to be at a big disadvantage if there’s a long lockout. The Panthers may be stuck with Jimmy Clausen as their Week 1 starter in a brand new offense.

5. Vikings
Promoting Leslie Frazier to coach should help the defense maintain continuity. Then again, the team has holes all over the roster and a potentially limited free agent period to address them. Finding a veteran quarterback will be difficult without being able to trade before the draft.

6. Seahawks
The Pete Carroll Program is entering Year Two, but how much progress was really made? Their quarterback position is actually more unsettled, and the team needs time to install a new offense. This is a team likely to continue a massive overhaul whenever a CBA is reached, so time is at a premium.

7. 49ers
Perhaps Jim Harbaugh has spoke so glowingly of Alex Smith this offseason because he knows he won’t have any better options. An abbreviated free agent period in August or September will lead to a lot of shotgun marriages. (And a high divorce rate next offseason.)

8. Dolphins
Miami would love to add pieces to their bankrupt offense, especially with new coordinator Brian Daboll. Instead, they could get stuck with another season of Chad Henne in a loaded AFC East.

9. Bengals
The best way to get value for Carson Palmer would be to trade him before the draft. That won’t be possible now, and it’s anyone’s guess what quarterback will run new coordinator Jay Gruden’s West Coast offense next year.

10. Cardinals
Pressing pause isn’t a great idea for a team with John Skelton as their best returning quarterback. Oh, and Arizona’s annually disappointing defense has yet another new coordinator.

11. Eagles
New coordinator Juan Castillo hasn’t coached defense since the 1980’s. He needs the offseason just as much as the players. Any team that is active in free agency like Philly could also get penalized this year. Speaking of which ...

12. Redskins
Without their annual offseason championship to win, what do the Redskins have? After one year of Mike Shanahan, the roster actually has more holes than when Jim Zorn was dumped.

13. Rams
Teams near the top of our list have a lot of young players with new coaches. St. Louis’ offense is extremely green at quarterback, receiver, and tackle. Post-lockout, they will have to take a crash course in Josh McDaniels’ playbook – one of the most complex in football.

14. Texans
It will be tough to Wade Phillips to install his 3-4 defense without practice time. The Texans have a lot of players like Mario Williams and Brian Cushing playing in very different roles. A bright side -- the offense has enough continuity and returning parts to survive a lockout just fine.

15. Bucs
The youngest team in the league needs as much time on the field together as possible.

16. Cowboys
Dallas brought in a new defense coordinator – Rob Ryan – but the scheme remains the same. Continuity is solid on offense, although that’s not necessarily a good thing with this aging offensive line.

17. Bills
Buffalo doesn’t rank too high because they have a returning coaching staff and they aren’t overly active in free agency. Still, a lockout could stall the progress of a potential incoming rookie quarterback.

18. Lions
Well, quarterback Matthew Stafford probably wouldn’t be healthy enough to practice much anyway. Detroit would like to be active in free agency, but a lockout wouldn’t be crushing for Jim Schwartz’s program.

19. Jets
Rex Ryan’s team has plenty of veterans that don’t need a lot of practice time. The tricky part here is the Jets have a lot of big free agent decisions and would love to pick up some veterans via trade and free agency. There will be no Santonio Holmes-type deals this time around for an annually active team.

20. Raiders
New coach Hue Jackson already ran much of the offense last offseason, so a transition shouldn’t be too rough. The Raiders lockout-proofed their roster by re-signing Richard Seymour, John Henderson, Stanford Routt and Kamerion Wimbley in February.

21. Bears
Jay Cutler and his young wideouts could use more time around Mad Mike Martz so they can figure out what he’s talking about.

22. Jaguars
You could make the argument a long lockout helps the young Jaguars a bit, if only because it hurts division rivals Tennessee and Houston.

23. Giants
The Giants own enviable continuity on offense and plenty of talent on defense. They aren’t a team that is afraid to spend in free agency, but a lockout wouldn’t hurt them much.

24. Falcons
Falcons G.M. Thomas Dimitroff and coach Mike Smith have been together longer than most of the NFC’s power tandems. That says a lot about job security in the league.

25. Ravens
Still searching for receivers after all these years. Baltimore may be prevented from making a splashy move like the Anquan Boldin trade, but their veteran roster should hold up well in a lockout.

26. Saints
Having a coach on the field like Drew Brees will be an advantage if there’s no actually coaching going this offseason. While they have a lot of free agents, New Orleans’ scheme continuity will help.

27. Chargers
Philip Rivers and his receivers should be able to hit the ground running. Ron Rivera’s absence could complicate things on defense, but it’s not like the Chargers can start any slower than they usually do.

28. Chiefs
Going back to Todd Haley as a de facto offensive coordinator should be a lot easier than bringing in a new guy.

29. Patriots
The weirder the rules are, the more that creative front offices should thrive. The Patriots and other quick-thinking teams can better adapt and sniff out market inefficiencies.

30. Steelers
Missing out on a free agent period won’t exactly be devastating for a draft-and-develop team like Pittsburgh. Perhaps more time off could actually help any Super Bowl runner up hangover.

31. Packers
We stacked the bottom of our list with the best front offices. Ted Thompson is going to stay the course no matter the league rules, and he has the ultimate trump card -- the most talented roster in the league.

32. Colts
It’s hard to imagine a team affected less by a lockout than the Colts. They could care less about free agency and their schemes haven’t changed in a decade. Their free agent class will be all their returning injured players.

© 2011 NBC Sports.com Reprints

Mr. Rosenthal can say what he wants but if McCoy doesnt have a playbook in his I'd be very surprised. By hook or crook that young man will have plenty of reading in his time off!

www.KFFL.com

NFL | League willing to freeze deadline
Thu, 03 Mar 2011 10:43:24 -0800

The NFL is discussing the idea of "stopping the clock" on the collective bargaining agreement negotiations in order to give the two sides more time to negotiate, according to NFL Network's Jason La Canfora. The league is also prepared to divulge more financial data. The players' union was prepared to decertify from the league Thursday, March 3, barring a last-minute breakthrough in talks.

Quote:

---

3. Browns
Browns football czar Mike Holmgren will pay for delaying the end of the Eric Mangini era. Presumptive starting quarterback Colt McCoy won’t get to learn his new scheme and the defensive players don’t fit the team’s new 3-4 defense. With a first-time coach in Pat Shurmur, it’s like they are starting all over again.

---

That's only if you really believe that the coaches and players won't talk during the lockout. I understand that's the rule, but I doubt it works that way in practice

These reporters don't bother doing their own homework. It's embarrassing. Although, I wouldn't expect every reporter to know what every team in the NFL is running for their defense.....but if you mention it in an article you're writing, you should probably bother to make sure you don't sound like an idiot.

If the union is delaying the decertification, that's good news. Hopefully they can get something done before that happens. Once they let that cat out of the bag, I don't think the process stops before we hit rock bottom.

I'd still bet my next mortgage payment we miss at least 3-4 regular season games.

Funny, I expect every NFL reporter to know every defense every other team runs. I couldn't imagine being a beat reporter for a team and having to google the Raiders to see what defense they ran if we traded for one of their players (as an example).

www.KFFL.com

NFL | Three QBs leading anti-trust action against league
Thu, 03 Mar 2011 12:53:39 -0800

New England Patriots QB Tom Brady, New Orleans Saints QB Drew Brees and Indianapolis Colts QB Peyton Manning have agreed to be plaintiffs in a pending anti-trust action if the union decertifies from the league, according to ESPN's Chris Mortensen.

Most fans that follow the league as closely as the die hards around sites like this are able to know what defense most every team in the league runs.... so one would think that someone who writes about it professionally - at a major news outlet no less - would at least pay equal attention.

Furthermore, the information is merely seconds away via Google.

It is simply pure laziness.

well, the link does say "2010 depth chart."

Linkage

The biggest losers in an NFL lockout? Everyone.

Cam Newton may have to wait a while for his NFL debut
By Daniel Roberts, reporterMarch 3, 2011: 4:33 PM ET


FORTUNE -- Shining NFL draft prospects like Cam Newton must be feeling a little neglected right about now. It's the time when buzz would normally be building to a fever pitch for new rookies, who have spent the past week strutting their stuff at the scouting combine in Indianapolis, in preparation for the draft in late April. Instead, all of football fandom is focused on the grim reaper of an impending lockout, as owners and players battle it out over contracts, money, and, let's face it: respect.

Today -- the expiration date for the league's current Collective Bargaining Agreement -- was to at last deliver an answer on the question that is the 2011-2012 NFL season. Though talks are ongoing, it's impossible to tell when, or whether, a deal might be reached. In other words, we may not have a resolution until the eleventh hour, late August, right before the season begins.

A ruling by U.S. District Judge David Doty in Minneapolis on Monday almost guaranteed that the wheels of progress would keep grinding slowly. Doty handed the players a major victory by ruling that the NFL's safeguard against a possible lockout -- which ensured $4 billion of TV money to the owners in the event of a stoppage -- violated the rights of the NFLPA, the players' labor union. "Today's ruling will have no effect on our efforts to negotiate a new, balanced labor agreement," the NFL insisted in a statement issued after the ruling. Sure.

Next up: a hearing to determine what reparations the NFL will now have to make to the NFLPA (in other words, where will that $4 billion go?), though the owners will almost certainly appeal. Meanwhile, the players have already voted to allow the union to decertify itself if labor chief DeMaurice Smith deems it necessary. That would nix the National Labor Relations Board's jurisdiction and allow the players to file an injunction preventing the owners from locking them out. Individual players could even sue owners, ensuring months of tedious legal wrangling.

All this could mean one thing: no NFL football games. Although a lockout had once seemed completely unthinkable, and though Doty's ruling makes it less likely (with no security trove to fall back on, the owners may be more inclined to bargain), a lockout of at least a few games is now very possible. Make no mistake: if this happens, almost everyone loses.

Rookies & endorsement deals

Newton and other hot prospects like A.J. Green and Mark Ingram are praying for resolution. "From an endorsement perspective," says Marc Ippolito of Burns Entertainment & Sports Marketing, "there's more at stake for you if you're looking for a deal or being considered. Companies are going to hold back, and won't want to spend money on a player if there's no season." This, Ippolito says, could apply to existing pros (think Michael Vick, who performed well enough that everyone expects him to get some new deals), but might apply most to big-name rookies that would be tasty bait for marketers.

"If you already have a current deal," Ippolito continues, "the marketer is fretting because they put money behind a talent, but with no season they obviously won't do much of an ad spend." Newton, for one, already sealed up a deal with Under Armour, the young company that did nearly $750 million in U.S. apparel sales in 2010. And Newton doesn't even have a team yet. The endorsement contract has been estimated at $1 million a year and CNBC's Darren Rovell has said it may be the largest deal ever given to an incoming rookie. "I can see Under Armour saying he's a big enough name that they can do ads around him regardless of the season," says Ippolito. "But if you're a top pick and expecting the usual offers, there might be a big hold back until we see a resolution." In other words, players are going to get nervous soon, and marketers already are.

Networks & advertisers

The last Super Bowl was not just the most watched ever; it was the best-rated television program of all time, according to Nielsen, with 163 million people tuning in. If there's no football, the networks lose you, the viewer. You tune into something else (like a reality show, or a sports league on another network) or abandon the tube entirely and head to the opera.

And if a lockout does happen, the networks have big chunks of time to fill with programming that, as Bob Dorfman of Baker Street Advertising points out, "will be nowhere near as valuable as football games." Ad time is bought in May, so what do advertisers do if the season goes away? They'll have to look elsewhere to spend their money, and it would probably be a far less appealing venue. It would probably be on other networks, Dorfman explains: "Maybe all the TV networks that don't have football contracts." Imagine seeing the biggest brands -- GM (GM), Anheuser-Busch InBev (BUD), Visa (V, Fortune 500), Ford (F, Fortune 500), and others you associate with football -- placing their priciest ads during How I Met Your Mother.

NFL teams: players & owners

Owners and players alike, though they're on opposite sides of the table, would suffer in some of the same ways if games get axed. Teams would be unable to hold training camp or any activities of any kind. They couldn't sign new guys. They couldn't make any personnel moves.

In addition, once the CBA expires, players will technically be unbound from league rules, so there is some concern that many could start violating NFL conduct standards or find themselves in trouble normally punishable with league fines or suspensions. Realistically, no one believes players are looting alcohol cabinets, but Dorfman does point out, "They could start doing ads for casinos, or for liquor. That may seem unlikely, but some players need the money."

The owners, led by the likes of New England's Bob Kraft and Dallas's Jerry Jones, feel they've had to spend too much on stadiums and increased costs. It's why they protected themselves with the $4 billion insurance chest that Judge Doty deemed unethical. The players, meanwhile (represented by NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith) have been getting nearly 60% of overall NFL revenues, which the owners feel is too high. An 18-game season, which Commissioner Roger Goodell and the owners have been pushing for, makes the revenue pot bigger so that players could go home happy even if their percentage share goes down. But two more games also means two more weeks of risk to their health. In light of rabid press about football concussions, it's two more games many players have said they don't want to put their bodies through.

Scott Boras, MLB super agent whose clients include A-Rod and Matt Holliday, is watching the negotiations with years of experience from similar strikes in baseball. "I think [the owners' $4 billion war chest] turned out to be a costly maneuver that eroded legally," he says. "It was a tactical mistake. And now time is operating against the owners, not the players. The players can go back to work in a matter of weeks. The owners have to have the TV contracts and the advertising and all of that in place long before the season begins."

Boras believes the owners could be causing damage to the league that will last beyond the coming season. "There comes a point in collective bargaining where things don't make sense, because what you're risking and what you're gaining is not worth it for the league."

Meanwhile, although many teams are privately financed cash cows -- most of them are valued around $1 billion -- quite a few had abysmal ticket sales the past couple seasons. Teams like the Detroit Lions (who went 0-16 in the 2008 season), Tampa Bay Bucs, and Oakland Raiders all had crushingly low attendance last season, in a league that expects sellouts every week. They need to rebuild, but instead, they face an off-season that could put them in direr straits.

Fans

This means you, red-blooded American football viewers, and don't underestimate your own role in this. No season means no fantasy football leagues -- that's less traffic to sports news web sites, and less money circulating via office pools (see: Was my sports bet legal?). It means no Sunday night (or Monday night) watching parties, which brings a hit on supermarkets, corner stores, and any other businesses that sell beer, M&Ms, chips and dip. And it means your workweek becomes a little drearier without the playoffs to look forward to, or team records to brag about at the water cooler.

Moreover, consumers of media will go hungry. Think of your favorite sports columnist in the local paper. If she's a pro football beat writer, expect a lot of stories about furloughed assisstant coaches. ESPN's SportsCenter loses, daily papers with strong sports sections lose, reporters and broadcast pundits lose, and readers lose. If things drag on, the appetite for strike news could gradually be overtaken by apathy towards the whole spectacle, and a long climb back into the public consciousness when games finally restart.

Boras points to this as a significant hit: "The value of Internet properties would be dramatically affected [by a lockout] because all the content available on Internet and cable that's associated with analysis, if that goes away you have a massive content void. The online and TV content has become part and parcel of the culture." Indeed, as the biggest fans know, watching a game is just half of the experience. Then there are columns to read the next day, videos to watch, and highlights to email, Facebook share, and tweet about.

Stadium cities & employees

Forget economic impact to cities that host a Super Bowl (hint: it's enormous and although estimates can vary wildly, this year's game brought at least $100 million to the Dallas area). It's regular home games that bring steady cash flow to the Foxboros, East Rutherfords, and Arlingtons of the football world. Eight home games means eight Sundays of fans filling up at nearby gas stations, buying hot dogs from street vendors, and going out to bars afterwards. There's big money spent before and after the game at apparel stores near the stadium, by people who need a jersey or hat.

Then there's the mega business inside the stadium. Food and drink vendors like Aramark (RMK) thrive not just from running food stands but also by catering luxury suites. With no season, that all goes away, and worst of all, so do four months of work for stadium employees. Jobs will be lost. Gil Brandt, who was vice president of player personnel for the Dallas Cowboys for almost 30 years, tells Fortune: "I went through two of these before when I was with the Cowboys, and the people you feel for are the ones we employ at training camp, or the ones with seasonal jobs that work in the refreshment stands. Those are people that don't stand to gain anything from these talks, all they do is lose."

The NFL generates somewhere around $10 billion in revenue each year. This is a league that knows how to squeeze money out of every corner possible, a league that let the Cowboys charge fans $200 last season to watch the game on a screen outside the stadium. Most players have pretty big financial cushions, and owners would survive as well (though they have more fiscal and operational burdens to deal with than players). It's stadium employees and the many small businesses in and around football stadiums who don't have the margins to lean back on.

Merchandisers

An obvious side effect of a lockout would be merchandise sales. Matt Powell of SportsOneSource says, "We could see declines in the 50% range," though it will depend on whether games are canceled for a month or for a whole season.

"People get really mad at the teams, you know," says Powell. "If they feel mad at the owners for locking the players out, they won't want to support them by buying jerseys. It's also important to remember a lot of people buy this merchandise because they're going to a game, or because the team is doing well."

Meanwhile, apparel sales were already on the decline before this drama. Powell estimates that U.S. NFL merchandise sales last year were $2.1 billion. In the 2009 season, that number was $2.5 billion. "It's gone down steadily, but every league has taken a bit of a hit due to the recession," says Powell. "Apparel is a discretionary purchase. If people are short on cash it's the first thing to go." Short on cash, or short on actual games to watch, either way it means jerseys stay on the rack.

Does anyone win?

The one market that might stand to benefit from a lockout -- though you can trust that they're hardly rooting for it -- could be college sports.

Dan Fulks, an accounting professor and athletics adviser at Transylvania University in Lexington, Kentucky, who conducted economic impact studies for the BCS, sees a lockout having a real effect on college football players. "Kids won't be quite as eager to leave school early and enter the draft," he predicts. Still, that hardly makes them total winners in this scenario. Take those who have already signed up for the draft for this coming season -- where do they go?

"These kids made a decision based on information they had, and they signed with agents, and now if there's a lockout they've got nowhere," says Fulks. "I wonder if the NCAA would give them some kind of relief, assuming they haven't already taken money. The fair thing to do would be to let the kids go back to play in college." Unlikely.

Still, with no NFL, viewers could quite plausibly turn to college -- that old standby for seeing "the purity of the game" -- for their football fix. During the MLB strike of 1994, fans rediscovered the minor leagues. And not just college football, but even pro sports could benefit. In winter months, in lieu of the NFL playoffs, the NBA might get the fan runoff. United Football League, anyone?

Boras acknowledges the potential benefit to the MLB. "The whole focus would move to the baseball postseason and to college football," he predicts. "And advertising dollars would float over to the MLB as well."

Ippolito agrees about advertisers looking to both pro baseball and college football, and the reason is a lack of uncertainty. "An advertiser making decisions might say, 'Hey, we know that season is happening at least.' There could be new sponsorship potential for college football as well." Dorfman jokes that all sorts of dark horse companies, like The Home Depot (HD, Fortune 500), could benefit, too. "Players [not to mention former football fans] might spend Sundays working on their houses."

But get real -- no one wants a lockout to happen. And it isn't just about the massive amount of money on the table here; people love football. Everyone is hoping the owners and players hold this truth above all others.

j/c

Extension reached for labor talks
EmailPrintComments
578
ESPN.com news services

Extension For Labor Talks
The NFL and NFLPA have agreed to a 24-hour extension to the expiration of the CBA
Tags: SportsCenter, Chris Mortensen, Andrew Brandt, NFLPA, CBA, David Doty
VIDEO PLAYLIST

Extension For Labor Talks
Benefit Of Decertification
President Obama Staying Out
Mike And Mike: Unionize The Fans
WASHINGTON -- America's favorite sport is still in business -- for another day.

The NFL and the players' union agreed Thursday to a 24-hour extension of the current collective bargaining agreement so that negotiations can continue.

Indianapolis Colts center Jeff Saturday, a member of the NFL Players Association's executive committee, told The Associated Press about the extension after the sides met for about eight hours before federal mediator George Cohen. The CBA was set to expire at midnight, which would likely have prompted the first work stoppage since 1987 for a league that rakes in $9 billion a year.

"We just know right now that we granted a 24-hour extension," Saturday said as he and Steelers quarterback Charlie Batch left the session.

Future Of The League
In a guest column, NFL rep Greg Aiello outlines the league's problems with the CBA and ways to fix the system as the game moves forward. Story

With the CBA expiring on March 3, NFLPA executive George Atallah breaks down how the players and the union view the crucial talks. Story

• NFL labor history since 1968
• Sando: 10 things to know
• NFL Labor: Topics page

Failing to make a deal could put the two sides on the road to a year without football, even though opening kickoff of the 2011 season is still six months away. The labor unrest comes as the NFL is at the height of its popularity, breaking records for TV ratings: This year's Super Bowl was the most-watched program in U.S. history.

Without a new CBA, the owners could lock out the players, and the union could decertify to try and prevent through the courts -- something the NFLPA did in 1989. It formed again in 1993.

Sources told ESPN the union was prepared to decertify Thursday. Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Peyton Manning and Logan Mankins have agreed to be name plaintiffs on the antitrust suit the players will file against the NFL if no labor agreement is reached and the union files for decertification, according to sources. There would be nine name plaintiffs on the lawsuit.

Commissioner Roger Goodell and the NFL's negotiating team arrived at a federal mediator's headquarters about 45 minutes ahead of NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith and his group.

"We're working hard," Goodell said.

Also on hand for the NFL were Pash, outside counsel Bob Batterman, New York Giants owner John Mara, Green Bay Packers president Mark Murphy, Washington Redskins general manager Bruce Allen and several other league executives. Mara and Murphy are members of the league's labor committee, which has the authority to call for a lockout if a new agreement isn't reached.

"We'll stay at it as long as it takes," Pash said.

They'll be staying at least into Friday, though a deal isn't done. Washington Redskins player rep Vonnie Holliday told the AP that the two sides are "still apart" on a pact to replace the current CBA.

"I don't see how we can be that close right now unless somebody is going to pull a rabbit out of the hat; I just don't see it," he said.

Since the 1987 players' strike that shortened the season to 15 games -- with three of those games featuring nonunion replacement players -- there has been labor peace in the NFL. The foundation of the current CBA was reached in 1993 by then-Commissioner Paul Tagliabue and union chief Gene Upshaw.

It has been extended five times as revenues soared, the league expanded to 32 profitable teams, and new stadiums were built across America to house them.

The contract extension reached in 2006 was the final major act for Tagliabue, who then retired, succeeded by Goodell. An opt-out clause for each side was included in that deal, and the owners exercised it in May 2008 -- three months before Upshaw died.

Smith replaced Upshaw in March 2009.

Joining Smith at the mediation session Thursday were union president Kevin Mawae, New Orleans Saints quarterback Drew Brees, Saturday, and about a dozen others, including current and former players.

The biggest sticking point all along has been how to divide the league's revenues, including what cut team owners should get up front to help cover certain costs, such as stadium construction. Under the old deal, owners received about $1 billion off the top. They entered these negotiations seeking to add another $1 billion to that.

Among the other significant topics: a rookie wage scale; the owners' push to expand the regular season from 16 games to 18 while reducing the preseason by two games; and benefits for retired players.

Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.

Maybe some good news?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6177293

j/c

Are you the kind of person who loves hearing the bug zapper?

Who likes it when the highway paves over a few neighborhoods? Who secretly wants the tank to flatten the kid with the flower?

Then you're going to love the NFL owners in this mess.

It's hard to find anybody to like in this coming distraction known as the NFL lockout. But look closely. Yes, some of the players are millionaires. But half of the owners are billionaires.

Their estimated combined net worth is well over $40 billion, which is more than the GNP of 150 nations. Paul Allen, owner of the Seattle Seahawks, has a 414-foot yacht called "The Octopus" with two helicopters, two submarines, a swimming pool, a music studio and a basketball court. He also has two backup emergency yachts.

You're really worried about his wallet?

Yes, many of the players are diamond-coated knuckleheads. But have you ever met Washington Redskins owner Daniel Snyder? He's worth $1.1 billion and yet, two years ago, the Redskins sued a 73-year-old grandmother for not keeping up on her season-ticket package payments.

This man also got caught buying stale peanuts from a defunct airline and reselling them at games.

For the owners to lock out the players at this time in American history is unconscionable. You don't like the players? Fine. There are still nearly 9 percent of Americans out of work. Think of the people who've lost their homes, lost their cars and can barely pay the rent. Watching an NFL game on a Sunday -- and getting ready for it all week -- is sometimes literally the only thing keeping them going.

Do you realize what having no NFL season would do to the economy? According to the NFLPA, it's estimated it would cost each NFL city $160 million and 3,000 jobs. That's 93,000 jobs nationwide. For what? Another Aspen chalet?

Question: In 10 years, do you think you're going to find New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft wandering the streets because of the 200-plus concussions he didn't know he had from his time in the NFL? You figure Detroit Lions owner William Clay Ford will end up with ringing in the ears and depression the way former Patriots linebacker Ted Johnson did? Within the past year alone, two former players killed themselves.

You recall any NFL owners killing themselves lately?

The players aren't asking for more money. They deserve what they get, and they get it for an average of only three years. The Bidwills have owned the Cardinals for 79 years. The Rooneys have owned the Steelers for 78 years. Nine NFL owners inherited their teams. There's no easier path to permanent hot-and-cold running jets than your dad handing you an NFL team.

On the other hand, nobody hands NFL players anything but a chinstrap. With what we know about the dangers to brains now, would you exchange jobs with an NFL player?

This isn't baseball. These guys go to a job every day in which safety is Job 1,379.

The people asking for more money are the owners. They want $1 billion more out of the deal they have now.

They say they're losing money. But if you were losing money and were asking for $1 billion back, wouldn't you slap some proof down on the table? The owners are more secretive with their books than KFC is with its recipe.

Take our word for it and just fork over the billion. Oh, and play two more games for free. Thanks.

In this, the greediest and most shameful era in American business history, the NFL owners would steal the cake. No set of sports owners in U.S. history has known this kind of popularity, love or cash. If there is a lockout, the day the 2012 season starts, every fan ought to pelt the owners' luxury boxes with pennies.

Jeffrey Lurie, owner of the Philadelphia Eagles, owns an 18-bedroom estate with a three-hole golf course, two-lane bowling alley, two-story recreation center and indoor tennis court. He's really going to lock players out? For what, his own ski hill?

Stan Kroenke, owner of the St. Louis Rams, owns four homes, four ranches and three vineyards. He once ordered his employees to destroy $3 million in wine because he didn't think it was up to his standards. His wife is a Wal-Mart heiress.

Are you really fretting about his future?

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said the other day that the owners need this money to build new stadiums. And who profits from new stadiums? The owners. A new stadium doesn't make the team any better. The seat under your butt isn't any bigger. But a new stadium, usually built with vats of your tax dollars, funnels millions more per game into an owner's pocket via luxury boxes, concessions and advertising. That's money that isn't shared 32 ways. What Goodell is saying is, "We need that billion so my owners can buy new Bentleys. Theirs are dusty."

Locking out the players now would be unjust, unfair and as indefensible as Al Davis' wardrobe. There is so much to go around, it's obscene. A billion back? These guys have that in cash.

Malcolm Glazer, owner of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, once bought a $14 million Palm Beach mansion and never moved into it. He later sold it for $24 million.

Bud Adams, owner of the Tennessee Titans, has 10,000 head of cattle.

Jennifer Lopez, part owner of the Miami Dolphins, has offered to auction off her twins' clothes because they're not allowed to "repeat" outfits.

When's the telethon?

link

Although none of that is particularly untrue, its a little out of context. The owners OWN the League. It's thier business. I don't think they owe the players an explaination.

I do however feel that if they want peace and harmony, they better show good faith when negotiating with the players.. thus far, I don't think they are doing that.

They are trying to play hardball and in the end, all they will do is destroy the goose that lays golden eggs..

JMO

Yeah, I see where you're coming from.

The owners' big argument is they need more money, but they don't want to show proof. Now, do they HAVE to? I'm not sure they HAVE to, but it certainly doesn't help with the "good faith" argument.

While it is true that the owners are wealthy, Allen didn't buy his yachts or his homes with the money he made owning a professional football team... just as most of the other owners achieved their great wealth, THEN bought a football team.

These guys are businessmen, they are not stupid... if I'm making $100,000,000 in my lawfirm or my high tech business then great, if I own a football team that is breaking even them I'm going to fight to make it profitable, I'm not going to subsidize it with money from my other successful business (Not saying football teams are actually losing money, just making a point)...

If my football team employs 200 people, then I need to run it like a business and pay those 200 people what they are worth, and I want some left over for myself since the risk, should something go wrong, is all mine.

I'm not totally on the side of the owners, I think both sides need to give but this seems like an obvious attempt to create class warfare between two already very wealthy groups of people......

j/c

The NFL and the NFL Players Association have mutually agreed to a seven-day extension of their talks toward a new collective bargaining agreement, and the two sides will resume labor negotiations on Monday under the continued supervision of federal mediator George Cohen, sources said Friday.

An announcement is expected shortly ,with clarification as to whether the new CBA deadline is next Friday or Monday, March 14.

Under the terms of a "tolling agreement," the league's 32 teams still will be prohibited from conducting or executing player transactions. It is the same agreement that was reached via a 24-hour extension of talks Thursday.

link

Is there any possible reason why they can't continue to negotiate through the weekend instead of waiting until Monday?

Hey, they have 7 more days! Why push things!!

I want them to work out a deal, but I agree with what PPE said earlier. You have a deadline. Stick to it.

or they extended the deadline as a PR way of saying that they tried everything before finally "needing" that lockout.

I like your view better

I like the way you look at it. But, as I'm sure you know, sometimes that deadline is the only thing pushing the two sides to make a compromise.

If you can just keep backing up the deadline, where's the impetus to really compromise?

Thanks for the update 79

That's kind of a biased article really. Who cares how much the owners have? Is the owners wealth from the team, or from other businesses they own or are involved with.

It sounds like envy. The "you have more than me, and that's not fair" attitude.

Should we post an article about the players wealth in relation to my lack of wealth?

The guys that go buy $100,000 cars, have 2 or three homes, wear $10,000 worth of jewelry, toss money around like they're going to be employed forever, etc? In relation to me, that's craziness.

I would imagine no owner became a billionaire because of the team he owns - he either inherited the money/team or he was successful in other ventures that allowed him to make his wealth. Good for him.

I do know that players became millionaires because of the game they played - of their own choosing. Some have done well for themselves playing AND after playing, some have squandered their money. Should the equipment managers sue the nflpa because they don't get a big enough cut of the pay the players make?

I think the issue is that the owners are saying "we need the money." The players are saying "before we say yes, prove you need more money."

Kind of a "if you don't have anything to hide, then you shouldn't hide anything."

realistically, if they were that close where they are in the stage of ironing out the contract language, then I would suspect that we would be hearing about it. so, I think they are a bit further than that step.

however, I don't want to discourage the optimism too much because I really want them to get this deal done and it's nice to hear some people are still holding out hope for it.

I agree. I like the optimism.

I guess I'm just thinking, if they only had 1 or 2 things they were close on, why didn't they get close on them sooner? Like I said, deadlines are good things to push you closer. If you can just extend the deadline, then what's driving you to compromise?

If I know that the deadline is Thursday night at 11:59, I'm not going to wait until Thursday night at 11:50 to start making a compromise. But, if I know I can just keep backing up the deadline, then I'm not going to compromise as quickly.

In the end, I just want a deal done that's going to avert game cancellation. If it means they extend the deadlines a couple times, so be it. I'd rather have that than no deal until September or later.

one thing I'm curious about is how trades are affected by the extension. can teams still trade players for draft picks now or for other players? i've read a bunch of different FAQs from various writers and noone seems to hit on that particular angle.