• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

NFLPA Has Screwed us again

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
possibility based on an internal email that the nflpa won't be voting now till monday at the earliest, good job schmucks.
 
1) An agreement was reached as to the settlement of the Brady et al lawsuit.
2) That settlement requires the approval of 23 owners and all 10 named plaintiffs.
3) It was alleged that, at the last minute, two of the named plaintiffs attempted to finagle a lifetime exemption from the franchise tag in exchange for their approval of the settlement.
4) Those two alleged plaintiffs were Manning and Brees.
5) It was alleged that, at the last minute, two of the named plaintiffs attempted to finagle a lifetime exemption from the franchise tag or lump sum payments of $10,000,000 each in exchange for their approval of the settlement.
6) Those two alleged plaintiffs were Mankins and Jackson.
7) After the allegations in 3 and 5 were uncovered Manning, Brees, and Mankins stated they were false.
8) After the settlement is agreed to, the players will need to vote to reform the union.
9) Once the union is reformed the settlement can be accepted as the new CBA.
10) The owners have stated that they will not end the lockout until the union is re-formed and the CBA is signed because if they end the lockout when the settlement is finalized but before the union is re-formed they risk a new antitrust and collusion lawsuit.
11) The players allege that once the settlement is signed it will take at a minimum two weeks to send union ballots by mail and have them returned.
12) The owners game specific instructions to the players on how they legally can re-form the union using electronic signatures in a little as 24 hours.
13) The owners ratified the settlement 31-0-1 with the Raiders abstaining and sent it to the players.
14) The players alleged that the owners tried to change the terms of the settlement without discussion.
15) The players alleged that the owners were "rushing" the players and being condescending by telling them "they have to" re-form the union and "how to do it".
16) The players received the ratified settlement from the owners on July 21 and will not take action until at least July 25.
17) Unnamed sources indicate that plaintiff Jackson still refuses to sign the settlement unless he gets $10,000,000 or a lifetime exemption from the franchise tag.

Those are the facts. You can believe that the players are unnecessarily delaying things and demanding perks that hinder the process. You can believe that the owners tried to pull a fast one and never should have opted out in the first place.
 
Not trying to appear to side with one side or the other, but what "pull a fast one" did the owners try? I still have difficulty defining/discerning what the fast one was......
 
nycxandy said:
See #s 14 and 15 in sactoking's post.
Click to expand...

except that #14 was debunked once people got to look at the actual document and now look like idiots for screaming about it. and #15 is just them thorwing a tantrum after the owners went charlie brown on their collective asses so now everyone can see that they are in fact the current problem.
 
Having worked in a union most of my life, this is where you have to follow the union negotiators' lead. Negotiators are in the real hot seat here. They walk out of the room with a firm grasp of what they negotiated and they realize they are going to have to sell the rank and file on what they went along with. They have a vested interest to see the rank and file ratify otherwise they lose their standing with the rank and file as someone who is a capable negotiator and not someone who'll sell them out.

For negotiators to come out and say WTFBBQ this isn't what we agreed on is pretty unprecedented and can lead to charges of not negotiating in good faith.
 
Last edited:
lupi said:
except that #14 was debunked once people got to look at the actual document and now look like idiots for screaming about it. and #15 is just them thorwing a tantrum after the owners went charlie brown on their collective asses so now everyone can see that they are in fact the current problem.
Click to expand...

There may still be something to #14. According to ProFootballTalk.com, which reportedly has a copy of the agreement as of Wednesday night and has spoken to people who know the agreement signed Thursday, there were some changes. Now, there is the real possibility that the players are exaggerating the severity of the changes, but they appear to be undisclosed changes nonetheless.

Alleged changes:
1) Pay for catastrophic injury was reportedly agreed at $3,000,000 and the owners deal reduces it to $500,000.
2) Roster size was to be increased to 47 from the current 45. Owners deal was signed at 46.
There may be other changes but I have to go now.
 
OP, considering how much of a little whiny bitch you've been this entire thread, I hope these negotiations drag on as long as possible so that you miss your fix to the point of pain.
 
sactoking said:
There may still be something to #14. According to ProFootballTalk.com, which reportedly has a copy of the agreement as of Wednesday night and has spoken to people who know the agreement signed Thursday, there were some changes. Now, there is the real possibility that the players are exaggerating the severity of the changes, but they appear to be undisclosed changes nonetheless.

Alleged changes:
1) Pay for catastrophic injury was reportedly agreed at $3,000,000 and the owners deal reduces it to $500,000.
2) Roster size was to be increased to 47 from the current 45. Owners deal was signed at 46.
There may be other changes but I have to go now.
Click to expand...

probably depends on how you read the language, but did find this:

One other rule the two sides have agreed on for the coming season: NFL gameday rosters would expand from 45 to 46 players, with the No. 3 quarterback no longer counting as an inactive player, a league source told ESPN's Schefter.





and also you have things like this:

Also, under the agreement approved Thursday by NFL owners, minimum player salaries would increase by $55,000 over 2010 numbers, a league source told ESPN's Andrew Brandt. The source said first-year players will make a minimum $375,000 and second-year players a minimum $450,000. Approximately 900 of the league's players earn minimum salaries.



So 900 of the 1900 members are minimum salary types, and they are getting a massive bump up, but let's not sign a deal because of one guy

One issue that continues to loom is how to handle San Diego Chargers receiver Vincent Jackson, one of the 10 named plaintiffs in the players' antitrust lawsuit against the NFL, a source told ESPN's Schefter.

The source said Jackson has stuck to his demands, despite his public denials that he wants $10 million or no franchise tag for life. With the tag this season, Jackson would earn $11.4 million this year.

Jackson has not personally made those demands but people close to him have, the source said. It is possible Jackson would continue suing the NFL after the other plaintiffs, including Mankins, Tom Brady and Peyton Manning, withdraw their lawsuit as part of the overall settlement with the league.



so for all those twitter thumb fools out there, it's not hard for the owners to make you look bad when you yourselves are doing this type of stuff.
 
Deeko said:
Meh. If its a stunt, its a necessary one. There should be pressure on the players to sign, because they should sign it, and they're just being assholes at this point.
Click to expand...

How are they being assholes about it? Why should they sign right away? So you can watch THEM play?
 
Wow you guys take this shit really serious. Bunch of couch athletes arguing over something that doesn't involve them, lol
 
IAteYourMother said:
How are they being assholes about it? Why should they sign right away? So you can watch THEM play?
Click to expand...

They have been assholes through the entire process and continue to do so now. And cut the crap with your last line. You make them sound like altruistic entertainers, doing this out of the goodness of their hearts for me. They are millionaires for playing a sport because I am willing to watch, not the other way around.
 
Deeko said:
They have been assholes through the entire process and continue to do so now. And cut the crap with your last line. You make them sound like altruistic entertainers, doing this out of the goodness of their hearts for me. They are millionaires for playing a sport because I am willing to watch, not the other way around.
Click to expand...

Ok, they're negotiating, and how does that make them assholes again? Pray tell? Don't watch football if they bother you this much, but honestly, I'm not quite sure why you're so bothered. Yes, you are a customer, but they are working and have every right to fight for their own interests. Honestly why not complain about the owners who locked the players out because they wanted to skim another 1 billion dollars off the top of revenue and fail to account for player safety?
 
IAteYourMother said:
Ok, they're negotiating, and how does that make them assholes again? Pray tell? Don't watch football if they bother you this much, but honestly, I'm not quite sure why you're so bothered. Yes, you are a customer, but they are working and have every right to fight for their own interests. Honestly why not complain about the owners who locked the players out because they wanted to skim another 1 billion dollars off the top of revenue and fail to account for player safety?
Click to expand...

I covered my thoughts on the issue in depth 4 months ago: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2149114

On top of that, the players are assholes because they're pathetically unprofessional. After a round of negotiations, does Jerry Jones or Robert Kraft get on Twitter and start insulting the players personally? Does Roger Goodell say he won't piss on fire to put out James Harrison? No. Yet the players do all of these things and more.

Regardless of which side of the dispute you're on, its simply undeniable that the players have held themselves in a terribly unprofessional manner throughout, and many of them have been assholes or worse.
 
Deeko said:
I covered my thoughts on the issue in depth 4 months ago: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2149114

On top of that, the players are assholes because they're pathetically unprofessional. After a round of negotiations, does Jerry Jones or Robert Kraft get on Twitter and start insulting the players personally? Does Roger Goodell say he won't piss on fire to put out James Harrison? No. Yet the players do all of these things and more.

Regardless of which side of the dispute you're on, its simply undeniable that the players have held themselves in a terribly unprofessional manner throughout, and many of them have been assholes or worse.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are right, there are more poorly mannered players than owners... but I guess I thought you meant as negotiators.

So while your post on the issue that you linked suggests that the issue is balanced, your posts in this thread place the fault on the players. In fact, you use the fact that the players are millionaires as your reasoning for why you shouldn't care about them, even though the very post you linked to me suggests that we shouldn't be biased against the owners for being billionaires.

So again, I ask, why should the players sign the proposed CBA immediately without reading it, especially if the owners have added in changes that haven't been agreed upon by the players' side? If this really is a business and the owners have every right to maximize profits, then why shouldn't the players respond likewise?
 
Its easy to make someone's argument look incorrect when you take their points out of context and twist their words to mean other things. Your replies to me are quite disingenuous, and as such there is no point in discussing this with you, so this will be my last reply to you.

The players know what is in the agreement. They are stalling for the sake of stalling at this point. It does not take five days to read an agreement that you spent 4 months building. Not to mention the public attitudes so many of them have displayed this week. They're being assholes, plain and simple. Have a good night.
 
Deeko said:
Its easy to make someone's argument look incorrect when you take their points out of context and twist their words to mean other things. Your replies to me are quite disingenuous, and as such there is no point in discussing this with you, so this will be my last reply to you.

The players know what is in the agreement. They are stalling for the sake of stalling at this point. It does not take five days to read an agreement that you spent 4 months building. Not to mention the public attitudes so many of them have displayed this week. They're being assholes, plain and simple. Have a good night.
Click to expand...

What was your argument again? That the players should sign right away? And you can't accept that there might be reasons for not signing right away other than just being assholes?


u-mad1.jpg
 
and when the owners voted 2 days ago, and the players have said nothing will happend till monday at the earliest, what's your excuse for them doing jack and shit about it till then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top