Goodell Speaks...

One of many experimental iterations ...

Boone

GM
Staff member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
40,488
Reaction score
1,544
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia





Dear NFL Fan,

When I wrote to you last on behalf of the NFL, we promised you that we would work tirelessly to find a collectively bargained solution to our differences with the players' union. Subsequent to that letter to you, we agreed that the fastest way to a fair agreement was for everyone to work together through a mediation process. For the last three weeks I have personally attended every session of mediation, which is a process our clubs sincerely believe in.

Unfortunately, I have to tell you that earlier today the players' union walked away from mediation and collective bargaining and has initiated litigation against the clubs. In an effort to get a fair agreement now, our clubs offered a deal today that was, among other things, designed to have no adverse financial impact on veteran players in the early years, and would have met the players’ financial demands in the latter years of the agreement.

The proposal we made included an offer to narrow the player compensation gap that existed in the negotiations by splitting the difference; guarantee a reallocation of savings from first-round rookies to veterans and retirees without negatively affecting compensation for rounds 2-7; no compensation reduction for veterans; implement new year-round health and safety rules; retain the current 16-4 season format for at least two years with any subsequent changes subject to the approval of the league and union; and establish a new legacy fund for retired players ($82 million contributed by the owners over the next two years).

It was a deal that offered compromise, and would have ensured the well-being of our players and guaranteed the long-term future for the fans of the great game we all love so much. It was a deal where everyone would prosper.

We remain committed to collective bargaining and the federal mediation process until an agreement is reached, and call on the union to return to negotiations immediately. NFL players, clubs, and fans want an agreement. The only place it can be reached is at the bargaining table.

While we are disappointed with the union's actions, we remain steadfastly committed to reaching an agreement that serves the best interest of NFL players, clubs and fans, and thank you for your continued support of our League. First and foremost it is your passion for the game that drives us all, and we will not lose sight of this as we continue to work for a deal that works for everyone.


Yours,
Roger Goodell
 

Boone

GM
Staff member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
40,488
Reaction score
1,544
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia

I take no pleasure in being right. This was inevitable, and likely to get uglier in the near future. You don't walk away unless you know the only option you have is to battle it out in the courts.
 

Elephant

The Commissioner
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
24,810
Reaction score
453
Points
1,113

Florida State

After their strike, I am unlikely to ever return to watching baseball. Just this season I have watched my first hockey game since before their strike. I just can't see myself not watching football anymore but if there is no NFL season next year, it will take a long time to get over it.
 

Burgundy Burner

Coaching Staff
Staff member
Joined
Oct 1, 2009
Messages
23,983
Reaction score
309
Points
1,113
Location
Memphis, TN

Virginia

After looking at PFT and what the owners offered specifically, I hope the players lose...

everything.

I mean it.

Who wouldn't want to have those kind of benefits for ANY job?
 

Goaldeje

The Legend
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
18,376
Reaction score
41
Points
328
Location
Waynesboro, VA

James Madison

Two sides, BB. The offer looks good, but it is Goodell's job to put the best possible spin on his side, which he has done well. The owners would be wise to keep quiet and let him do the talking from now on. The bottom line is the owners were trying to take away $1B to start with, and were unwilling to open their books to prove financial hardship. Seems to me their cries of hardship ian age of unprecedented growth and success is a bit disingenuous, particularly if they are unwilling to prove it.

We would all like those benefits, sure. But we also would hate to have our salary cut during a time when our respective companies were growing and dominating the industry. And if we could collectively bargain our position, good on us.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device
 

Boone

GM
Staff member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
40,488
Reaction score
1,544
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia

That's all well and good Goal. But I also have to point out that this isn't marriage. NFL owners are OWNERS. They OWN the business. Players are employees, not equal partners. The fact that players would like to be equal partners is irrelevant. Of course they will argue that, without their talents, the NFL couldn't thrive or even exist. And that is true. Without heart surgeons, bypass surgery couldn't occur - but that doesn't give those physicians the right to determine how hospitals operate their businesses.

It looks to me, at least at surface glance, that the owners came a long way towards responding to many of the players requests here and were still rebuffed.
 

Goaldeje

The Legend
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
18,376
Reaction score
41
Points
328
Location
Waynesboro, VA

James Madison

That's all I'm saying, Boone. I'm not arguing that they should be on equal footing with the owners. Only that things may not be as they first appear. On the surface, the owners proposal does look good, but that's because it is Goodell's job to make them look good. And he did his job well in this case.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device
 

Boone

GM
Staff member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
40,488
Reaction score
1,544
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia

Well - you are correct that the owners are much more ideally suited to 'frame' the discussion and to put their overall spin on things as they evolve. But you can bet we'll be hearing plenty of the players perspective in coming days.
 

Henry

Coaching Staff
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
9,820
Reaction score
151
Points
219
Location
Fairfax, VA


Pointing fingers doesn't put games on the schedule.

Is there going to be football or not? That's the only question I want answered.

If the answer is 'no', well, then the NFL, players and owners, better hope I don't get used to life without them. And that's all I have to say about that.
 

servumtuum

The Owner's Favorite
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Messages
7,138
Reaction score
0
Points
116
Location
Raleigh, NC

Indiana

Pointing fingers doesn't put games on the schedule.

Is there going to be football or not? That's the only question I want answered.

If the answer is 'no', well, then the NFL, players and owners, better hope I don't get used to life without them. And that's all I have to say about that.
+1

Total agreement, Henry. I'm being selfish I guess but I want football no matter who has to give up what or if it's seen as fair or equitable to whoever. I'm not really pleased with either side right at the moment but find the "blame-flingfing" non-productive and essentially pointless.
 

Boone

GM
Staff member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
40,488
Reaction score
1,544
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia

Give me a break guys :)

Not much point in having a discussion forum if all we care about is watching games.

Let the finger-pointing begin!!!!!!!!
 

Elephant

The Commissioner
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
24,810
Reaction score
453
Points
1,113

Florida State

I have a question for you more savvy types. Now that the union has de-certified, once their is a collective bargaining agreement in place, do these unions re-certify? It all seems like a crock of **** to me.
 

Boone

GM
Staff member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
40,488
Reaction score
1,544
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia

Don't know, but that's a great question. You know with 'normal' unions, there is a whole process during which a certain portion of the potential union members have to vote in favor of unionization - and there are mandatory waiting periods as part of that. I guess the NFL is a bit of a unique situation though, since it's not exactly an open question as to whether players would *want* a union or not, it's a foregone conclusion.

The interesting thing would be, if this lockout were to go on for more than a year, and ultimately many players were to blame their own union reps for that lockout, whether the players might decide that having a players union wasn't in their best interests long term?
 

servumtuum

The Owner's Favorite
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Messages
7,138
Reaction score
0
Points
116
Location
Raleigh, NC

Indiana

The interesting thing would be, if this lockout were to go on for more than a year, and ultimately many players were to blame their own union reps for that lockout, whether the players might decide that having a players union wasn't in their best interests long term?
I'm going to be somewhat of a contrarian and swim aginst the ideological tide and say I think that would be a tactical error. Frankly, I do not trust the owners enough to give them carte blanche. The Dan Snyders and Jerry Jones and a few others would be like foxes in the henhouse. Would they put the players in as much of a disadvantageous position as possible for as long a term as possible? My instincts say yes. The way the NFLPA handled the situation wasn't really very well done-but not having some type of organized way to thwart a collusion of NFL owners is absolutely mandatory in my view.

Gordon Gecko is too much a "hero figure" in our culture.
 

Ax

The Ugly American
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
15,000
Reaction score
257
Points
363

****'em.

Bring back the replacement players. They'd appreciate just having a goddamn job.

These players CHOSE their profession. Most would never make a fraction of what they do now, in the real world. Stop ****in' whining, and be glad you can make millions playing a GAME. Use your ****in' brains. Save and invest your money. Plan ahead for life after football, and move along. It's absurd for employees to determine how much their employers can make. Don't like it? Find another job.

The owners will be rich, with or without football. Can't change that.
 

fansince62

The All-Time Great
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
16,349
Reaction score
156
Points
343


I take no pleasure in being right. This was inevitable, and likely to get uglier in the near future. You don't walk away unless you know the only option you have is to battle it out in the courts.
there's a lot of talk that was Demerius Smith's plan fro Day 1.
 

fansince62

The All-Time Great
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
16,349
Reaction score
156
Points
343


****'em.

Bring back the replacement players. They'd appreciate just having a goddamn job.

These players CHOSE their profession. Most would never make a fraction of what they do now, in the real world. Stop ****in' whining, and be glad you can make millions playing a GAME. Use your ****in' brains. Save and invest your money. Plan ahead for life after football, and move along. It's absurd for employees to determine how much their employers can make. Don't like it? Find another job.

The owners will be rich, with or without football. Can't change that.
leaning toward your pov Ax.
 

SkinsOrlando

Searching for the 6 fingered man
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
1,845
Reaction score
81
Points
48
Location
Orlando, FL

Kent State

Slightly surprised no poll to see whose siding with the owners, players or overall isn't picking sides just get a deal done.
 

fansince62

The All-Time Great
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
16,349
Reaction score
156
Points
343


Two sides, BB. The offer looks good, but it is Goodell's job to put the best possible spin on his side, which he has done well. The owners would be wise to keep quiet and let him do the talking from now on. The bottom line is the owners were trying to take away $1B to start with, and were unwilling to open their books to prove financial hardship. Seems to me their cries of hardship ian age of unprecedented growth and success is a bit disingenuous, particularly if they are unwilling to prove it.

We would all like those benefits, sure. But we also would hate to have our salary cut during a time when our respective companies were growing and dominating the industry. And if we could collectively bargain our position, good on us.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device
1) Why should ownership opens its books to employees.....you know of any private companies where that happens?

2) Hardship? No. Revenues have leveled off the last two years.

You know my position: let the underpaid Peyton Mannings and Tom Brady's file lawsuits. And let owners stop pool funding that supports the players. Also, force the Unions to accept more of the risk (e.g., stadia) if they want more of the gross revenues.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Private conversations
Help Users
    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Chat 0
    Top