8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues

[SBXVII]

Interesting:
NFLLabor.com If it’s a history lesson you want… «

NFLLabor.com FACT CHECK: DeMaurice Smith at the University of Virginia’s Darden School of Business «

^

FACT: The NFL publicly released its proposal to the players on March 11. We offered to show the union five years (2005-2009) of year-by-year league-wide operating profits based on audited club reports reviewed and confirmed by Deloitte & Touche. We offered to show the union the number of clubs that had declines in operating profits from 2005-2009, and by how much on a cumulative basis, again based on audited financial statements. We offered the NFLPA the ability to review Deloitte’s work. We also offered to give five years (2005-2009) of audited individual club financial statements to a third-party accounting firm to verify for the union the profitability data provided to the union. And there were no conditions put on the information offered, meaning that they could have asked for more. But the union’s concern was giving up its public relations position. As linebacker Hunter Hillenmeyer wrote in an NBC Chicago blog post on April 1, “It’s true, the NFL did offer some financial info towards the end of mediation. We rejected it, not because nothing is better than something, which it is not, but because the perception would then be that we got what we needed.”

[SBXVII]

Whats with the lies? Is it a strategy for court?

NFLLabor.com FACT CHECK: The NFL is not suing anybody «

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

About time this happened...

"RT @judybattista NFL coaches association filed amicus brief in support of players, asking 8th Circuit to affirm injunction and lift lockout."

I'm curious how the owners will fell about this.

Interesting note in this article that Kubiak and Del Rio have apparently been given ultimatums to make the playoffs. I mean, we've all speculated it but never really had an inclination that it was official

NFL Coaches Association brief: 'End the lockout' - CBSSports.com

In other related news: One team (maybe the only team) whose coaches chose to side with the owners and not associated themselves with the amicus brief was the Redskins

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Interesting note in this article that Kubiak and Del Rio have apparently been given ultimatums to make the playoffs. I mean, we've all speculated it but never really had an inclination that it was official

NFL Coaches Association brief: 'End the lockout' - CBSSports.com

In other related news: One team (maybe the only team) whose coaches chose to side with the owners and not associated themselves with the amicus brief was the Redskins

Ironically, we are one of the teams that is significantly affected by the lockout. If there is a season next year, I wonder if the owners will take this lockout in consideration as they decide to fire coaches of teams that haven't performed well.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Interesting note in this article that Kubiak and Del Rio have apparently been given ultimatums to make the playoffs. I mean, we've all speculated it but never really had an inclination that it was official

NFL Coaches Association brief: 'End the lockout' - CBSSports.com

In other related news: One team (maybe the only team) whose coaches chose to side with the owners and not associated themselves with the amicus brief was the Redskins

I understand that it's more important now than before for the owners to do everything they can to conserve money, but if you have to make an ultimatum to your head coach to make the playoffs or lose his job, he probably shouldn't start the season as coach.

[SmootSmack]

NFL.com news: 'Skins coaches say their views not reflected in NFLCA brief

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

NFL.com news: 'Skins coaches say their views not reflected in NFLCA brief

...all the coaches or just Mike? My guess Mike's salary is guaranteed regardless of lockout or not.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

...all the coaches or just Mike? My guess Mike's salary is guaranteed regardless of lockout or not.

All the coaches but Mike

[Son Of Man]

The coaches are making a sound business decision...aligning themselves with the man who signs the checks. Distancing themselves from the NFLCA filing while at the same time being vague enough to not alienate the players.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Son Of Man

The coaches are making a sound business decision...aligning themselves with the man who signs the checks. Distancing themselves from the NFLCA filing while at the same time being vague enough to not alienate the players.

How many of those guys are actually getting paid during the lockout? If I were a position coach not getting paid, I'd side with the NFLCA.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Son Of Man

The coaches are making a sound business decision...aligning themselves with the man who signs the checks. Distancing themselves from the NFLCA filing while at the same time being vague enough to not alienate the players.

I don't get how "not getting paid" is a sound business decision. Not to mention that coaches are measured on the performance of the players, which is being hindered by this lockout. Like I said, I'm curious how trigger happy will owners be about firing coaches, given that this lockout is a huge negative for team performance next season (if there is one).

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

How many of those guys are actually getting paid during the lockout? If I were a position coach not getting paid, I'd side with the NFLCA.

My guess is that DS is paying them tho'. I haven't heard anything that says the Skins have furloughed or reduced any pay. I think if we actually miss games then maybe, but like the Skins coaches said, people need to work it out and get back to football.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

NC_Skins, without getting into it too far, since 2 big guys here are sick of it :cheeky-sm

if the owners hadn't opted out, we would be at this same place just 2 years later. Opting out was legal and in the spirit of the CBA. Leaving bargaining 6 hours early to disclaim interest and avoid the constructs written into the CBA in case it expires. I see a difference if you don't nothing I say will change it.

One other point, and I think this is fair, but also certainly speculative. Shortly after the owners opted out, Gene Upshaw died, and the whole system got thrown into a bit of a chaotic state for a while, and by the time it resolved both sides were set in their strategies. Had he not been taken away as he was, even if he retired, perhaps the transitions and plans may have been more steadied. The owners couldn't un-opt out to give more time to DSmith et al to get some ground under their feet and get a feel for NFL labor relations.

Oh well, we are where we are, and all sides are pretty unyielding (IMO)

You and Mr. Brees seem to agree about Upshaw

Saints QB Drew Brees explains players side in NFL labor issue - Jim Trotter - SI.com

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

You and Mr. Brees seem to agree about Upshaw

Saints QB Drew Brees explains players side in NFL labor issue - Jim Trotter - SI.com

I think we agree his death impacted these negotiations, I don't think I believe his take on it.
Also surprised me how negative the comments were towards him and his sentiment.

[SmootSmack]

Well, many say none of this would have happened if Upshaw didn't know that Tags was going to retire during the last negotiation. They say Upshaw knew that Tags was planning to announce his retirement and he (Tagliabue) didn't want his legacy to be his tenure ended with a lockout/strike so Upshaw got Tags and the owners to agree to things they normally wouldn't have otherwise.