NFL Owners, Players Begin 'Fact Finding' Mission Regarding CBA

by TheSportsGuru on May 13, 2008 6:20 AM MDT in Headlines

Quietly, somewhat too quietly, the NFLPA and Owners sat down last week to begin looking at a new Collective Bargaining Agreement. In NFLPA Chief Gene Upshaw's weekly 100 Wordson the NFLPA website, the embattled Union Head had this to say about the proceedings --

We met with NFL negotiators last Thursday in New York. Attendees included owners Jerry Richardson and Pat Bowlen, the League’s financial team and its new outside attorney, Bob Batterman. The NFL discussed the 32 teams’ financial condition and how the CBA has caused every club to lose money. They are attempting to gather financial information to share with the NFLPA. We made it clear that we are willing to discuss their financial condition, but we cannot expect our players to embrace the NFL’s position without the owners providing audited financial statements. This is just the first step in the process.

As many of you know, Broncos Owner Pat Bowlen is an imporant part of this process, being the League's point-man in negiations with the Players' Union. Many have wondered if the virtual belt tightening within the Broncos was in direct correllation to the impending labor unrest. The team has denied the fact, but one has to seriously wonder if the man charged with proving to the Union can effectively do that if his team isn't showing signs of fiscal prudence.

On the flip-side, it is easy to get a read on Gene Upshaw's stance. The guy is fighting for his job, and with Kevin Mawae, the NFLPA President, saying no change in leadership would be made while there is CBA unrest, it is safe to say Upshaw will let these negotiations rattle on as long as possible. Something to keep your eyes on to be sure.

1 recs | Comment 33 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

It will most likely be Al Davis to the rescue......once again......

Look, Al has always been a players owner, and he is the only man in the NFL that has the experience and the knowhow at the head coaching position, the commissioner position, and the owners position, as he has been all three in his Hall of Fame career. Thus, Al has a unique position above the fray. Along with his experience, and in many cases because of it, Al has allies on all sides of the argument, owners and players. Just like is the last labor agreement, it is my bet that if the crap hits the fan, it will be Al Davis that brings folks together to work something out. He was able to make both sides give concessions last time, and it made it so both sides got something, and both sides lost something too. There has to be reciprocity in the negotiation process, and Al will most likely be the one folks look to, to try and make peace if it comes down to it. Keep in mind that Al is great friends with Jerry “money bags” Jones, and that went a long way towards bringing the sides together last time.

OakFoSho

S&BP > Mile High Mules ............ Like Sharks? http://mvn.com/nhl-sharks/

by 0akFoSho on May 13, 2008 7:49 AM MDT 0 recs

Before anybody tries to

bring down Al Davis, since we do have certain …preclusion… towards him in our thoughts, it should be noted that he DID/IS having a hall of fame career (not that h.o.f. means anything to us). Newer fans might not be truly aware about how knowledgeable and influential Davis was, and to those who do, he definitely seems like a shell of his former self. Anyone that has trouble imagining this (or blanches at the thought of it) just frame Davis as a Darth Vader, or Godfather type character.

Having said that, my personal thoughts on Al Davis are simply that I probably would have done it differently, but there is no debating his production via the methods he chose.

But I have to wonder if he will want to occupy the role you are talking about oakfosho. The faster the league goes along, the slower it seems like Al Davis is getting, and I don’t think it is has as much to do with infirmity as it does with what I might call ‘disgust’ with the league. Disgust isn’t really the word I am looking for here, since Davis was part of making it what it has become. Davis looks to me like a guy that no longer cares what the league does with itself, like someone who raises their kid as best as they can, teaches them and helps them as well as they know how, but the kid still wants to be a prostitute or druggie, despite years of efforts to help them.

I guess I am saying that Davis and the league have two different ideas about how to get this all done, and so I am doubtful that he would want to help do anything but throw dirt on them at this point.

On the other hand, if the money he is sinking into the team this year is any indication, he may feel that he should help keep things together just so his “Final Hurrah” team isn’t jeapordized by labor unrest… I suppose it could go either way, but I wouldn’t blame him at all if his frustration with the league and the other owners drove him to abstain from contributing to the negotiations.

Mountains, forest, sea: these render man fierce, but yet do not destroy the man.

by styg50 on May 13, 2008 8:11 AM MDT up 0 recs

What you say could actually be true......Check this out....

http://www.ibabuzz.com/raidersblog/2008/03/27/can-davis-save-labor-peace-again/

“When the NFL owners convene Monday in Palm Beach, Fla., the labor agreement Davis helped broker along with former commissioner Paul Tagliabue will be an imposing backdrop. Judging from some of the saber rattling among some of the owners, Davis may have a hard time selling the agreement a second time.

There’s the possibility Davis may not attend at all. As he said in March of 2006 at the meeting which resulted in an extension of the collective bargaining agreement, "The whole idea was that no one was totally dissatisfied. We had to have labor peace. That’s why I came all the way here. I don’t make many of these trips anymore."

Owners can terminate that agreement this November, creating two more years of salary cap football before going to an uncapped year in 2010. Union boss Gene Upshaw is convinced they will, and it could lead to a lockout in 2011.

Tagliabue leaned heavily on Davis’ counsel for the extension, crediting him publicly for helping soothe what appeared to be a stalemate. Not long afterward, Tagliabue appointed Davis to the eight-man selection committee to determine the new commissioner.

When Roger Goodell was elevated to the position, Davis told USA Today, "His loyalty and passion and love for the game have always come through."”

I don’t think Al wants to be put in the middle again either, but being a small market owner, he needs the CBA and shared revenue. Also, I think that if it really gets bad as far as negotiations are concerned, folks on both sides will have nowhere else to turn, especially if he stays out of the way and above the initial fray. He will yet again be looked to as a mediator and negotiator, and for the leagues sake, and his legacy’s sake, Al will probably come to the rescue.

OakFoSho

S&BP > Mile High Mules ............ Like Sharks? http://mvn.com/nhl-sharks/

by 0akFoSho on May 13, 2008 8:33 AM MDT up 0 recs

Here's the problem...

Al, along with other “small market” owners will cry they are losing money, but at the same time spend 100’s of millions on free agents this off-season. If you were the players union what would you think.

I’m not singling out Davis by any stretch, he’s not alone, but how can he look Jerry Jones or Dan Snyder in the face and say the deal is unfair while spending all that jack? Unless, of course, he isn’t going to go the way of Ralph Wilson and Mike Brown, the only two dissenters of the original agreement.

-TSG

www.milehighreport.com

by TheSportsGuru on May 13, 2008 8:57 AM MDT up 0 recs

Add in..

...the fact that Al has turned on the League so many times, it makes you wonder what his real intentions are.

Consider this. One team right now faces the Salary Cap Hell scenario (and it happens to be the raiders). It may be coincidental, but Al goes on a spending spree in FA and cuts already good players (with real cap value) without seeming to be concerned. And to top it off…

He’s also involved in the CBA proceedings.

If the NFL faces a strike year, or is forced to close out the players defensively, Al doesn’t have to pay for the salary cap trouble his team should face in a couple of years and beyond. It is in his team’s best interest to spend like mad, make cuts that have cap penalties, and then fight like hell to make sure that the League doesn’t prevail in the talks.

Far fetched? An upstart league (the USFL) tries to sue the NFL for antitrust, and guess who endorses the USFL position and offers to testify for them. Add in some of the lawsuits he’s filed against the NFL (see one of my comments about his suits here), and one can reasonably worry about his real intentions.

It isn’t a stretch to think that what is bad for the League is good for the raiders when it comes to the CBA, particularly when it comes to the salary cap.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on May 13, 2008 10:07 PM MDT up 0 recs

You will recall the USFL won that case.....

and Davis was right to do what he did, as he ended up on the right side of justice in that case.

It can be argued both ways. On the one hand, Al needs the revenue from the other owners as he is small market. On the other hand he wants the deal to fail because then his signing spree will be uncapped in a few years and he can cut dead weight if necessary with limited penalty.

In my opinion, there are negatives and positives on both sides for Al. However, if there is one outcome that can serve to bolster Al legacy. If a new agreement is ratified, yet again due to the efforts of Al Davis bringing the two sides together, the Al wins in more than one way. He still get to receive $$$$ via revenue sharing, and he is hailed yet again as a great negotiator and mediator that can elevate above the fray for the good of all parties involved. If their is one thing Al cares about, its his legacy, and what better way to go out than as savior, and hopefully SB champion in the next couple years. I cant think of any better way, can you?

OakFoSho

S&BP > Mile High Mules ............ Like Sharks? http://mvn.com/nhl-sharks/

by 0akFoSho on May 13, 2008 11:07 PM MDT up 0 recs

I will never refute what Al has done in the past

what I see now though is a guy who is in one way or another taking his team slowly to the bottom of the barrel which bugs me because I grew up on the Broncos raiders rivalry that was so heated because they were always COMPETING for Division or playoff spots and then since the Pirate Bowl nothing has gone right for oakland. I think davis needs to understand it is time to let other take control in areas. The saying goes absolute power corrupts absolutely!

Davis to the Hall!

by Jon Tollerud on May 13, 2008 11:13 PM MDT up 0 recs

Don't judge a book by its cover..........

Also, the SB loss to the Bucs was not the turning point for the Raiders, the injury to Rich Gannon the next season was. I have stated this before, but I will restate it for you here. The Raiders were 4-2 and on their way to victory in Baltimore when Gannon was injured in 2003. The Raiders would have made the playoffs and had another shot that season, but when you take the MVP of the league away from a team, they will plummet down the standings for a long time. Imagine taking away Peyton Manning from the Colts. THe Raiders were a veteran squad put together for one last run in 2003, and once Gannon suffered the career ending neck injury, it was all downhill.

Problem is you cant start a rebuild in the middle of the season, so there goes 2003. Rebuilds take 2-3 years in the NFL, so that explains 2004, 2005, and 2006. Last season the Raiders changed the culture of losing and brought in Kiff. The Raiders were in all but 3 games in the fourth quarter, and led in half of those before losing it late in the game. (See Raiders at Donkeys, 2007) It is true that the Shell year was a waste and the turnaround could have happened about a season earlier, but that did not happen. Moving forward, the Raiders have added a bunch of talent (yes, some of it may be risky, but not all) and cut loose the dead weight.

I think this season will prove Al still has what it takes. Still, Al is not the reason for the collapse in 2003, rather the unfortunate neck injury to Gannon, league MVP and real leader of the Raiders, Callahan was a bust as a coach (in college too!). Al can be blamed for the Shell hire, and the lost 2006 season, but after reviewing the realities of losing the MVP, I think its clear to see that 2003, 2004, and 2005 were a loss the second Gannon went down to injury.

OakFoSho

S&BP > Mile High Mules ............ Like Sharks? http://mvn.com/nhl-sharks/

by 0akFoSho on May 14, 2008 1:23 AM MDT up 0 recs

I can agree and disagree a little bit here

I do think Gannon was key to the downslide. Still What I saw over the time was Al refusing to give people the control they needed within their own job to do it effectively. It seemed to this military man that he was taking his soldiers M-16 giving him a 9mm and sending him up against an RPG! That was just insane, I as an NCO would never send my boys in under equipped. The whole thing with Kiffin (and I like him as a coach) is that most of us see Al cutting his legs out from under him like he has done to numerous others. I agree with HT, I want competition in this division and sometimes I wonder if Al does as well.

Until Terrell Davis makes it into the Hall of Fame, I refuse to acknowledge the existence of such a place other than the Ring of Fame at Mile High!

Davis to the Hall!

by Jon Tollerud on May 14, 2008 1:57 AM MDT up 0 recs

I for one hope it doesn't happen.......

but Kiff may just get the Ax. Its just Al’s way. If Kiff does not produce at least an 8-8 season this year, then Al will fire him. I do not buy into all the rumors about the resignation letter and such, especially since most of that rumor was debunked by all parties involved. Ryan asked to be let go, Kiff relayed the info, and Al was probably pissed. However, Al was able to bring Rob back, and all parties are in harmony going into the season. Its what Kiff does with that season that will count. Al is all about results. You know…..Just Win Baby? Thats the idea this year. Get it done or get out, especially after Lane flirted with Arkansas and other jobs. He was a fool for doing that. I mean here is Al Davis, going against all convention, to give you a job as a HC in the NFL, without you having gone through the steps normally required. That breeds a bit of resentment around the NFL among coaches that feel he was not worthy. For Kiff to then go behind Al’s back and flirt with a college job? Well, I can understand why Al was pissed.

OakFoSho

S&BP > Mile High Mules ............ Like Sharks? http://mvn.com/nhl-sharks/

by 0akFoSho on May 14, 2008 2:07 AM MDT up 0 recs

OFS

heres to hoping we have some competition this season. Personally I wouldnt mind a DE or six of yours Killing Phyllis “Cry Me A” Rivers. If youre DE’s and our DE’s kill him I woudl be happy.

Until Terrell Davis makes it into the Hall of Fame, I refuse to acknowledge the existence of such a place other than the Ring of Fame at Mile High!

Davis to the Hall!

by Jon Tollerud on May 14, 2008 2:19 AM MDT up 0 recs

Oh......

I hate that loud mouth little ass!! At least we can agree on that. Kid needs to shut him mouth and let his play, or rather the play of the real leader of that team, LT, do the talking. Though I also dislike Cutler, as he is a Donkey, I at least can respect his abilities. Rivers on the other hand, well lets just say, hes due…...

OakFoSho

S&BP > Mile High Mules ............ Like Sharks? http://mvn.com/nhl-sharks/

by 0akFoSho on May 14, 2008 2:51 AM MDT up 0 recs

By due.....

I mean a beating….

OakFoSho

S&BP > Mile High Mules ............ Like Sharks? http://mvn.com/nhl-sharks/

by 0akFoSho on May 14, 2008 2:52 AM MDT up 0 recs

I couldn't agree more.

Rivers is due for a serious thumping. I don’t care who does it, so long as I get to watch the highlights.

MHR's Bronco History

by Zappa on May 14, 2008 8:56 AM MDT up 0 recs

I gotta throw in with you on that one OakFoSho

Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of our own mind. - Emerson

by firstfan on May 15, 2008 11:28 PM MDT up 0 recs

That's incorrect.

With respect, it was the NFL that prevailed in the case, not the USFL. Here’s the full story.

The amount the USFL could sue for was $567 mil, and the amount could triple to $1.7 bil under antitrust law.

The USFL lost most of the decisions related to the case, which led to the demise of the USFL. In fact, the ruling (that most media “experts” called a victory) was appealed by the USFL, not the NFL.

The court did find the League guilty of being a monopoly (and a money award went to the USFL, and you’ll laugh when we get to it). But the jury (it was a jury case), also ruled that the USFL was acting in a predatory manner by trying to force the NFL into a merger with the case.

The court also found that the USFL was not being targeted by “behind the scenes” deals with the networks”, and that the USFL had brought up this charge with malicious intent as well.

The jury awarded the USFL only one dollar. Under the rules of anti-trust, the amount now tripled to $3. The USFL only ended up with 3.76 (the extra amount from interest accrued during the appeals). The check remains in the hands of the lower court, having never been cashed.

The decision was so damaging to the USFL that they immediatly shut down operations, and players were released from their contracts.

The USFL tried to appeal to the 2nd circuit of the US Court of appeals, but lost there as well. However, since they prevailed on the prime motion and were the “injured” party (even though they only won $3), they were found to be entitled to attorney’s fees of $5.5 millions dollars. It went to the attorneys, the USFL got none of it. The USFL did get a token award – reimbursement for $62,000 in courts costs.

The USFL was in shatters, and out of operation. Now the NFL decided to rub salt in the wounds. They sued to prevent the USFL from collecting the tiny $62,000 amount. Both the appeals court and later the US Supreme Court (in 1990) found in favor of the USFL (just on if they could have the small court fee money back). The USFL won that decision, but had already ceased to exist.

In the end the USFL won one of the decisions in the suit, and lost several others. Their lawyers got paid, but the team ended up with nothing monetarily and the USFL was destroyed.

Bottom line – I still haven’t heard a reason why I would want Al Davis on my side, especially in a court room.

(Some trivia – Howard Cosell also testfied on behalf of the USFL. Also, Donald Trump was the witness that most damaged the case, when it was discovered that he was trying to bully the NFL into a merger with his USFL team, The Generals).

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on May 14, 2008 9:26 AM MDT up 0 recs

I only briefly have ever heard of the USFL

being born in 84

Until Terrell Davis makes it into the Hall of Fame, I refuse to acknowledge the existence of such a place other than the Ring of Fame at Mile High!

Davis to the Hall!

by Jon Tollerud on May 14, 2008 10:05 AM MDT up 0 recs

Don't feel bad.

I was born decades before, and I hardly heard of them either. LOL

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on May 14, 2008 10:36 AM MDT up 0 recs

Well that gives me a bit of relief

I still have tons to learn about American football but if you read my little Bio on my fan page (or whatever its called) there is no way I will NOT be a Denver Bronco Fan ever!

Until Terrell Davis makes it into the Hall of Fame, I refuse to acknowledge the existence of such a place other than the Ring of Fame at Mile High!

Davis to the Hall!

by Jon Tollerud on May 14, 2008 11:21 AM MDT up 0 recs

Ahh yes........

but a win is a win, right? I mean, technically, the USFL won the case, and BSPN actually did a nice program on the USFL and the whole ordeal a year or two ago. The former USFL guys actually kept the check they got for that tiny amount. Some guy keeps it in his office desk. I forget his name, but it was pretty funny in the show. Hilarious I tell you, but a monopoly is a monopoly.

OakFoSho

S&BP > Mile High Mules ............ Like Sharks? http://mvn.com/nhl-sharks/

by 0akFoSho on May 14, 2008 11:25 AM MDT up 0 recs

It's hard to claim the monopoly tag

when there just isnt a market for a second league. The AFL actually has to run AFTER the super bowl is played so they dont lose viewers. the ones tha do watch AFL are so desperate for Football action they are only seconds from watchign a CFL game. The market for a second big League just isnt there so litigation of this sort is pointless to me. It reminds me of the lady suing McDonald’s because her coffee was hot and they didnt tell her…ITS FRIGGIN COFFEE!

Until Terrell Davis makes it into the Hall of Fame, I refuse to acknowledge the existence of such a place other than the Ring of Fame at Mile High!

Davis to the Hall!

by Jon Tollerud on May 14, 2008 11:59 AM MDT up 0 recs

Actually...

The infamous “Hot Coffee” verdict was correct. Here were some of the facts:

The lady who was burned was in the passenger seat of a car, and the car had come to a complete stop (so as to allow the lady to add cream.) She had the coffee between her legs as she opened the cream packet…but when the top of the cup popped off, coffee spilled on to her inner legs, causing severe burns.

This wasn’t the first time such an incident had occured, however. McDonalds has been “buying off” a growing list of other burn victims from their coffee. Turns out, they were serving it at temperatures between 170 adn 180 degrees under the assumption (however bad, especially with sip-cup lids) that people bought the coffee to drink at home/work, by which time it should cool to a more consumable 140 degrees. But people buy coffee to drink right away, and the 170-180 range is FAR too hot to consume.

So, the case wasn’t just “hot coffee is hot, and the lady is stupid for trying to drink while driving.” It was that McDonalds was serving coffee at a dangerous and unnecessary temperature.

~Uffdah

by Disco_Stu on May 14, 2008 12:08 PM MDT up 0 recs

Link for more info

HERE

~Uffdah

by Disco_Stu on May 14, 2008 12:11 PM MDT up 0 recs

Its just crazy

hot coffee will burn I never knew that

Until Terrell Davis makes it into the Hall of Fame, I refuse to acknowledge the existence of such a place other than the Ring of Fame at Mile High!

Davis to the Hall!

by Jon Tollerud on May 14, 2008 12:33 PM MDT up 0 recs

Well

Coffee at a reasonable drinking temperature won’t burn; it may be uncomfortable, but it shouldn’t require surgery and skin grafts. This isn’t a case of people saying, “ouch, I burned my tongue, I think I’ll sue!”

I think the big issue is this: McDonalds knew that they were serving coffee too hot. They had over 700 reports of people get burned between 1982 and 1992, and instead of saying “okay, let’s turn it down just a bit”, they kept buying people off. IMO, that is irresponsible and arrogant.

~Uffdah

by Disco_Stu on May 14, 2008 12:41 PM MDT up 0 recs

Hey no arguments here

All I am saying is it was a little out there. I mean lets sue whoever we can is the mentality now. Starbucks gave me carpule tunnel so I need to sue them. I mean it just get so trumpeed up. The coffee may have been to hot but going after more than the surgery and what not cost is greedy.

Until Terrell Davis makes it into the Hall of Fame, I refuse to acknowledge the existence of such a place other than the Ring of Fame at Mile High!

Davis to the Hall!

by Jon Tollerud on May 14, 2008 12:49 PM MDT up 0 recs

Oh, Yeah

I’m with you on most of the stupid lawsuits. Look up the one about the former judge who tried to take a local cleaners…er, well, to the cleaners. THAT one is horrible!

I think the coffee one sticks with me for some reason; probably just the extent to which it is misinterpreted. However, with the number of really BAD lawsuits (including the case of a guy who bought a milk shake form McDonalds, spilled it on his lap, got in to an accident, and tried to sue McDonalds…he failed) make it easy to write this one off as a horrible miscarriage of justice.

And I’ll stop hijacking this thread now. :o)

~Uffdah

by Disco_Stu on May 14, 2008 1:11 PM MDT up 0 recs

Boy

You really got ole’ Stu going on that coffee issue!

Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of our own mind. - Emerson

by firstfan on May 15, 2008 11:35 PM MDT up 0 recs

well you never know

how that could turn into football…um…somewhere…okay I cant think of anything

Until Terrell Davis makes it into the Hall of Fame, I refuse to acknowledge the existence of such a place other than the Ring of Fame at Mile High!

Davis to the Hall!

by Jon Tollerud on May 16, 2008 2:26 AM MDT up 0 recs

Yeah...I got excited

Much unnecessary non-football related stuff there.

lol And I don’t even like coffee!

~Uffdah

by Disco_Stu on May 16, 2008 8:50 AM MDT up 0 recs

I wouldn't call it a win.

They won on one of three decisions at the lower court, and the jury (and the judge who let the decision stand) were so digusted with the malicuousness of the USFL side (that side included Davis), that they only awarded the dollar.

The result was that the USFL lost more money than they made on the suit. They also lost their business. Had they stayed out of court, they might have still had a viable league. Instead, they used false testimony and false evidence. The one ruling (of three) that they DID prevail on was technical. Of course the NFL is a monopoly. It is also appropriately a monoploy. That the feds have done nothing to act on the ruling, and the dollar amount, shows that the prime ruling was not made with any force of conviction.

At BEST the “victory was pyrrhic. In my book, when you lose money, lose your business, are found to be acting malicousy by a court, lose two of the three rulings at the original court, then appeal all the way to the SCOTUS and lose, I call that a total defeat. Maybe Davis is defing vistory in court the way he defines it on the football field? (friendly jab).

The main reason I wouldn’t say they “won” is that if the rulings were to he liking of the USFL, they wouldn’t have appealed. Taken with the other points, and I believe Davis picked the wrong horse. Badly.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by hoosierteacher on May 15, 2008 9:22 AM MDT up 0 recs

You are wrong.

Al Davis has screwed more players over than he has helped. Al Davis even ruined Dickey’s career and life by screwin’ with his head. He then screwed over Marcus Allen. Davis is nothing more than a senile old man.

MHR's Bronco History

by Zappa on May 13, 2008 9:05 AM MDT up 0 recs