Breaking News Broncos WR Wes Welker suspended four games for use of amphetamines. ×

Ice Shower Puts Lockout End In Jeopardy


UPDATE 2:  According to PFT, the supplemental revenue sharing deal that the owners approved is a 1o year deal between the owners.  Meaning the owners have agreed to a system that will share revenue around the league.  This is NOT something that the NFLPA had any concerns on or were part of in terms of negotiations because it wasn’t something they needed or wanted to be a part of.  The owners have been working for almost 4 years to come up with an acceptable revenue sharing program.  Tonight they did.

UPDATE:  The latest from ESPN and others is that there never was a finalized CBA for the owners to vote on, instead, according to these sources, the NFL owners voted on the current proposal to the players.  The players still claim to have at least three issues that need to be worked out.  Currently, players are reportedly NOT going to vote yes on the owners “proposal”.  Others are saying that Roger Goodell lied about a deal being agreed upon between him and DeMaurice Smith.  This is not good news for the NFL season ahead.

Just as many fans were ready to roll with the news that the lockout is lifted and players can report to facilities on Saturday, comes more news that DeMaurice Smith and his brood of plaintiffs have thrown an ice bath on the positive vibe. In a nutshell, the players are pissed at the owners for voting to ratify a deal that they themselves have yet to vote on.

The players were supposed to vote on this deal yesterday, they were supposed to vote on this deal today. They have known for a week that the owners would be meeting today to vote on the same deal. The owners did, the players did not, and now they are pissed off that they were not the ones standing up to the cameras declaring victory.

According to multiple reports, the players are being advised, for now, not to report to team facilities until they can figure out a course of action. The NFL has given the players until Tuesday to ratify the deal and re-certify the union or the lockout is back on and the league year will be in jeopardy.

At the core of the issue are statements from an unnamed member of the plaintiffs team VIA Email to members of the player reps and an Email from DeMaurice Smith VIA Email that there are still unresolved conflicts that have not been agreed upon and despite the fact that Roger Goodell has said the two sides have agreed upon a revenue sharing program, that, according to Smith, is not the case.

Smith, Jeffery Kessler, and a few unnamed players are upset over the way the league voted and concluded on their own that a deal was done. Roger Goodell for the most part according to the tone of the Emails, ‘assumed’ a deal was completed that really wasn’t. The players now feel that they owners are trying a power play move to get the players to vote on something they are not completely sold on. They feel the owners decision to do this was to publicly pressure the players into making this deal.

You can read the excerpts from the Emails after the jump.

While it’s still likely that a deal gets done and likely within the next week, something like this could easily trigger a standoff that suddenly takes a close conclusion into a league wide shutdown that in turn gets battled out in the courtrooms. This isn’t over yet.

These excerpts are from Profootballtalk.com

From an unnamed source within the NFLPA team:

“[The settlement] gives the players only three days–Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday of next week–to try to bargain any changes to the old CBA.  Any such changes would have to be agreed to by the owners in order to be incorporated into the Agreement, which would then become final on Saturday, July 30.  If the NFL does not agree to the players’ proposed changes, the old CBA terms on benefits, discipline, safety, etc. will remain unchanged for another ten years,” the email reads.

“In addition to depriving the players of the time needed to consider forming a union and making needed changes to the old Agreement, this proposed procedure would in my view also violate federal labor laws.   Those laws prohibit employers from coercing their employees into forming a union, and could result in any Agreement reached through the procedure being declared null and void,” the email finishes.

From DeMaurice Smith:

“As you know the Owners have ratified their proposal to settle our differences,” the e-mail states.  “It is my understanding they are forwarding it to us.  As you may have heard, they apparently approved a supplemental revenue sharing proposal.  Obviously, we have not been a part of those discussions.  As you know from yesterday, issues that need to be collectively bargained remain open other issues such as workers compensation, economic issues and end of deal terms remain unresolved.  There is no agreement between the NFL and the Players at this time.  I look forward to our call tonight.”

Dick's Sporting Goods presents "Hell Week":

Tags: NFL NFL Lockout NFLPA

  • Pingback: Players Not Happy With Owners’ Vote; Could This Power Play by the Owners Put the Season in Jeopardy? « BuffaLowDown | A Buffalo Bills Blog

  • corners

    “the players are pissed at the owners for voting to ratify a deal that they themselves have yet to vote on”

    So it is about who gets to go first in line. Wow! Why am i not surprised.

    • Brian Miller

      That’s my issue Corners. The Players had this in front of them on Wednesday and did not vote. They had it Thursday and did not vote. Last Friday it was announced that each team should send 4 execs to Atlanta so when the owners voted Thursday they could get the teams up to date. So why are the players so surprised that the league voted on this? I really believe this is nothing more than I have said over and over again. The players wanted the impression that the league accepted their deal and not that the players accepted the owners. They simply wanted to be first and they blew it.

  • massanuttenref

    The NFLPA seems upset that the League is forcing the timetable for them to recertify as a union. Well, it seems to me that you have to have a union for a Collective Bargaining Agreement to be made with by owners/management. What am I missing here about the word “collective”?

    So …. we wait and we wonder?