IBJNews

NFL, players face expiration of labor contract

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

With the NFL on the brink of its first work stoppage in nearly a quarter of a century, Commissioner Roger Goodell and union head DeMaurice Smith met at a federal mediator's office Friday, the day the league's twice-extended labor contract was set to expire.

Goodell was joined by nine of the 10 members of the owners' labor committee, along with various league executives and lawyers. Smith walked over from the NFL Players Association's nearby headquarters with about 20 people, including New Orleans Saints quarterback Drew Brees and several other current or former players.

Friday was the 16th day of negotiations since Feb. 18. The collective bargaining agreement originally was scheduled to run out last week; another extension was possible.

"We're going to head inside today, try to get some work done," Smith said.

Said lead NFL negotiator Jeff Pash: "We'll do our best."

But with little apparent progress on key economic issues — how to divide more than $9 billion in annual revenues, and the union's demand for full financial data — and a public series of back-and-forth barbs Thursday night, there was a chance talks would break off.

That could lead to the union dissolving itself, meaning players would give up their rights under labor law and instead pursue antitrust cases in court, and the owners could impose a lockout. Both actions could threaten the 2011 season of a sport at the height of its popularity. The past two Super Bowls are the two most-watched programs in U.S. television history.

The NFL hasn't lost games to a work stoppage since 1987, when a strike shortened the season and some games included non-union replacement players.

The current CBA was agreed to in 2006. It included an opt-out clause for each side, and the owners exercised it in May 2008.

There have been various issues discussed during the current negotiations, including the owners' push to increase the regular season from 16 games to 18; a rookie wage scale; and benefits for retired players.

Truly, though, the dispute centers on money: how to divide the billions in revenues, how much of that should go to owners off the top to cover certain costs, and the union's insistence on what it calls "financial transparency."

Under the old CBA, owners received an immediate $1 billion to go toward operating expenses before splitting remaining revenues with players. Owners initially tried to add another $1 billion to that. Although they have lowered the upfront figure they want — at least down to an additional $800 million — Smith said it is still too much.

"To our fans - I give you my word that we as players are doing everything we can to negotiate with the NFL towards a fair deal," Brees wrote on his Twitter feed Friday morning.

He continued: "The NFL brought this fight to us - they want $1 billion back, we just want financial information to back up that request."

And more: "We have a responsibility to our players - past, present, and future, to advance this league forward, not take 3 steps back."

The labor committee members present Thursday and Friday were Jerry Richardson of the Panthers, Pat Bowlen of the Broncos, Jerry Jones of the Cowboys, John Mara of the Giants, Art Rooney II of the Steelers, Clark Hunt of the Chiefs, Mark Murphy of the Packers, Dean Spanos of the Chargers and Mike Brown of the Bengals. Eagles president Joe Banner and Redskins general manager Bruce Allen also were there both days.

The only missing member of the key league group was Patriots owner Robert Kraft, who is part of a delegation visiting Israel with Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick.

On Thursday, the union complained that none of the owners met with any of the players on hand.

The rhetoric rose as the clock ticked down Thursday night.

"I've said it many times: If both sides have an equal commitment to getting this deal done, it will get done," he said. "I don't know if both sides have an equal commitment. ... Obviously, we have the commitment."

When that was relayed to NFL Players Association spokesman George Atallah, he responded with an e-mail to The Associated Press that said: "Jeff Pash was part of an executive team that sold the networks a $4 billion ticket to a game they knew wouldn't be played. The only thing they've been committed to is a lockout."

That is a reference to a court ruling last week, when the federal judge overseeing NFL labor matters sided with players in their case accusing owners of improperly negotiating TV deals to prepare for a work stoppage.

Smith then went back to the mediator's office to respond to Pash's statement himself.

"We have been committed to this process. But for anyone to stand and turn to the American people and say they question that?" Smith said. "Look, I understand that there's probably some things Jeff Pash just has to say, but this is the truth: We know that as early as March of 2009 ... the National Football League engaged in a strategy to get $4 billion of television money ... even if the games weren't played."

The public acrimony between the sides temporarily had been tamped down in recent weeks, because mediator George Cohen asked the league and union to stay silent about the talks.

"Things can come together quickly," Pash said Thursday night. "Things can fall apart quickly."

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. If I were a developer I would be looking at the Fountain Square and Fletcher Place neighborhoods instead of Broad Ripple. I would avoid the dysfunctional BRVA with all of their headaches. It's like deciding between a Blackberry or an iPhone 5s smartphone. BR is greatly in need of updates. It has become stale and outdated. Whereas Fountain Square, Fletcher Place and Mass Ave have become the "new" Broad Ripples. Every time I see people on the strip in BR on the weekend I want to ask them, "How is it you are not familiar with Fountain Square or Mass Ave? You have choices and you choose BR?" Long vacant storefronts like the old Scholar's Inn Bake House and ZA, both on prominent corners, hurt the village's image. Many business on the strip could use updated facades. Cigarette butt covered sidewalks and graffiti covered walls don't help either. The whole strip just looks like it needs to be power washed. I know there is more to the BRV than the 700-1100 blocks of Broad Ripple Ave, but that is what people see when they think of BR. It will always be a nice place live, but is quickly becoming a not-so-nice place to visit.

  2. I sure hope so and would gladly join a law suit against them. They flat out rob people and their little punk scam artist telephone losers actually enjoy it. I would love to run into one of them some day!!

  3. Biggest scam ever!! Took 307 out of my bank ac count. Never received a single call! They prey on new small business and flat out rob them! Do not sign up with these thieves. I filed a complaint with the ftc. I suggest doing the same ic they robbed you too.

  4. Woohoo! We're #200!!! Absolutely disgusting. Bring on the congestion. Indianapolis NEEDS it.

  5. So Westfield invested about $30M in developing Grand Park and attendance to date is good enough that local hotel can't meet the demand. Carmel invested $180M in the Palladium - which generates zero hotel demand for its casino acts. Which Mayor made the better decision?

ADVERTISEMENT