Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

NFL transcripts: Commissioner Goodell, Jerry Richardson, John Mara & Jeff Pash

Kurb

By Kurb,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Kurb Newbie

Kurb

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I'm sure Smith will make a statement. I find it funny that the league had statements ready so fast. You know, since it was the players' union that was preparing for all this beforehand and all.

Reaching a little here.

D. Smith said that they wanted 10 years of paperwork, auidts, tax statements.

That was the 'meat' of his comment. The rest was fluff about regretting not reaching an agreement . His statement was very short.

No No, I want a breakdown of the differences. Like Pash did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
twylyght Rookie

twylyght

Posted
Posted

I'm sure Smith will make a statement. I find it funny that the league had statements ready so fast. You know, since it was the players' union that was preparing for all this beforehand and all.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6205936

"We met with the owners until about 4 o'clock today," union head DeMaurice Smith said outside the mediator's office. "We discussed a proposal they had presented. At this time, significant differences continue to remain. We informed the owners that ... if there was going to be a request for an extension, that we asked for 10 years of audited financial information to accompany that extension."

About 15 minutes later, the union decertified.

You tell me who was jumping the gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
blackcatgrowl Newbie

blackcatgrowl

Posted
Posted

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6205936

"We met with the owners until about 4 o'clock today," union head DeMaurice Smith said outside the mediator's office. "We discussed a proposal they had presented. At this time, significant differences continue to remain. We informed the owners that ... if there was going to be a request for an extension, that we asked for 10 years of audited financial information to accompany that extension."

About 15 minutes later, the union decertified.

Demanding 10 years of audited financial data in 15 minutes just for an extension to continue negotiating?

That's not negotiating in good faith. Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sam Mills Fan Newbie

Sam Mills Fan

Posted
Posted

Demanding 10 years of audited financial data in 15 minutes just for an extension to continue negotiating?

That's not negotiating in good faith. Period.

The burden of proof lies with the owners though because this whole lockout is being brought on by their side. You would have a point if the players were going on strike.

Besides, I've yet to hear one decent argument from anyone as to what legitimate reason the league has in not opening their books if that would bring about an easy resolution to this mess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
twylyght Rookie

twylyght

Posted
Posted

The burden of proof lies with the owners though because this whole lockout is being brought on by their side. You would have a point if the players were going on strike.

Besides, I've yet to hear one decent argument from anyone as to what legitimate reason the league has in not opening their books if that would bring about an easy resolution to this mess.

They may as well call this a strike now. Severe concessions were made on the part of owners to meet and sporadically exceed the NFLPA demands. The ball was in their court to negotiate. They walked away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zod Grand Master

Zod

Posted
Posted

we offered grow it from there over four years by $20 million a club, to the point where in 2014 the player compensation number was the union’s number. It was the number the union proposed to us and we accepted it. That wasn’t good enough.

what....the...fu...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ncbobcat Newbie

ncbobcat

Posted
Posted

Reaching a little here.

No No, I want a breakdown of the differences. Like Pash did.

Not availabe yet then, as far as I know. D. Smith did not do detail as you want in his statement. He did say there would be further comments later tonight as the 'lockout' looms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zod Grand Master

Zod

Posted
Posted

They may as well call this a strike now. Severe concessions were made on the part of owners to meet and sporadically exceed the NFLPA demands. The ball was in their court to negotiate. They walked away.

Sure does sound that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
blackcatgrowl Newbie

blackcatgrowl

Posted
Posted

The burden of proof lies with the owners though because this whole lockout is being brought on by their side. You would have a point if the players were going on strike.

Besides, I've yet to hear one decent argument from anyone as to what legitimate reason the league has in not opening their books if that would bring about an easy resolution to this mess.

They DID offer information to the union, that the union refused to review.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81eb9686/article/nflpa-nfl-release-statements-about-labor-situation?module=HP_headlines

The union was offered financial disclosure of audited league and club profitability information that is not even shared with the NFL clubs.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sam Mills Fan Newbie

Sam Mills Fan

Posted
Posted

This whole negotiation process is predicated on the "fact" that the owners are losing money or aren't growing at the rate that they find acceptable. The FACT that they have been unwilling to show any evidence of that throughout the whole process has been an example of "not negotiating in good faith" all along.

How is it fair to blame the players for not taking anything the owners were conceding on without being able to get concrete evidence of what their whole premise is in this mess other than "trust us, we promise!"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riddel Newbie

riddel

Posted
Posted

Here is the actual law that requires the owners provide the union what they had been asking for for the last 3 months!!!

Cost of Labor Contracts Section

2. Increased financial disclosure. The employer will have to make a claim of inability to pay or financial hardship. although the company's financial information normally need not be disclosed in collective bargaining, when the employer puts profitability or financial condition in contention, the financial data MUST BE provided to substantiate the position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • mav1234
      BREAKING: Panthers Announce Four Moves Including LB Trevin Wallace To IR

      By mav1234 · Posted

      I'd give it a C mainly because of Brooks.  If we just didn't have a 2nd I'd argue B to B+ tbh. Brooks was a bad gamble, tho one that could still pay off long term. Yes XL only has 400 yards but... Look who is throwing him the ball. And I think he isn't a "true #1" but he's been able to consistently get open. Hands definitely need to be cleaned up.  But he should end the year with 500-600 yards. Like you said - Sanders looks great.  Get him a better QB / more time with a QB and I think he's gonna impress. We added a couple rotational players on D that have both made plays and show promise for the future from later rounds. So I'd say, Brooks really hurts this drafts grade. It'll be interesting to see how it progresses over the next 3 years. I've overall really liked Morgan's FA acquisitions, so...
    • Gapanthersfan
      Would you trade Ickey

      By Gapanthersfan · Posted

      Oh he would absolutely flourish. It’s the panthers way. It’s no different with coaches. Sometimes they reach their expiration date, go somewhere else, and find new success.  Similarly to Burns, how long to wait for the light to finally turn on?  Market forces will demand a salary that the panthers can not responsibly match. Sliding him to guard will fit his skill set better, but he has played LT for 3 years. He will receive offers from other teams wanting to pay him LT money.  At guard, he won’t start with what they have paid Hunt and Lewis. Center then?? Dunno. Maybe? He will become a backup by default once they draft their stud LT. I doubt Dan just stands pat. That’s not his MO.  So where does this put him? Can you match what other teams will offer for a backup LT/guard? Do you dish out franchise LT $ on a guy who still needs significant improvement in pass protection. This team will be DOA in the playoffs with the very first team who has a formidable speed rusher. What if he has hit his ceiling in pass protection already and they sign him long term? It’s a big gamble either way. 
    • travisura
      Cousins benched in Atlanta

      By travisura · Posted

      We're in a great position to see just how big of a misstep it would be, having made so many ourselves
×
×
  • Create New...