Amazing how it's become a sort of urban legend around here that Revis was the only party responsible for delaying his signing. Oh well. More importantly the Times reports substantial progress on the labor negotiation front. A deal seems imminent, with movement on most of the outstanding issues and agreement on the basic breakdown of proceeds in place. It seems that the requirement that teams spend a certain minimum percentage of the cap helped win over the players. Here's the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/20/s...nfl-nears-end-of-lockout.html?_r=1&ref=sports
Who else held up Revis signing with the Jets? He was under contract and wouldn't come in until he was top paid DB. How does that make it an "urban legend" that he held up the Jets? Not sure why his situation is even brought up in the same context of what the current players agents were trying to pull. What these 4 players (KESSLER) were trying to do was get some extra bootie at a time when they figured the owners were desperate to get the deal done. They totally didn't take into account the backlash and how it would look to the other players and fans. A bunch of players in 93 (Reggie White..) got just this type of special treatment, but nobody outside ever knew. Everything is known quickly nowadays.
This shit is so annoying. https://twitter.com/#!/DonBanks/status/93754293206794240 @DonBanks Don Banks NFL source said status of CBA is more "tenuous'' than is widely thought. And it's still too early to know if vote will happen today on sked.
This is not really the forum for this, but it takes two to negotiate. Why the assumption that the Jets had no role in delaying the process? Tanny acknowledged Revis's contract was going to be redone. How people think they know that the holdup was all on Revis's side, and I mean ALL, is an urban legend.
He's afraid to debate me on any subject. I'm on his ignore list, I posted that mainly so others could see it.
in Blocker's defense, you're not exactly a gracious debate partner, junc. Especially, since you're wrong half the time. :smile:
:up: It's all in fun, no one should take offense to anything I post in a debate. We all have our opinions it's just some of us actual know what we are talking about:jets: Just talk football w/ him, that tends to confuse him:grin:
Sorry, no link since I'm not a twitter person and this was sent to me in an email: dkaplanSBJ*daniel kaplan* NFLN also now following AP report that there will be no players vote today. HowardFendrich*Howard Fendrich* *by dkaplanSBJ Person familiar with*#NFL*negotiations tells*#AP*that the players will not vote Wednesday. ... More to come.
More: dkaplanSBJ*daniel kaplan* Now getting confusing. SI now reporting that player reps voted to forward settlement to plaintiffs pending resolution of outstanding issues
Sigh. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/20/ap-no-player-vote-wednesday/ AP: No player vote Wednesday Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on July 20, 2011, 5:11 PM EDT APKeep the champagne on ice. The NFLPA* will not to hold a vote on a possible settlement to end the lockout Wednesday, according to the Associated Press. This report counters ESPN’s front page story throughout Wednesday, which said a vote would take place. NFL Network has confirmed that no vote will take place Wednesday. While a vote was expected, it’s not worth speculating (yet) if this means much in the grand scheme of things. The procedure to end the lockout is a complex one, filtering from the NFLPA* executive committee to player reps to antitrust plaintiffs and beyond. The NFL owners meet on Thursday and are expected to vote to ratify a new CBA. We’ll have to wait and find out if the players have agreed to the deal by the then. At this point, approval of the CBA should be a no brainer for the union. We wouldn’t overreact to the delay yet.
If this is what is really holding things up, it's just stupid: dkaplanSBJ*daniel kaplan* Players feel owners should pay them that money, while owners are perplexed by request because they never owed the $s. 10 seconds ago*Favorite*Retweet*Reply dkaplanSBJ*daniel kaplan* SI reporting one of the key issues holding it up remains the $320 mln in benefits owners did not have to pay in 2010 under old CBA...
No worries, this is getting done w/in the next day or 2. If they get past friday w/o an agreement I will begin to get worried.
For what it's worth: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/20/trying-to-explain-the-delay-in-player-vote/ Trying to explain the delay in player vote Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on July 20, 2011, 5:42 PM EDT So everyone expected the NFL players to vote on a possible deal to end the lockout on Wednesday, and it didn’t happen. Since I’m not smart enough to understand why this might have happened, let’s collect a few reports from around the league to make sense of things. From Alex Marvez of FoxSports.com: “Source told FOXSports.com delay stemmed from volume of CBA material that must be reviewed. “That’s a lot of stuff to digest in one afternoon.”‘ Mark Maske of the Washington Post passed along the same reason, with very similar wording from the player’s side. That would seem to indicate the delay isn’t a huge concern. Yet. One “key NFL source” thought the delay raised a “warning flag” according to Daniel Kaplan of Sports Business Journal. Most interesting was a series of tweets from Jim Trotter of SI.com. He writes that the players voted to “conditionally approve” the deal pending resolution of a few key items. NFLPA* class counsel will reportedly continue to work with NFL owners in hopes of having agreement before NFL owners vote tomorrow. “The players vote is conditional, meaning they’re prepared to forward the settlement if certain issues can be resolved with the owners. One of the issues presumably is the $320 million the players lost in benefits last season during the uncapped year,” Trotter writes. Chris Mortensen of ESPN echoed the idea, saying the players gave De Smith a “vote of confidence” to finish deal points. A final vote could take place via conference call. So what do we make of all this? The deal isn’t done until it’s done. Apparently, some negotiations remain. This is a thorny, complicated process that is tough to hammer through quickly. If the players truly left things in the hands of DeMaurice Smith, we cautiously doubt it’s anything to fret over. Smith is the one that brought the 32 player reps together because he had a deal he wanted to present to them. He’s clearly confident in a deal. Whatever the “certain issues” are, we’d imagine they can be resolved. We’ve waited this long. What’s another day? (Hopefully.)
The players just want to make sure everyone knows they're not over anxious to sign on. They want to create the appearance of slow deliberation and debate. They'll agree tomorrow at the same time the owners do. As far as that $320 mil they won't get it and shouldn't get it. They negotiated that money out of the last CBA for an uncapped year. They got their uncapped year, now they want the money too. The owners have given in on alot of issues, and the players can already consider this thing a win. The cap floor being so high means alot of cash in players pockets. The owners won't give in on this and shouldn't have to.
