[G-Nitro]

NFL Says Negotiations Are Not Going Well

By BARRY WILNER
The Associated Press
Friday, February 3, 2006; 4:25 PM

DETROIT -- There's nothing like a little gloom and doom at the end of Super Bowl week. NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue's pessimism about labor negotiations with the players' union permeated his annual state of the league address Friday.

"We're not making the kind of progress we need to be making," he said. "I don't think negotiations are going very well."

Gene Upshaw, executive director of the NFL Players Association, said the same thing the previous day. Upshaw warned that without significant movement by March 9, the union will consider its legal options.

The collective bargaining agreement expires after the 2007 season. But under the current contract, there would be no salary cap in 2007. Upshaw insists if the cap disappears then, it won't come back.

Tagliabue doesn't recognize March 9 as any particular deadline _ after all, there are two full seasons remanning under the deal _ but he has a sense of urgency.

Unfortunately, he believes the owners and players are drifting farther apart.

"I do think there needs to be an outreach and more reality on both sides," Tagliabue said. "There needs to be a positive dose of reality on both sides of the table. To some degree, positions are hardening on both sides when they shouldn't be."

He wasn't optimistic about making much progress in negotiations before the league's meetings begin March 25 in Orlando, Fla.

"A lot of things get done at the 11th hour and 59th minute," Tagliabue said. "I don't know if we'll get something done by the league meetings."

These talks have become more contentious in great part because team owners can't agree among themselves how to divide revenues that will go to the players. High-revenue teams who make more money from sources other than television and ticket sales are balking at contributing the same percentage of their income as low-revenue franchises.

Patriots owners Robert Kraft, one of the league's power brokers, believes a CBA extension must preclude any agreement among the owners on how to split money.

"Until we know what our deal is with the union, we can't come together among ourselves on revenue sharing," he said.

Upshaw talked Thursday about a potential decertification of the union. Tagliabue conceded those were possibilities, but "I don't think we'll be in litigation or decertification."

Tagliabue also:

_ noted that while the "Rooney rule" that requires interviewing minority candidates for coaching and front office jobs is working, no minorities got any of the eight openings filled thus far.

"I thought we were getting beyond the stereotypes and these men were accepted as coaches, not as minority coaches," Tagliabue said. "I thought it would carry over to the hiring process and it didn't.

"We all understand the need to be aggressive to blitz this issue. We need to be measured by what we do and achieve, and not by what we say."

_ reiterated league support for keeping the Saints in New Orleans, saying the commitment is multiyear. He hopes all eight of their regular-season games next season will be played at the Superdome.

"The team coming back and the Superdome coming back can be a magnet to attract other businesses," he said.

_ virtually ruled out another international regular-season game in 2006. Although the 49ers-Cardinals game in Mexico City last October was a huge success, "right now it would be difficult to play a regular-season game outside the United States in this upcoming season."

_ expressed his support for instant replay as an officiating tool, even as he acknowledged the botched reversal in the Pittsburgh-Indianapolis playoff game.

"It's perfectly clear that in an overwhelming number of cases, it eliminates mistaken calls and gives officiating crews the chance to see things they do not see in real time."

_ saw only expansion to Los Angeles anytime soon, even though it would give the NFL an odd number of franchises.

"To me, the only possibility in the foreseeable future for an expansion team would be Los Angeles," he said. "I could not see a decision with two expansion teams."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0301771_pf.html

[G-Nitro]

Tagliabue Has a Proposal for Owners

By Mark Maske
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, March 6, 2006; 3:00 PM

NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue is scheduled to present a proposed labor settlement to team owners Tuesday in Dallas, and several sources familiar with the deliberations said today they expect the proposal to be delivered with Tagliabue's endorsement as a result of an agreement reached between him and players' union chief Gene Upshaw.

That was denied by the league. An NFL spokesman said that Tagliabue had not agreed to a tentative deal with Upshaw to put before the owners. Greg Aiello, the NFL's vice president of public relations, said the settlement proposal that Tagliabue will present to the owners will be Upshaw's proposal and the commissioner will not offer a recommendation about whether he thinks it should be ratified.

Earlier, three sources said that Upshaw and Tagliabue had reached a tentative agreement regarding Tagliabue's support of the proposed settlement. A participant in the negotiations, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the deliberations were ongoing, said that representatives of the owners and the union would spend today putting the terms of the deal into writing and the union had been informed that Tagliabue would give the proposal his backing at the owners' meeting.

The details of the proposed agreement were not immediately available, but the participant in the talks said they might be available later today.

The owner of one NFL team said he had been told there was a tentative agreement between Tagliabue and Upshaw on the proposal that's pending the owners' approval, and a top front-office executive from another club said his team had the same understanding.

Any proposed labor settlement would have to be approved by at least 24 of the 32 NFL teams to go into effect.

The person involved in the talks said the proposed settlement is more complex than is being portrayed in reports that say it would give the players 59.5 percent of an expanded pool of league revenues as compensation. The salary cap figure would fluctuate annually based not only on changes in revenues, the person said, but also on how much money the 32 NFL teams collectively spent above or below the flexible salary cap the previous season.

If the teams collectively spent less than the salary cap allotment in a season, the next season's cap would move upward in the players' favor. If the clubs collectively spent more than the salary cap allotment in a season, the cap would move lower the following season to guarantee the players less money.

In the 12 seasons that the NFL has had a salary cap system, such "cash over cap" expenditures have averaged about 4 percent annually. But the expenditures have been far less during the past five seasons, producing problems for the current negotiators in assessing how much extra money teams will spend in future seasons.

Talks between the league and union broke off Sunday evening. But the night ended with Upshaw saying that the league had agreed to present the union's proposal to the owners Tuesday. The union and league agreed Sunday to postpone the opening of the league's free agent market until 12:01 a.m. Thursday to give the owners time to consider the proposal.

The talks broke off Sunday with the union apparently seeking about 59.5 percent of league revenues under a salary cap system, and the owners apparently offering about 56.5 percent. But that gap perhaps could be bridged by a mechanism to factor "cash over cap" expenditures into the salary cap system.

The owners' meeting is scheduled to begin at 3 p.m. Tuesday and could spill over into Wednesday.

Upshaw previously has said that any labor settlement would have to be accompanied by an agreement among the owners for the teams to increase the degree to which they share their locally generated revenues. But there are deep divisions among the owners over revenue-sharing issues.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0600660_pf.html

[G-Nitro]

NFL delays start of free agency again


NFL.com wire reports

NEW YORK (March 6, 2006) -- NFL labor negotiations took yet another surprising turn late Sunday when the league and union agreed to postpone free agency another 72 hours, giving the sides more time to try to reach agreement on a contract extension.

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said the delay would give owners a chance to consider the union's latest proposal during a meeting Tuesday in Dallas.

Talks broke off earlier in the day, leaving dozens of veterans in danger of becoming salary-cap casualties before free agency was supposed to begin Monday at a minute after midnight.

The breakdown in talks was typical of the topsy-turvy negotiations, so far: Just when things seemed darkest, they got back on track; and when it appeared a deal could be struck, talks fell apart.

The union broke off Sunday's session.

"The talks ended after the NFL gave us a proposal which provided a percentage of revenues for the players which would be less than they received over the last 12 years," said Gene Upshaw, executive director of the NFL Players Association. "After suggesting we extend the waiver deadline from six o'clock to 10 this evening, they gave us a new proposal which was worse than their prior offer. Quite naturally, we rejected that proposal and saw no need to continue meeting."

But Harold Henderson, the NFL's executive vice president for labor relations, said the union rejected a proposal that would have added $577 million for players in 2006 compared to 2005 and $1.5 billion in the six years of the extension. "It's an unfortunate situation for the players, the fans and the league," Henderson said.

A mere four hours later, things were fluid again.

After a conference call between owners and league officials, including commissioner Paul Tagliabue, the league announced yet another extension - the second 72-hour respite in free agency, which originally was to start Friday.

"The NFL and the NFL Players Association have agreed to extend the start of the 2006 league year for 72 hours - until 12:01 a.m., EST, Thursday, March 9 - in order to allow the NFL clubs to meet in Dallas on Tuesday to consider the NFL Players Association's offer," the NFL said.

Shortly afterward, Upshaw said:

"The NFL negotiators called us tonight after our negotiations broke off to indicate that they will take our complete package to the owners for an approval vote on Tuesday. We have therefore agreed to extend the free agency deadline until midnight Wednesday in order to provide time for that vote to be accomplished. It was the NFL's previous rejection of our proposal earlier this evening that caused the talks to break down."

The deadline for teams to be under the salary cap also was pushed back. Though cuts had already started, the cap extension changed things.

The Oakland Raiders thought they would be forced to let quarterback Kerry Collins go, saving $9.2 million in cap space, however, the delay gave them a reprieve. Center Kevin Mawae was cut by the New York Jets, although he probably would have been gone anyway because he is 35 and missed the final 10 games of last season with a triceps injury.

The Washington Redskins, the team believed to be in the most cap trouble, said they had worked out an agreement to make linebacker LaVar Arrington, a three-time Pro Bowl player, a free agent. An official with knowledge of the transaction told The Associated Press that Arrington had agreed to a buyout that would save the team cap space it wouldn't have had if it had cut him.

Other big names also could go if teams try to squeeze under a salary cap of $94.5 million. If a deal is reached, the cap could go as much as 10 million higher - in other words, allowing teams to keep some of the players.

Amid all the labor back-and-forth came news that running back Shaun Alexander was staying put: The league's MVP agreed to return to the NFC champion Seattle Seahawks for $62 million over eight years, with $15.1 guaranteed, according to his agent, Jim Steiner.

These negotiations were by far the most difficult since the NFL and the union first agreed to free agency and a salary cap in 1992, ending years of labor unrest that included player strikes in 1982 and 1987. The contract has been extended several times since then, most of the time with ease.

Even now, the contract doesn't expire until 2008, but this would be the last year of a salary cap - 2007 would be uncapped, which could lead to wild spending by some teams and little by others, creating a haves/have not situation similar to the one in baseball.

One reason these talks were more difficult is that the players asked for a change in the system.

Until now, they received their money primarily from television and ticket revenues. This time, they requested their share from all team revenues, including outside money generated by everything from parking fees to stadium naming rights.

That led to difficult negotiations, in part, because the teams themselves are having their own dispute over that money because of the disparity in outside income made by low-revenue teams like Buffalo and Indianapolis and high-revenue teams like Dallas, Washington, New England and Philadelphia. Union leaders had suggested that it would be hard to reach agreement on a labor contract until the owners settled their own differences.

Both sides seemed ready to compromise on Sunday, largely because of the pressure of impending free agency, which was supposed to begin last Friday. However, it was put off for three days so the sides could keep talking.

Negotiations appeared to be at a standstill last Thursday, when the owners took just 57 minutes to reject the union's last offer. But seven hours later, the sides reversed course and started talking again.

Upshaw said he still thinks revenue sharing is the key, although Henderson said it was never discussed. Upshaw also said the players would do as well or better sticking with the current agreement.

"Under our previous cap agreement, we got just less than 60 percent of all of the revenues. The NFL now wants us to cut that percentage to less than 57 percent. Given the enormous revenue growth the NFL is experiencing, I am not about to give back gains which we have made in the past. It is clear to me that we will do much better under our current CBA in 2006 and particularly in 2007, the uncapped year," Upshaw said.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9287697

[edward1849]

Owners agree to a deal today.

[G-Nitro]

Owners approve six-year CBA extension


NFL.com wire reports

GRAPEVINE, Texas (March 8, 2006) -- Labor peace was restored to the NFL when the owners agreed to the players union's proposal, extending the collective bargaining agreement for six years.

There were no further details on the agreement, or whether it includes expanded revenue sharing.

The vote was 30-2, with Buffalo and Cincinnati, two low-revenue teams, voting against the extension.

Free agency, put off twice by the protracted negotiations between the owners and players, now will start at 12:01 a.m. March 10.

"It was a good compromise," said Jim Irsay, owner of low-revenue Indianapolis. "We're happy with it -- 30-2 is a good vote."

The agreement comes after a week of on-again, off-again negotiations, culminating in a two-day owners meeting.

No agreement wouldn't have meant a work stoppage -- at least not for the next two years -- but it would have sent teams scrambling to get under a $94.5 million salary cap. That would have put a number of veterans on the street and it would've also limited the amount of money available for other free agents. And it would've led to an uncapped year in 2007.

Now the cap is expected to go up by as much as $10 million with an extension of the CBA in place.

The real debate was between the owners themselves on the important issue of expanded revenue sharing.

The revenue debate involves low-income teams such as Buffalo, Cincinnati and Indianapolis who say high-revenue teams -- Dallas, Washington and Philadelphia, for instance -- should contribute proportionately to the player pool because they can earn far more in nonfootball income such as advertising and local radio rights.

Those high-revenue teams might contribute only 10 percent of their outside money compared with 50 percent or more for low-revenue teams.

"Some teams are contributing a little more than others," Redskins owner Dan Synder said. "This is really a win-win."

Gene Upshaw, the executive director of the NFL Players Association, has insisted throughout more than a year of negotiations that the division between owners must be resolved before agreement could be reached on a contract extension.


AP NEWS
The Associated Press News Service

Copyright 2006, The Associated Press, All Rights Reserved

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9293409

[thealmightyGOD]

And that is why football is better than hockey.