Would NFL Owners Kill Golden Goose?
By Jay Mariotti 2/05/10 Jay Mariotti is a national columnist for FanHouse
FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — They wouldn’t be this stupid, would they? Here in the second decade of the 21st century, with the NFL long established as the most powerful and prosperous of American sports leagues, would the owners and players fight so ridiculously and obnoxiously about splitting an $8 billion pie that they’d actually allow a season to be shut down?
I would like to say, in the words of wheezing Super Bowl halftime singer Roger Daltrey, that we won’t get fooled again. The NFL’s last labor impasse was in 1987, when none other than Sean Payton, now the head coach of the New Orleans Saints, crossed a picket line to be a scab quarterback for the Chicago Spare Bears. Since that mess was resolved, pro football has blown away baseball and basketball to become a national obsession, growing at a pace — if you believe the NFL Players Association, as I do — that has spiked franchise values about 500 percent over a 15-year period. While so many industries teeter in an ongoing recession, the NFL still does huge business, fueled by enormous television rights fees even as a few franchises struggle to sell out home games and remain on a level competitive field with the major-market behemoths.
Yet to hear NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith all week, the league is ready to gamble with the golden goose. He says the owners want the players to take an 18-percent pay cut, for a per-player annual average of $340,000, adding that the league’s latest offer includes a demand that players accept only 41 percent of applied revenues — down from 59 percent. When commissioner Roger Goodell was asked about the 18-percent figure Friday at his annual State of the League news conference, he wasn’t nearly as quick with a denial as he has been recently on the same issue. See if you can decipher what the man is saying.
“I think it’s difficult to negotiate these things in these kinds of forums. I will tell you that what we’ve asked for very clearly is 18-percent cost recognition, so that when investments are made to grow the game and generate revenue, they’re given recognition,” Goodell said. “And that will encourage further investment. It will, hopefully, grow that pie. By investing in a new stadium in Los Angeles that would generate more revenue, the players would share it. That’s a positive. We’ve talked about a restructured season as another way to generate new revenue by improving the quality of what we’re doing. We’ve talked about international [expansion] before. There are ways in which we can invest in our game. There are literally billions of fans that we think will love the game of football if they’re exposed to it, but that takes an investment. And we have to invest in the game so that we can take that money and share it with everybody.
Read the entire article here: http://jay-mariotti.fanhouse.com/2010/02/05/would-nfl-owners-kill-golden-goose/
Goodell Reiterates Desire for Deal
Associated Press February 6, 2010
FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — The only thing certain about pro football for the rest of this year is that the Colts or Saints will win Sunday’s Super Bowl.
After that, the NFL likely will enter its first season since 1993 without a salary cap. What effect an uncapped year will have on the 32 teams is uncertain.
What is certain is that by this time next year, a lockout could be imminent if there’s no contract between the league and its players.
“I don’t think anybody wants to see a work stoppage,” commissioner Roger Goodell said Friday at his annual Super Bowl-week news conference. “There are no benefits to that. If it comes to anything like that, we would all have failed.”
Failure is not a familiar word in the NFL, which has enjoyed soaring television ratings in a season filled with intriguing story lines. But a lack of progress on a new collective bargaining agreement casts a shadow over the nation’s most popular and prosperous sport.
“We have to sit at the table and we have to get an agreement that works for everybody,” Goodell said. “And that’s what people expect. They expect solutions, and I think it’s our responsibility to sit down at that table and work out the issues. I think there’s been a lot of dialogue, but we need productivity.”
Goodell bristled about a statement union chief DeMaurice Smith made Thursday. Smith estimated the chance of a lockout next year was “14″ on a scale of 1 to 10.
“I couldn’t make that prediction, and I sure hope he’s wrong, and I sure hope it doesn’t become a self-fulfilling prophecy,” Goodell said.
“Right now we don’t need a lot of focus on that. We need to take advantage of the opportunity we have right now to structure an agreement and sit down and negotiate. That’s how this is going to get done, and we will have an agreement. It’s just a matter of when, but talking about options like work stoppages is not going to get us there.”
The owners opted out of the current agreement in 2008, claiming the players’ 60 percent share of revenues was too high. Goodell said Friday that since the 2006 agreement was struck, the NFL generated $3.6 billion in additional revenue, and $2.6 billion of that went to the players.
“The owners are actually $200 million worse off than they were in 2006,” Goodell said. “So the system is not working for at least one side of the equation. And that’s the point. You have to have a system that works for everybody here.”
On other issues, the commissioner said:
• There’s more work to do on the issue of concussions, but the league has made progress in player awareness and changing the culture.
“We want to make sure people understand that they are serious injuries, and make sure that we deal with them in a conservative and medical fashion,” Goodell said.
• Extending the season will be part of the discussion when talks with the union resume. Goodell favors adding one or two games to replace exhibition games.
“I consistently hear from players and fans that the quality of our preseason is not up to NFL standards and that we need to fix that,” he said. “This is one way of doing that, and what I believe is an effective way.”
• The NFL is still eyeing a return to Mexico; the Cardinals and 49ers held the league’s first regular-season game outside the United States in Mexico in 2005.
“We would like to expand the number of games we’re playing internationally,” Goodell said. “The restructured season, actually, is one of the ways to do that. By adding two more regular-season games, it gives us a little more flexibility to be able to reach our international audience.”
• Cleveland Browns wide receiver Donte’ Stallworth will be reinstated after the Super Bowl from his suspension for killing a pedestrian while driving drunk last March in the Miami area.
“I met with him when I was down here in South Florida approximately a month ago,” Goodell said. “I think he’s in a better place than he was. I think he recognizes what he did and the horrific nature and the unfortunate outcome, and I think he’s prepared himself to get back in and play.”
• The overtime system is unlikely to be changed.
“We saw overtime in two games this postseason, and they were two of the most exciting games we’ve had,” Goodell said. Arizona beat Green Bay 51-45, and New Orleans reached Sunday’s Super Bowl against Indianapolis by beating Minnesota 31-28.
• Attendance at Jacksonville Jaguars‘ home games remains a concern, and with crowds of around 40,000, “you can’t continue to have an NFL franchise.” Goodell said the league wants to keep a team in St. Louis, where the Rams may be sold, and wants to return to Los Angeles.
• The cold-weather Super Bowl bid for the new Meadowlands stadium in 2014 remains under consideration.
“There are real benefits to the league considering this,” he said. “Playing in the elements is central to the way the game of football is played. I think being able to do that and celebrate the game of football in the No. 1 market could have tremendous benefits.”
Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press
‘We want an agreement,’ Goodell says
POSTED: February 6, 2010 By Bob Brookover Inquirer Staff Writer
FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. – DeMaurice Smith slammed a 200-m.p.h. serve into NFL commissioner Roger Goodell’s end of the court Thursday afternoon when the executive director of the players’ union strongly suggested that the owners would force a work stoppage with a lockout in 2011.
Goodell was far less aggressive with his return in yesterday’s state-of-the-league address at the Broward ty Convention Center.
“We want an agreement,” Goodell said. “I think every owner will say the same thing. We want an agreement that is fair to the game, to the players, and will allow us to continue to invest in the game.
“The idea that ownership would be anxious for a work stoppage is absolutely false. You don’t make money by shutting down your business.”
That was much more diplomatic than the message sent by Smith when he met with reporters in the same building less than 24 hours earlier, but Goodell didn’t offer any substantial reasons for optimism on labor negotiations that apparently will lead to a season without a salary cap in 2010.
Smith and the Tennessee Titans’ Kevin Mawae, president of the union, the National Football League Players Association, said the owners had asked the players to take an 18 percent cut in the revenue sharing between the sides.
That contention was among 10 labor questions asked of the commissioner, who had to know the subject would dominate his news conference.
“I will tell you that what we’ve asked for very clearly” is “that when investments are made to grow the game and generate new revenue, they’re given recognition,” Goodell said. “And that will encourage further investment that will hopefully grow [the] pie.”
Goodell said that if the union agreed to help invest in a new stadium that would lead to the league’s return to Los Angeles, it would benefit the players.
“That will generate more revenue, and the players would share it,” Goodell said. “That’s a positive.”
Smith said Thursday that he’d like a closer look at the ownership revenues.
“We were all for transparency,” Goodell said. “Our players have a tremendous amount of the economic data . . . and we will continue to share that data with them.”
He stressed that since the 2006 collective-bargaining agreement was struck, “we have generated $3.6 billion in additional revenue” and “$2.6 billion of that has gone to the players.”
“The owners are actually $200 million worse off than they were in 2006,” Goodell said. “So the system is not working for at least one side of the equation. And that’s the point. You have to have a system that works for everybody here.
“And so we will continue to make sure the players understand the economics of the league . . . that the owners and the clubs are being squeezed.”
Goodell seemed bothered by Smith’s forecast of a work stoppage.
“I couldn’t make that prediction and I sure hope he’s wrong,” the commissioner said. “I sure hope it doesn’t become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Right now, we don’t need a lot of focus on that.”
The commissioner said the league would continue to implement new guidelines for dealing with and trying to prevent concussions. Some of the guidelines were introduced this season after the Eagles’ Brian Westbrook twice left games because of brain injuries.
“We have more work to do, but we think that we’re making progress on the awareness, and we’re changing the culture,” Goodell said. “That’s what we really want to do. We want to make sure people understand that they are serious injuries, and make sure that we deal with them in a conservative and medical fashion.”
Goodell continued to push for expanding the season to 18 games, a move that would probably be tied to the next collective-bargaining agreement.
“The restructured season is something that we give a lot of consideration for a variety of reasons,” Goodell said.
“One is the quality of what we do,” he said. “I consistently hear from players and fans that the quality of our preseason is not up to standards and that we need to fix that. We need to address that. This is one way of doing that, and I believe it is an effective way.”
The commissioner was asked whether the league should stage the 2014 Super Bowl in East Rutherford, N.J., where the New York Giants and Jets will share a new open-air stadium next season. Goodell said he had to be neutral, but didn’t appear to be.
“I think there are real benefits to the league considering this as an option,” Goodell said. “I think the idea of playing in the elements is central to the way the game of football is played.
“I think being able to do that and celebrate the game of football in the No. 1 market could have tremendous benefits to the league going forward.”
________________________________________
Contact staff writer Bob Brookover at 215-854-2577 or bbrookover@phillynews.com.
Giants legend George Martin taking a stand for the needs and future of retired NFL players
By Jerry Izenberg/Columnist Emeritus Feb. 4, 2010
George Martin Taking a Stand for NFL Alumni
FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — This town, this week, this game is lousy with money. But the Nile green tint of the Atlantic Ocean just yards from the Convention Center that serves as central command for an army of pencils, cameras, microphones and tape recorders that have hit the beach here for Super Bowl XLIV, pales when measured against the dollars that fuel the entire operation.
They fuel the league. They fuel the players. And right now, from Miami to Fort Lauderdale, they fuel the hotels, restaurants and businesses that make up the Gold Coast. Clearly, nobody ever went broke hosting a Super Bowl, and it is light years since George Halas and Tim Mara had to wonder about paying their electric bills.
But Wednesday, upstairs in the Convention Center, inside room 305, the last advocates of The Army of the Forgotten assembled to pull aside the veil that shrouds their constituency. They met in defense of the world that never cashed in on the pro football boom, that had to fight for whatever it got, and it is determined to defend the less fortunate among them.
The NFL Alumni Association has a new president. For 14 years George Martin was the emotional soul of the Football Giants locker room. For 10 of those years he was the captain. For two of those years he was president of the NFL Players’ Association.
He walked a picket line for 57 days. He does not understand what went wrong with the NFL Players’ Association — the quasi-union that represents the active players and ignores the shameful plight of a number of retired players when it should know better.
The alumni group Martin now heads is comprised solely of retired NFL players. They are the only constituency and the only voters. Wednesday, Martin announced an alliance between his group and the Morehouse University School of Medicine to deal with, among other things, the dementia that may be caused in later life by concussions sustained on the field. It will do research. It will pioneer treatment. It will work on mental health.
It is an idea whose time should have come sooner.
But Wednesday’s session went far beyond it. Martin laid bare the anger of his constituency toward the union that represented them when they played and has done nothing but heap humiliation on them since they retired.
Martin had a message for that union. Its previous executive director was the late Gene Upshaw, a former player who should have known better. His successor is a non-player named DeMaurice Smith, who has no interest in the alumni. Perhaps because they can’t vote in the NFLPA election.
Martin says he has tried several times to meet with Smith but receives no response. Wednesday, in his speech, Martin addressed the following to Smith:
“I suggest as a first step you begin by respecting the men who built the very building in which you now reside. To effectively lead, you must first have the willingness to listen.”
“On behalf of the 3,000 members who once played in the NFL, I propose that instead of meaningless press releases you sit down and engage in dialogue.”
“The NFL Alumni do not want to participate in monetary negotiations. We just want you to work with our members for the benefits they need. If the Commissioner of Football can meet with us, why can’t you?”
For years, so many who played this game and built it into America’s Sunday showpiece have medical needs that have been neglected and have had to rely on other former players to help them. The NFLPA will not even talk to them.
That “union’s” first president was John Mackey, a brilliant tight end who played for the Colts when they were in Baltimore. His performance defined the position. His self-sacrifice helped make the union. He wound up as a dementia victim. Bruce Laird, a retired teammate and successful businessman, was so angered by the NFLPA’s callous indifference, he sought to get help for Mackey and others like him. He formed a group called “Fourth and Goal.”
Wednesday, he had this to say about the union and Upshaw and Upshaw’s successor:
“Twice I sent him (Upshaw) certified letters. I never heard from him, not once. You send a certified letter to somebody in America and he gets it. But he wasn’t interested. John Mackey made the association Upshaw headed happen. But Upshaw wasn’t interested. Now the association still isn’t interested and there are so many of our group with physical problems.”
You would think that Upshaw, a brilliant player who put in hard time in the NFL trenches, would have done something. How and why would he ignore this problem?
“I’ll tell you why,” Laird said. “There was a simple reason. Picket his house. Call a press conference. None of it mattered. He did it because — like Pharaoh — he could.”
“Nothing changed. The NFL Alumni will keep this before the public.”
And it damned well should.
Jerry Izenberg, The Star-Ledger’s columnist emeritus, is one of only three daily newspaper columnists to have covered every Super Bowl. That gives him 43 more appearances at the big game than the New Orleans Saints, who will finally step onto center stage next Sunday for Super Bowl XLIV against the Indianapolis Colts.
NFL Owners Have Opened Their Books To the NFLPA!
Retired NFL Players have heard a lot of talk coming out of the NFL Players Association about the need for NFL Owners to open their books and reveal all of the revenue that is coming into the NFL. That is a reasonable request when you consider that almost 60% of the NFL owner’s revenue is given to the active players, who then make decisions on how much they set aside for salaries and benefits, including benefits for retired players.
What the NFL Players Association hasn’t told anyone is that there are specific procedures outlined in the Collective Bargaining Agreement to ensure that the TR -Total Revenues of the NFL are reported to the NFLPA on an annual basis. Without the process, there would be no way to establish the Annual Team Salary Cap. For sixteen (16) straight years, the NFLPA has agreed with the NFL on the annual amount of money to set aside for the Salary Cap.
But how do the NFLPA, the active players and the retired players know we are getting accurate financial information from the NFL owners? It starts with getting independent accountants to look at the books. So who’s looking at the books?
In the CBA, under Article XXIV – Guaranteed League-Wide Salary, Salary Cap & Minimum Team Salary, Section 10 – Accounting Procedures, which is attached, it states that “The Accountants shall be a nationally recognized accounting firm jointly appointed by the NFL and the NFLPA.”
It also states that “The Reporting Package to be used by the Clubs and the League in providing information to the Accountants (“Revenue Reports”) in each of the NFL playing seasons covered by this Agreement shall be agreed to by the parties.”
The Accountant’s report is known as “Special Purpose Letters”. After receiving a Special Purpose Letter, the NFLPA has the right to conduct an audit of the League and any of its Clubs to further verify the accuracy of the information!
In the event of any dispute concerning the amounts of any revenues, expenses, or player costs to be included in the Revenue Reports, including any dispute concerning any findings or determinations concerning expenses made by the Accountants that cannot be resolved, then both the NFL and the NFLPA have the right to contest the Accountant’s report by commencing a Special Master Proceeding.
The Special Master is appointed by the Court pursuant to the Final Consent Judgment in White v. NFL and shall have exclusive jurisdiction to enforce the terms of Articles I, XIV, XVI-XXI, XXIV-XXX, XXXVIII-A, XXXVIII-B, and LVI-LVIII. The Special Master can make findings of fact and recommendations of relief including, without limitation, damages that are binding upon the parties unless stayed, reversed, or modified by the Court, or by an appellate court. In the event that a Club or anyone acting on its behalf fails to materially report or materially misreports Total Revenue, the Special Master may impose a fine upon the Club of up to $3 million.
SO LET’S GET THIS RIGHT: The NFLPA jointly chooses the accountants; jointly agrees to the reporting procedures; has the right to conduct an audit of the League and any of its Clubs to further verify the accuracy of the information in the accountant’s reports; can dispute the accountant’s reports and commence an independent Special Master Proceeding to resolve the dispute. And best of all, if the NFLPA wins, the decision is binding upon the NFL unless stayed, reversed, or modified by the Court, or by an appellate court.
What more can the NFLPA ask for!
If the NFLPA has any reason to believe the NFL Owners are, or have been hiding revenues from them, then they have a great way to find the truth. The NFLPA agreed to this process in the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
The NFLPA Executive Director, DeMaurice Smith needs to stop telling the media, the active players and the retired players that the NFL won’t open its books. The NFL owners have opened their books annually to the NFLPA using the process they both agreed to in the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
If the NFLPA wants to dispute the Accountant’s financial report of NFL revenues, they can commence a Special Master Proceeding against the NFL. The NFLPA just won a case against the NFL on revenue sharing, so what are they waiting for?
The owner’s main complaint is that they’re not making enough money. Some of them are obviously making more than others. They have the freedom to cry the blues, that’s what businessmen do, but to say that they haven’t opened their books, is simply just not true.
As Chris Carter, Mike Ditka, Tom Jackson and Chris Berman would say to DeMaurice Smith……….. “C’MON MAN!”
Sign up to get more info on Retired Player Class Action Lawsuit
If you would like more information about the Class Action Lawsuit then go to the following website and fill out the form: http://retiredfootballplayerslawsuit.com/contact.html
The goal of this action is to resolve the rights of as many retired NFL football players as possible, regardless of level of celebrity, prominence in NFL Films or how long they played in the league. The retired players are represented by Bob Stein, LLC, Zimmerman Reed, PLLP and Ward & Ward, PLLC.
If you would like to speak with an attorney directly, please call:
| Bob Stein Bob Stein, LLC 10125 Crosstown Circle, #200 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Telephone: 952.829.1043 Cell: 612.961.7356 Fax: 952.829.1040 |
Charles S. Zimmerman J. Gordon Rudd, Jr. Brian C. Gudmundson Zimmerman Reed, PLLP 651 Nicollet Mall, Suite 501 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: 888.621.1103 Fax: 612.341.0844 www.zimmreed.com |
Thomas J. Ward Daniel S. WardWARD & WARD, P.L.L.C. 2020 N Street, N.W. Washington D.C., 20036 Telephone: 202.331.8160 Fax: 202.331.9069 |
Retired players’ suit against NFL permitted to proceed
Posted by Mike Florio, NBC Pro Football Talk on January 30, 2010 5:52 AM ET
Last year, a group of six retired NFL players filed a class action against the league regarding claims that the league improperly is profiting from the names and likenesses of former players without ongoing compensation. On Friday, a Court in Minnesota allowed the action to proceed.
The lawsuit, filed by Hall of Fame defensive end Elvin Bethea, former Oilers and Raiders quarterback Dan Pastorini, former Vikings defensive end Jim Marshall, former Vikings tight end Joe Senser, former Vikings and Chargers guard Ed White, and former Rams defensive end Fred Dryer, focuses on the products of NFL Films, which rely on footage from football games of the past to maintain and generate interest in the sport in the present and future.
Michael Abbott of Zimmerman Reed, the firm representing the former players, has advised us of Friday’s denial of the league’s “motion for judgment on the pleadings.” In other words, the NFL tried to get the case thrown out, based on the contention that, even if the factual allegations are 100 percent accurate, no legal rights were violated.
“There is no dispute that these videos promote the NFL,” said Bob Stein, a former NFL player and attorney representing the players, in a press release provided to us by Abbott. “This suit is on behalf of thousands of players who want nothing more than to obtain their fair share of the revenues the NFL has earned, and the brand it has built due to their contributions. This is especially current with the growth of distribution channels such as the NFL network and worldwide Internet marketing. . . . This is an opportunity for the NFL to do the right thing by its retired players, on whose back the league was built.”
In denying the motion, the Court recognized that, as Stein’s last comment proves, the suit is the manifestation of the disconnect between the current financial condition of players who earned far less money and a professional sports league that, through the efforts of those players, now generates multiple billions of dollars per year in revenue.
“Plaintiffs’ filings mention frequently the dire straits of many former football players, who suffer from serious football-related injuries and who did not earn the high salaries that are prevalent today,” the opinion states in the concluding remarks. “The Court does not minimize the situation; it is, however, not relevant to the merits of the current Motion or even to the ultimate resolution of the legal issues in this lawsuit. On the other hand, the Court urges the parties to consider the plight of former players in any informal resolution of the claims at issue here.
“The NFL earns a substantial amount of money from its NFL Films division. That profit would not be possible without the players who played in the games that are showcased in these films. Whether or not the NFL infringes on the players’ rights of publicity, the NFL might consider determining a fair share of the profit it receives for the films at issue and making a corresponding payment to the pension fund for retired players. By the same token, the Plaintiffs, who profess great concern about their less-fortunate brethren who suffer long-term health consequences of playing in the League, might be willing to forego individual payment for the good of all former players. At this juncture, of course, the Court may not order such relief. However, the Court encourages the parties to consider whether the costs of litigation are justified in light of what appears to be a simple way to resolve the parties’ differences.”
For those of you interested in the legal mumbo jumbo regarding the claims made by the players and the defenses advanced by the NFL, we’ve put them after the break, since we hate to put 90 percent of the audience back to sleep on this fine Saturday morning.
The players’ claims arise under three general categories. They contend that the use of their names and images constitutes false endorsement under section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125. The players also invoke the “right of publicity” under the common law and/or statutes of Minnesota, California, Texas, Arizona, and the other 50 states. Finally, the players contend that the NFL has been unjustly enriched by its use of Plaintiffs’ names and images to promote the league.
In the motion, the NFL claimed initially that the contents of the NFL Films productions are protected by the First Amendment. The Court, however, found that the programming constitutes ”commercial speech,” which enjoys a lower degree of Constitutional protection. Whether the commercial speech rights outweigh the players’ rights to their names and images will be determined via further litigation.
Also, the NFL claimed that the federal Copyright Act prevents the lawsuit. The Court acknowledged that, indeed, the NFL holds a valid copyright for the properties at issue. But the Court concluded that the players’ right to their identities overcomes the copyright protections applicable to the video footage. “The right of publicity thus protects very different rights than does copyright,” the Court wrote in the order denying the motion.
The claim under the Lanham Act arises from the basic notion that the presence of the names and likenesses of the former players essentially amounts to false advertising, since the use of the players to market the NFL product can be construed by the viewer as an endorsement of the NFL product by the players. On this point, the Court found that it will be necessary to develop a full factual record in order to reach a resolution.
Finally, the league claimed that the contents of the player contracts overcome the contention that the NFL was “unjustly enriched” by the ongoing use of the likenesses. The Court found that, notwithstanding the language of the contracts — which likely included waivers permitting the images and names to be used in NFL Films productions — it’s possible that the league could have been unjustly enriched.
Here is the link to the PFT website: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/01/30/retired-players-suit-against-nfl-permitted-to-proceed/
Why does the NFL Players Association Fear George Martin?
George Martin - He's "One of Us" an NFL Alumnus!
The Assistant Director at the NFL Players Association – Clark Gaines, sent an email to the head of the NFL Alumni, George Martin on January 25, 2010. The email was also sent by Retired Player Assistant Director, Dee Becker to other NFLPA staff and non-NFLPA employees. Most businessmen would at least put a cc: at the bottom of their letter, letting the recipient know that it was being sent to others, but lately, things aren’t being done in a very businesslike manner at the NFLPA.
The contents of the email and the way it was disseminated, clearly demonstrate the lengths at which the NFLPA will go to discredit the work of the NFL Alumni and disrespect it’s newly “elected” leader, George Martin.
In his email, Mr. Gaines starts off by saying how he and George are friends and that they both spent many years as players serving in the Union. Immediately after that, he starts in with the lies and disrespect by saying “I know you have taking this position having been selected by the Owners as the head of the NFL Alumni. But you better than anyone know, that this union had to strike in 1974, and force a work stoppage in 1982, and strike again in 1987 to get pension fund contributions from the Owners.”
Saying that Mr. Martin was selected by the Owners is a huge slap in the face to all the retired players that invested so much time and effort in conducting a national search to make sure they got the right guy for the job. Trust me. We did!
The search firm of Spencer Stewart, along with a distinguished panel of NFL Alumni, interviewed 140 candidates before selecting Mr. Martin. The selection process was similar to what the NFLPA used to select Mr. Smith.
The NFLPA must really fear Mr. Martin, or they wouldn’t be making false, misleading and downright stupid statements like this, and they wouldn’t be doing everything they can to try and make him look like a pawn of the owners.
Why do they fear him? Well, first of all, he’s a true leader that has shown the ability to rally people together to accomplish something great (Journey 911). Secondly, he wants to bring all retired players under the umbrella of the Alumni and has been given that task by the Alumni Board of Directors. There is strength in numbers and the more retired players that gather under the NFL Alumni umbrella the stronger we all become. Thirdly, once the retired players have united under one organization they will have the leverage to do the things that the NFLPA once tried to do through its Group Licensing Agreements with retired players. (They dropped that program like a hot potato after the lawsuit) Instead of paying retired players what they were owed, they pocketed the money. All of the people that were involved in that scheme are still working at the NFLPA.
There was one thing that Mr. Gaines got right in his email. He talked about going on strike to get “pension fund contributions from the Owners.” If you remember, his boss DeMaurice Smith just recently said “individual owners and teams have spent exactly nothing on retired player benefits”. Every once in a while they slip up and tell the truth.
The NFLPA wants everyone to believe that the money comes from active players. Yes, we all know that the active players make the decision on how the pie is split up. We were all active players and we did it too! The Union just didn’t have enough money or power until after the 1993 CBA to really start to do something significant to the pension plan. But instead of significant increases to retired player pensions, the NFLPA started gorging itself on all types of other retirement type plans like the Annuity Plan, Second Career Savings Plan etc, etc. These plans only help the active players and the more current retirees.
Nonetheless, they now want all retired players to stand by them in this fight against the owners. Well, the Owners just put $100 Million on the table for an immediate increase in retired player pensions. So how did DeMaurice Smith and Clark Gaines respond to the offer? They attacked George Martin and the NFL Alumni!
We have finally backed the NFLPA into a corner and they can’t blame the owners anymore for not wanting to help retired players. Instead of doing what is right for retired players, they have come out swinging, unfortunately, Mr. Gaines and Mr. Smith are fighting the wrong opponent.
George Martin has graciously offered to meet with DeMaurice Smith and work with him to do the right thing, but he has only been met with underhanded, backstabbing political tactics that attempt to make him look like the bad guy.
George Martin has two things going for him that DeMaurice Smith doesn’t.
1) He’s one of us – a retired player - that knows our pain and can relate to us on a level that “D” will never know.
2) He was elected by retired NFL players!
‘Nuff’ said!
NFL Union Head Should Be Flagged
Michael Ozanian is National Editor at Forbes
Article by Michael Ozanian - January 22, 2010
NFLPA Executive Director DeMaurice Smith does not know what he is talking about when it comes to the funding of benefits (pensions, disability, etc.) for retired and active National Football League players. NFL team owners recently proposed to immediately increase retired player pensions by $100 million even before the current collective bargaining negotiations with the players are concluded. The owners did the right thing. Last year the owners paid out around $70 million in pension benefits to some 10,000 retired players. Obviously, $7,000 for a crippled, middle-aged man is not enough to get by so the increase was badly needed and long over due. The NFL Alumni Association supports the proposal. But last week NFLPA Director DeMaurice Smith responded to the proposal by saying individual owners and teams have spent exactly nothing on retired player benefits. What world is he living in? The simple fact of the matter is that all retirement funds–for both active and retired players–comes from the money allocated to active players under the league’s salary cap of 60% of NFL revenue. In 2008 this amounted to $23 million per team, or $736 million. Smith may not like cap money going towards retired players instead of active ones. But as the union boss he should at least understand where the money comes from.
The link to Forbes NFL Union Head Should Be Flagged
NFLPA Diverting Attention Away from the $100 Million Dollar Question
Don't pay any attention to that man (NFLPA) behind the curtain!
The Executive Director of the NFL Alumni, George Martin recently sent an email to the NFLPA Executive Director, DeMaurice Smith stating “We appreciate that the owners months ago initiated a proposal to significantly increase pensions for retired players immediately in the current deal for 2010. This would get help to retired players this year even without the NFL and NFLPA agreeing to a new deal whether in spirit or in principle. I am told this increase would be $100 million starting out. This would be tremendous for retired players. I hope the union will consider this proposal, as it will benefit retired players immediately, while not impacting their task of negotiating a new long term labor agreement for active players”
Instead of considering the proposal, DeMaurice Smith and at least nine retired NFL players — including Charles Mann and Jean Fugett, who were meeting with Smith in the union’s HQs — issued the following statement:
“Individual owners and teams have spent exactly nothing on retired player benefits. In fact, until the NFLPA and the Retired Players Association pushed them this year, they have even denied the long term consequences of concussions suffered while playing football. We have asked George Martin to ask the NFL, ‘Why?’
What a masterful job of diverting attention away from the $100 Million Dollar question!
Fourth & Goal has already addressed the false accusation that “individual owners and teams have spent exactly nothing on retired player benefits.” The Pension Plan and the Disability Plan are absolutely, positively funded by the owners. You can read it in Article 3 –Contributions - of the Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan. For the past 50 years, active players have successfully negotiated CBA’s that set aside money for these 2 Plans. To deny that truth, is to deny the hard work and efforts of the men that fought the owners, went on strike and in some cases lost their jobs because of their union activities. Additionally, the NFL Alliance, which is represented by the NFL owners, NFLPA, Hall of Fame and the NFL Alumni Association, collectively fund the Joint Replacement, Discount Prescription Drug Benefit, Life Insurance, Assisted Living Benefits, Medicare Benefit and Spine Treatment Benefit programs.
Now, can we once and for all please put that Big Lie to rest.
The second part of their diversionary tactic; The accusation that ‘until the NFLPA and the Retired Players Association pushed them this year, they have even denied the long term consequences of concussions suffered while playing football. We have asked George Martin to ask the NFL, ‘Why?’
The key words in this sentence, which are underlined above, are this year. Where the hell was our union for the past 20 years on this issue? Oh, that’s right, Gene Upshaw was in command. And what did he have to say about the issue? In a 2007 interview Gene said “I think we’re just a reflection of society. I don’t want to take that next leap to say, you know, football caused dementia. I just don’t believe that.”
Why would the owners take the union seriously when, for the past 20 years, the NFLPA has never really made this a serious issue……. until now. They are only doing this now, because of the pressure certain retired players put on the Union and the Owners. It wasn’t until Bruce Laird and the Baltimore Retired Player Chapter “shamed them” into creating the 88 Plan that ANYTHING was done to help retired players who were suffering from head traumas they incurred while playing in the NFL.
So, who has the most powerful incentive to make changes to help both active and retired players regarding the concussion/disability issue? You would think it would be the Union, seeing as how they say they represent retired players. But what have they done through the current CBA negotiating process to help us? Your guess is as good as mine. It’s not the owners that Jean Fugett and Charles Mann need to point fingers at….it’s the NFLPA! The NFLPA is the only group that negotiates with the owners. If we don’t get what we want through the collective bargaining process, we can’t blame the owners and we surely can’t blame George Martin. If the active players don’t like what is being offered by owners they can go on strike like we did in 1982 and 1987. Does anyone really believe that active players would go on strike to help retired player’s over concussion and disability issues? Nine retired players at the NFLPA are drinking the “D’ Smith Kool Aid and it must have more than sugar in it.
What is really happening here?
The NFLPA is trying to divert attention away from the $100 Million Dollar Question. And why? Because the money for this retired player Pension increase would probably come out of the 60% Cap money that is used for salaries and benefits for active players and retired players. Active players would have to make an unselfish decision to give retired players an increase in their pensions instead of increasing their own salaries and benefits.
One proposal to pay for the increase in retired player pensions – and offset the cost and any reduction in current player salaries and benefits – has already been brought up in the negotiations. See the posting here at Fourth & Goal entitled “NFL and NFLPA negotiations on Retired Player Money Linked to Rookie Wage Scale.”
The idea of a rookie wage scale was intially shot down by DeMaurice Smith when he first took over at the NFLPA. He said that the popular issue of controlling salaries for top draft picks wasn’t even an issue of concern for the union and that “It might be an issue to drive a wedge between rookies and vets. But I know one thing, it’s not a player issue”.
It might not be an active player issue, but it is a retired player issue.
Matthew Stafford received a $41.7 Million signing bonus before setting one foot on an NFL football field last year. Under the proposed Rookie Wage Cap, a lot of that money would have gone to the older generation of retired players that shed their blood, sweat and tears to help the NFL get to where it is today. $41.7 million! That’s just one player and almost half the money that the owners are proposing to set aside in an IMMEDIATE INCREASE in retired player pensions. If the NFLPA can’t get behind this proposal then they need to take these words off the cover of the NFLPA Constitution “We the National Football League Players Association pay homage to our predecessors for their courage, sacrifice and vision” and while they’re at it, they can drop the word “Past” in their overused and unfulfilled slogan “Past, Present and Future”.
FOURTH & GOAL PARTNERS
FREE MEDICAL SCREENINGS
Provided by ProHEALTHCARE Asociates
[CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFO]
"Save Thousands on Home Financing, Refinancing, Improvements and Home Sells, all while Helping Fourth & Goal."CLICK HERE
