Update On NFL Labor Issue

Posted by Mike Wobschall on April 26, 2011 – 6:47 am

As you’ve probably heard by now, there was NFL labor issue-related news late Monday afternoon. This is obviously a sensitive topic with complex issues layered on top of more complex issues, so for the time being we’re going to simply give you verbatim the update from to keep you in the loop.

As more information becomes available and becomes appropriate to share, we’ll have it for you right here on

The following update is from’s Albert Breer, who has been covering this issue for the League’s website:

The plaintiffs in the Brady et al v. National Football League case were granted an injunction on Monday by Judge Susan Nelson, lifting the NFL lockout, if temporarily.

The NFL’s stance on the matter now is that the lockout rules remain intact until Nelson, and then the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, rule on whether or not the ruling will be stayed upon appeal. In reaction to Nelson’s ruling, the league filed its appeal with the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and a request for a stay with Nelson on Monday night.

“We believe that federal law bars injunctions in labor disputes,” NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said in statement, prior to filing the appeal. “We are confident that the Eighth Circuit will agree. But we also believe that this dispute will inevitably end with a collective bargaining agreement, which would be in the best interests of players, clubs and fans. We can reach a fair agreement only if we continue negotiations toward that goal.”

The news set the stage for an interesting Tuesday morning, with the possibility of many players reporting to their respective team’s headquarters.

Aiello said late Monday night that if players show up, they will be allowed into facilities.

“If a player comes to the facility, he will be treated courteously and with respect,” Aiello said.

Posted in All, Mike Wobschall | 10 Comments »

10 Responses to “Update On NFL Labor Issue”

  1. By Dave the vikefan on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    I am so tired of this lockout..

  2. By Parody on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Join the club Dave. People are far too greedy. The worst part is that I don’t know the specifics of the offers that have been put on the table, so I don’t even know which side (if either) is being MORE unreasonable.

  3. By Carl K on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    If the pl@yers keep winning this anti trust case… this could be the last NFL draft we get to enjoy.

  4. By Steve on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Will players be invited to the Draft Party at Winter Park like previous years???
    That would be nice.

  5. By DRS on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    So what exactly did the players association pass on? The NFL has sent out what they say is a summary of their final offer that the players rejected.

    Summary from the NFL.
    1. We more than split the economic difference between us, increasing our proposed cap for 2011 significantly and accepting the Union’s proposed cap number for 2014 ($161 million per club).
    2. An entry level compensation system based on the Union’s “rookie cap” proposal, rather than the wage scale proposed by the clubs. Under the NFL proposal, players drafted in rounds 2-7 would be paid the same or more than they are paid today. Savings from the first round would be reallocated to veteran players and benefits.
    3. A guarantee of up to $1 million of a player’s salary for the contract year after his injury – the first time that the clubs have offered a standard multi-year injury guarantee.
    4. Immediate implementation of changes to promote player health and safety by
    a. Reducing the off-season program by five weeks, reducing OTAs from 14 to 10, and limiting on-field practice time and contact;
    b. Limiting full-contact practices in the preseason and regular season; and
    c. Increasing number of days off for players.
    5. Commit that any change to an 18-game season will be made only by agreement and that the 2011 and 2012 seasons will be played under the current 16-game format.
    6. Owner funding of $82 million in 2011-12 to support additional benefits to former players, which would increase retirement benefits for more than 2000 former players by nearly 60 percent.
    7. Offer current players the opportunity to remain in the player medical plan for life.
    8. Third party arbitration for appeals in the drug and steroid programs.
    9. Improvements in the Mackey plan, disability plan, and degree completion bonus program.
    10. A per-club cash minimum spend of 90 percent of the salary cap over three seasons.
    Expanding on that statement, the NFL lead negotiator, Jeff Pash, had this to say.

  6. By DRS on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    We incorporated new economic terms to try to bridge the gap. You’ve heard a lot of talk about an $800M gap. Nowhere close. Not close to factual.

    We offered today to split the difference and meet the union in the midpoint, with a player compensation number that would have been equivalent to player compensation in 2009 and above player compensation in 2010, and 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.

    We offered to guarantee for the first time in the history of the league, more than one year of injury on player contracts. Apparently not good enough.

    We moved off of our wage scale, and we offered to do a rookie compensation system within the context of a hard rookie cap as the union had proposed which would preserve individual negotiations and maintain the role of agents in the process. Evidently not good enough.

    We offered, in fact we agreed to the union’s request for a cash team minimum for the first time in league history. We agreed to it at their number and their structure. Evidently not good enough.

    We told the union that for 2011 and 2012, we would play within the existing 16-game regular season format, and we committed to them, notwithstanding the rights we have in the current agreement, we would not change to 18 games without their consent. Evidently not good enough.

    At the same time, we agreed to implement wide ranging health and safety changes, reducing the offseason program by five weeks, reducing the practice time in the preseason, reducing the practice time and contract drills during the regular season and expanding the number of days off for players. Evidently not good enough.

    We offered to increase the benefits in a wide range for both current and retired players. Under the proposal we had tendered, retired players who left the league before 1993, would experience an increase in their retirement benefit of close to 60 percent and the union, which says it represents former players, walked away from that today

  7. By DRS on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Have to go, God bless you all.

  8. By Bryan on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    These players should come up here to St. Cloud and spend a summer working at Woodcraft Industries. The labor dispute would be over in hours!!

  9. By Frederick Jones on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply


    I’m not going to get into an argument with you!!! You just set a record for the two longest blogs in the history of


  10. By DRS on Apr 26, 2011 | Reply

    Frederick Jones, Thanks, Just posting some info. Finally a record I can boast of, LOL.

Post a Comment