Joe's Whining Again

[ForceEight]

Getting a little old.

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/04/02/joe-flacco-not-happy-ravens-will-make-him-wait-for-new-contract/#comments

 

Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti says he expects to sign Joe Flacco to a long-term contract extension some time in 2012. Flacco doesn’t think he should have to wait that long.

 

“I think I’ve established myself,” Flacco told Jamison Hensley of the Baltimore Sun today. “If you’re not confident with who I am, I’m not sure what a year is going to make.”

 

Although the Ravens and Flacco are prohibited from having any contact during the lockout, Flacco doesn’t see why they couldn’t start talking contract as soon as the lockout ends.

 

“Ideally for me, I would like to start talks this year,” Flacco said. “Next year, I feel like they would have to throw something in front of me that’s going to be pretty legit in order for me to not play out my fifth year. If you don’t sign me this year, you’re making me play a whole year of my contract with no security. If you want to sign me after next year, what’s playing six more months.”

[BengalBilly]

You need to put this in perspective Force. We Bengals fans have Palmer refusing to play for Cincinnati again, while Flacco is miffed that contract negotiations are stymied by a labor dispute.

 

Count your blessings.

[OutsideRzAcE]

He's posturing...but I don't see why he feels he needs to do that - especially if he think he's established himself. Either way, this is something he needs to leave to his agent. They are paid to be the bad guy

[oldno82]

Flacco should shut-up about this.

[vmax]

He just laid a ton of pressure on the Front Office. I hate it when these guys negotiate through the media but Joe just won round one. They want him happy.

 

On the flip side they want Ngata happy too and he's next in line. Joe must not know about the pecking order, because when it comes to money, the Ravens also follow "next man up".

[thundercleetz]

On the flip side they want Ngata happy too and he's next in line. Joe must not know about the pecking order, because when it comes to money, the Ravens also follow "next man up".

 

Exactly. This isn't anything personal against Joe, this is just how Ozzie works. Everyone waits their turn, and Ozzie takes care of business when it comes time. Now we have never had a QB who has been worthy of an extension before, but at the same time Ozzie has re-signed everyone who has been worth an extension. Ngata comes first.

[cravnravn]

I dont have a problem with what Bazooka Joe said..I hope every Union worker sticks it in managements ass..

[ForceEight]

I dont have a problem with what Bazooka Joe said..I hope every Union worker sticks it in managements ass..

What union? :biggrin:

[cravnravn]

Oh dont you worry yourself Ks, NFLPA will be as strong as the Teamsters!!!

[thundercleetz]

I dont have a problem with what Bazooka Joe said..I hope every Union worker sticks it in managements ass..

 

Well if this arbitration on Wednesday does not rule favorably for the players then the union will have really screwed their own players. If it does rule in their favor, then they will be in good position to negotiate. In other words, the union is taking a big risk here. That offer by the owners before the deadline was by no means a final offer, it was meant to be a springboard for further discussion. That month of lost time could really end up biting the players in the ass as the owners are going to have leverage no matter what and that last offer is going to get less favorable as every day passes. There are nearly 3,000 players and there are only 32 owners, you tell me who is going to crack first (not to mention the owners have the commissioner in their back pocket). If this thing starts running into August and the union is still decertified, I guarantee you players are going to start running back to the owners instead of "sticking it to them".

[geo]

Well if this arbitration on Wednesday does not rule favorably for the players then the union will have really screwed their own players. If it does rule in their favor, then they will be in good position to negotiate. In other words, the union is taking a big risk here. That offer by the owners before the deadline was by no means a final offer, it was meant to be a springboard for further discussion. That month of lost time could really end up biting the players in the ass as the owners are going to have leverage no matter what and that last offer is going to get less favorable as every day passes. There are nearly 3,000 players and there are only 32 owners, you tell me who is going to crack first (not to mention the owners have the commissioner in their back pocket). If this thing starts running into August and the union is still decertified, I guarantee you players are going to start running back to the owners instead of "sticking it to them".

 

3200 players should crack first, personally not that optimistic.. The unity thing with those 32 owners seems to me bizar, they are just too different. A team like our Ravens who needs to cut more players, still to little mediamarket therefore they would like the cap to continue.. then there are obvious teams who would benefit without the cap, then you have Bucs, Panthers, and Bengals who would be favoured if that deal was done, and teams like Vikes, Bills and Jax who just seems to be struggling for their live all the time. Seems to me the unity thing is as much troublesome for the owners.

 

Also in august it is still the owners who have the responsibility to media and sponsors, not the players.

 

Btw there is a reason why we are here, thanks to the owners who lost all the way in 2006.

[dc.]

I think Joe's posturing is valid in the same sense it is for any player... a down year, an injury... any of the above could jeopardize his payday in coming seasons.

 

As the article points out, the O's are paying Bulger 75% of Joe's contract to be a back-up. Teams around the league are paying far worse QBs in the range of 7-8m for service that isn't nearly as good. And Joe has a right to say "I wanted to talk about it now, not later."

 

And in most cases, teams want to talk about these things sooner too. Lock players down before they explode in price. Backload a contract in some way or another.

[thundercleetz]

3200 players should crack first, personally not that optimistic.. The unity thing with those 32 owners seems to me bizar, they are just too different. A team like our Ravens who needs to cut more players, still to little mediamarket therefore they would like the cap to continue.. then there are obvious teams who would benefit without the cap, then you have Bucs, Panthers, and Bengals who would be favoured if that deal was done, and teams like Vikes, Bills and Jax who just seems to be struggling for their live all the time. Seems to me the unity thing is as much troublesome for the owners.

 

Also in august it is still the owners who have the responsibility to media and sponsors, not the players.

 

Btw there is a reason why we are here, thanks to the owners who lost all the way in 2006.

 

You cannot really compare 2006 and now. First off, we now have a owner-favoring commissioner in Roger Goodell whereas last time around we had a player-favoring commissioner in Paul Tagliabue. Tagliabue and former NFLPA president Gene Upshaw were buddy-buddies and worked very well together. The opposite is the case with Goodell and Smith. Also, Tagliabue knew very well that he was leaving in a few years and that this deal was merely a band-aid. There was no urgency in 2006. The economy was booming and league profits were expanding at an exponential rate. 2011 is completely a different situation. First, league profits have flattened out so the issue of how to split future profits and expand the cap is much more prevelant. Second, our economy is in much worse shape than it was in 2006. These financial issues as to how to split league profits now and in the future require substantially more attention.

 

As for expanding the cap, you would be very surprised how unified the owners actually are on this issue. Even a large market team like the Cowboys has it in their interest to level off the salary cap. Many owners made poor decisions by building new stadiums that they really could not afford, so cutting player salaries is the most obvious place to get some of that money back. And with the players asking for expanded benefits, you better believe the owners want those numbers included in the cap calculations. This is an issue where the owners are actually very unified. The owners wanted the cap at $131 million, the players proposed $151 million, and the owners countered at $141 million but the players declined. If the players attempt to overturn the lockout is denied, this lost time in negotiating could potentially hurt them a lot.

 

Here's what it comes down to, the owners are well prepared in the event of a lockout. Sure, some players like Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are set to wait this thing out, but what about the immature 23-year old player who made $350K per year and probably has no idea what retirement, health care, or how to open a savings account are? Not to mention he probably blew his money on cars and whatever else. And the league is filled with much more of these players than it is with Peyton Mannings and Tom Bradys. If the union is still decertified in July/August, these types of players will have two choices. They can continue to try and sue the league for denying them the right to work through class action lawsuits. However, this would only allow the owners to run the NFLPA dry as the owners will without a doubt file appeals for every court decision made to prolong this until the NFLPA gives in. And a class action lawsuit of 3,000 players could take forever to settle as there is most definitely going to be divide among the players for a settlement. Or, the players can re-certify as a union and get back to the negotiating table where they will undoubtably have to make more concessions after all this time lost.

 

As for the media responsibility, it all comes down to today's court hearing. If the owners lose they are going to look like the bad guys. If the players lose, they are going to come off as greedy and manipulative for wasting over a month of potential negotiating time. Which goes back to my original point, the players are taking a big risk here. I can pretty much guarantee you that this whole situation is not going to be settled through the courts. Neither side wants this thing to drag out and eventually the court fees are going to be too much and it will be much more beneficial for the union to re-certify and get back to the negotiating table. And when it comes down to it, neither side may like what a judge has to rule. If you want evidence, see the NFL and Reggie White settlement.