Agent: Peyton Manning, Drew Brees not seeking special treatment in new CBA - Indy Star

[bayone]

UPDATE: Mike Chappell of the Indy Star has a quote from Manning and Brees' agent Tom Condon:

Peyton Manning and Drew Brees are not seeking separate settlements in the Brady vs. NFL antitrust lawsuit that’s part of the on-going labor negotiations between owners and players, the agent who represents each high-profile quarterback said.

“Asserting anything else is nonsense,’’ agent Tom Condon said Tuesday evening. “Drew and Peyton have been two of the staunchest supporters of the players throughout this process.

“What they are doing is endorsing the players’ (bargaining position), not pursing anything individually.’’

Brees was quick to address the notion he was seeking individual leverage via Twitter.

“I hesitate to even dignify the false media reports with a response,’’ he wrote, “but obviously they are leading people astray.’’

It’s believed that rather than seeking anything individually, Manning and Brees are simply endorsing the players’ latest proposal as constructed by the trade association —

New England Patriots offensive tackle Logan Mankins and San Diego Chargers wide receiver Vincent Jackson reportedly are seeking individual compensation from any settlement in the labor dispute.

My link

[ViriLudant]

Can't see how this is true, considering that it was the NFLPA yesterday that decided to move on despite these 10 players.

[Peyton and Eli fan]

Can't see how this is true, considering that it was the NFLPA yesterday that decided to move on despite these 10 players.

In order the the suit to be dropped, all 10 would have to drop it. Mankins and Jackson appear to not want that. If it isn't dropped, it must be settled or the CBA can't be finalized. If you give them all exemption from the franchise tag it settles the suit quickly and gives makins and Jackson what they want. in 1993 the lawsuit was ended the same way. It's the quickest way to get it done, imo.

[Nuts]

UPDATE: Mike Chappell of the Indy Star has a quote from Manning and Brees' agent Tom Condon:

Peyton Manning and Drew Brees are not seeking separate settlements in the Brady vs. NFL antitrust lawsuit that’s part of the on-going labor negotiations between owners and players, the agent who represents each high-profile quarterback said.

“Asserting anything else is nonsense,’’ agent Tom Condon said Tuesday evening. “Drew and Peyton have been two of the staunchest supporters of the players throughout this process.

“What they are doing is endorsing the players’ (bargaining position), not pursing anything individually.’’

Brees was quick to address the notion he was seeking individual leverage via Twitter.

“I hesitate to even dignify the false media reports with a response,’’ he wrote, “but obviously they are leading people astray.’’

It’s believed that rather than seeking anything individually, Manning and Brees are simply endorsing the players’ latest proposal as constructed by the trade association —

New England Patriots offensive tackle Logan Mankins and San Diego Chargers wide receiver Vincent Jackson reportedly are seeking individual compensation from any settlement in the labor dispute.

My link

Payton, You are losing much more than you will ever gain. We, Colt fans, no longer hold you in the same high esteem. Greedy is now wearing #18.

[Peyton and Eli fan]

Payton, You are losing much more than you will ever gain. We, Colt fans, no longer hold you in the same high esteem. Greedy is now wearing #18.

I'm sorry, but did you read what you quoted before you wrote this? (Plus, it's spelled Peyton)

[ViriLudant]

Looks like Peyton et al DID ask: through their lawyers.

The Daily Shoutout

Posted on: July 20, 2011 7:09 am

GREED? Minnesota punter Chris Kluwe was one of the few people -- media, players -- with the guts to tell the truth. He went to Twitter to do it: "Sigh, and once again greed is the operative byword. Congrats [Drew] Brees, [Peyton] Manning, [Logan] Mankins, and [Vincent] Jackson for being ‘that guy’. #*."

Kluwe didn't back down when asked later about his tweet. He was angry over Brees, Manning, Mankins and Jackson slowing progress on a new collective bargaining agreement with personal demands. “The thing is we’re so close to having a deal done and to kind of pull that at the last minute it feels kind of like blackmail," he told the Minneapolis Star-Tribune newspaper. "We all out the owners when they do crap like that and it’s only fair to call out our own people when they do the same thing. I’m against hypocrisy wherever it’s at. Just finish the deal up so we can get the season going.”

Kluwe wasn't the only player angry over what Manning et al were doing, he was just one of the few willing to publicly express that anger. Members of the NFLPA executive committee, meeting in Washington as the story broke, were infuriated, one player told me. "They want blood," that person said.

That may explain why in the end it was leaked to the Boston Herald that any idea of the plaintiffs receiving special consideration has been now abandoned. It also explains why Brees, Manning and Jackson issued denials they were looking for special consideration after Yahoo! sports, the Boston Globe and myself reported they were. Profootballtalk.com broke some aspects of this story a few weeks ago. There was too much heat coming down on the players from both the outside and inside.

Brees said he never asked for anything special.

Manning said through his agent he didn't either.

Jackson said on Twitter he didn't.

And they're 100 percent correct. None of those players themselves asked for special considerations. Not one of them.

Their lawyers did.

That was the problem. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the league, to me, actually do deserve special compensation. They stuck their necks out.

The problem Kluwe and others had was twofold. First, while what the lawyers representing Manning, Brees, Mankins and Jackson were doing was within their rights, no CBA can be signed without all plaintiffs agreeing and it is accurate that the four men were basically slowing progress on a deal because lawyers representing them were seeking special considerations. That's a fact.

Second, how much money is enough? Certainly, owners have at times acted greedily during this lockout, no question, but what lawyers representing Brady and Manning were doing in particular -- seeking more compensation while slowing down the talks -- came off as greedy, too. The two men are millionaires many times over. They're set for life. Their demands were stopping a deal for the rest of the league many of whom aren't nearly as wealthy.

So here we are. A deal remains near. It'll get done.

But this was not the greatest moment for those four men. Not at all.

Or the lawyers representing them.

[Peyton and Eli fan]

I have no doubt it was floated. It's exactly how the settlement was reached in 1993 and you have to have a settlement. Doesn't mean anyone was looking to hold up the deal. The CBA can't be reached until a settlement is reached. Seems to me a no brainer to grant them all the exemption. Won't make a difference in Peyton's case anyway b/c they are offering him a contract.

[bayone]

I have no doubt it was floated. It's exactly how the settlement was reached in 1993 and you have to have a settlement. Doesn't mean anyone was looking to hold up the deal. The CBA can't be reached until a settlement is reached. Seems to me a no brainer to grant them all the exemption. Won't make a difference in Peyton's case anyway b/c they are offering him a contract.

think Mankins and Jackson want more than others and are the problem as want 10 million each now & its Mankins who doesnt like idea of being franchised 2 years in a row, if i read all correctly

But yes , as all are named in lawsuit, suit has to be settled , dismissed etc in order to have a new CBA signed or it is an overhang that would still exist and neither owners nor players want that

[ViriLudant]

I'm laughing at the two of you trying to whitewash this.

Fact: Peyton is trying to get out of the franchise tag for life. Even though he's been tagged already.

This was just as much of an issue yesterday as Mankins and Jackson: individuals out for themselves, not the other 1896 players.

[Peyton and Eli fan]

I'm laughing at the two of you trying to whitewash this.

Fact: Peyton is trying to get out of the franchise tag for life. Even though he's been tagged already.

This was just as much of an issue yesterday as Mankins and Jackson: individuals out for themselves, not the other 1896 players.

So, let him out for life. It's no big deal and it's exactly how the lawsuit can get settled quickly.

[dysthymic]

So, let him out for life. It's no big deal and it's exactly how the lawsuit can get settled quickly.

You must be a kid lol Have you thought about the consequences of your recommendation for Peyton, the Colts, or for the league in general?

[Peyton and Eli fan]

You must be a kid lol Have you thought about the consequences of your recommendation for Peyton, the Colts, or for the league in general?

It's exactly the same deal that the plantiffs got in 1993.

[bayone]

The NFL Players Association on Wednesday is debriefing both the lead and alternate player representatives from each team on the proposed new collective bargaining agreement.

The NFLPA plans to go over the proposed deal and see if it warrants sending to the membership for approval. The lead reps for each team are in Washington at NFLPA headquarters. Those reps not there will take part in a conference call Wednesday morning.

NFLPA president Kevin Mawae said Wednesday morning that the players won't be pressured into agreeing to a deal.

"We're not tied to a timeline of July 21 (when the owners are scheduled to meet in Atlanta). Our timeline is to get a deal that's best for the players," Mawae said.

One thing that shouldn't hold up a possible deal is special considerations to the 10 named plaintiffs in the Brady antitrust lawsuit against the NFL. The NFLPA decided the best course of action was to forgo special compensation for those 10 players as part of a settlement, sources confirmed to ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter.

Mawae referenced this in his comments to reporters Wednesday.

"The deal we're working on is the one that's best for all the players in the NFL and not just four guys," he said.

It will take a majority vote of the players to ratify the deal. The owners would vote on the proposed CBA on Thursday if the players OK the deal Wednesday. Twenty-four of the 32 owners must vote yes for the CBA, expected to cover 10 seasons, to be ratified.

The NFLPA's decision to not recommend special considerations to the named plaintiffs was first reported by the Boston Herald.

My link

[UMLBB10]

why is his a surprise to anyone? fans, players, media. when these guys signed on to be part of the lawsuit did everyone think they were just doing it out of boredom? there's a reason you take part in a lawsuit