Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
PatriotReign37

8th District court rules in owners favor

Recommended Posts

jason423    7,830

Are the players getting paid now?

Because if they are, I don't see where a stay of appeal for perhaps 3 weeks amounts to Game Over, despite all the braggadocio I'm seeing from the owners' supporters.

The only players getting paid now are those who had signing bonus payments scheduled throughout this year (signing bonus money is usually not paid in a lump sum upon signing a contract its just accounted for that way) and those with deferred salaries from last season. All the money tied into 2011 (roster bonuses, workout bonuses, option bonuses, supersede bonuses, etc...) are being withheld. For example Brady is making millions throughout the lockout making his part in the lawsuit pretty ridiculous.

The reason why the stay is a big deal is because of the language used by the court. Basically it says that two judges who are going to hear the appeal see almost no legal merit to the decision made by the lower court. It makes the case itself just seem like a formality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Registered members do not see this ad. Click here to create your free account today.
Registered members do not see this ad. Click here to create your free account today.
T0mShane    90,860

Hes painted them into a corner and thrown away the key.

D Smith didn't lock them out, and it's the owners painting themselves into a corner totally and completely. Best case scenario for fans is that the players are in camp, working and getting paid/placated while Smith and Goodell hammer out a deal. As is, what you're going to have is a Mexican standoff wherein the owners are basically going to try and starve the players out of the castle.

If you're the players, your next big chip is to hold out as long as you can so you start costing the NFL regular season games, which is when the owners start to cry poverty for real. I suspect that's what will happen, for as long as the players can hold ranks. If Doty gives them their $700 mil and it's rationed properly, the players could probably take this into November-December.

Prepare for a bunch of dark, expensive stadiums this Fall.

Edited by Sperm Edwards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scott Dierking    129,440

for as long as the players can hold ranks.

Therein lies your problem.

This ain't baseball, and Smith certainly is no Marvin Miller.

Players are going to fold up, once this starts getting serious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
T0mShane    90,860

If that is so, why are Buffalo, Carolina and Cinncinati pushing this, while the big market teams would love to cut the crap and settle tomorrow?

Buffalo, Cincy, etc., need to lessen the money that goes to players in anticipation of their financial apocalypse, where Jerry Jones eventually takes away the profit-sharing welfare program that has made it possible for low-end teams to win Super Bowls without actually building billion dollar stadiums to gouge fans in. Imagine how sad it must make ol' Jerry and lil' Danny Snyder and ol' Woody to have sodomized all those taxpayers for big, new sh*tboxes only to have to watch (gasp!) Pittsburgh play (gasp!) Green Bay in the Super Bowl!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
T0mShane    90,860

Therein lies your problem.

This ain't baseball, and Smith certainly is no Marvin Miller.

Players are going to fold up, once this starts getting serious.

They haven't yet and they're likely to get their war chest fattened by $700 mil in a few weeks. That should be enough to keep Cromartie's children in Rolexes for a few months, at least.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PatriotReign37    31,232

D Smith didn't lock them out, and it's the owners painting themselves into a corner totally and completely. Best case scenario for fans is that the players are in camp, working and getting paid/placated while Smith and Goodell hammer out a deal. As is, the owners went and found some of W's good ol' boys in the 8th circuit that like to break unions and now what you're going to have is a Mexican standoff wherein the owners are basically going to try and starve the players out of the castle.

If you're the players, your next big chip is to hold out as long as you can so you start costing the NFL regular season games, which is when the owners start to cry poverty for real. I suspect that's what will happen, for as long as the players can hold ranks. If Doty gives them their $700 mil and it's rationed properly, the players could probably take this into November-December.

Prepare for a bunch of dark, expensive stadiums this Fall.

Smith has to go back to the bargaining table or get caught in another one of his lies. Doing whats best for the players and getting back to the business of football for the fans means a new CBA. Not more of his lawsuits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PatriotReign37    31,232

They haven't yet and they're likely to get their war chest fattened by $700 mil in a few weeks. That should be enough to keep Cromartie's children in Rolexes for a few months, at least.

Im pretty sure that ruling can be appealed too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PatriotReign37    31,232

Therein lies your problem.

This ain't baseball, and Smith certainly is no Marvin Miller.

Players are going to fold up, once this starts getting serious.

Yup, its a matter of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
T0mShane    90,860

Smith has to go back to the bargaining table or get caught in another one of his lies. Doing whats best for the players and getting back to the business of football for the fans means a new CBA. Not more of his lawsuits.

I would just so love to hire you to work for my company. You'd be the perfect employee.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PatriotReign37    31,232

D Smith didn't lock them out, and it's the owners painting themselves into a corner totally and completely. Best case scenario for fans is that the players are in camp, working and getting paid/placated while Smith and Goodell hammer out a deal. As is, what you're going to have is a Mexican standoff wherein the owners are basically going to try and starve the players out of the castle.

If you're the players, your next big chip is to hold out as long as you can so you start costing the NFL regular season games, which is when the owners start to cry poverty for real. I suspect that's what will happen, for as long as the players can hold ranks. If Doty gives them their $700 mil and it's rationed properly, the players could probably take this into November-December.

Prepare for a bunch of dark, expensive stadiums this Fall.

No, D Smith had the NFLPA quit being a union, so he and Kessler could sue the owners when they didnt get their way. Black mail, nice. The whole thing has back fired in his face. D Smith will win in Minnesota court and then lose on appeal in the St Louis court who have the final say. This will go on for months and you cant blame the owners for appealing when Smith is suing them. He wanted to go there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PatriotReign37    31,232

I would just so love to hire you to work for my company. You'd be the perfect employee.

If you dont let me work for you, I will see you in court.

Damn rich employers are all alike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
T0mShane    90,860

If you dont let me work for you, I will see you in court.

Damn rich employers are all alike.

:lol:

Point is, this isn't getting settled in the courts. The entire function of these lawsuits and Kessler is to simply serve as a reminder that the NFL operates outside of the law and that the owners have only implicit freedom to manipulate a CBA. The courts are just a leveraging device for the players, and not the major determinant in these negotiations. The courts aren't going to hand them a CBA.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
New York Mick    85,400

The owners of businesses make more money then the people that work for them in every business so players shut the **** up get your over paid checks and get back to ******* work. Most of you greedy cunts came from sh*t and wouldn't be making sh*t if it wasn't for the NFL owners who put up their money to buy a business and hire your dumbasses.

Stop being greedy stupid cunts and get back to work

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FloridaJetsFan    671

The owners of businesses make more money then the people that work for them in every business so players shut the **** up get your over paid checks and get back to ******* work. Most of you greedy cunts came from sh*t and wouldn't be making sh*t if it wasn't for the NFL owners who put up their money to buy a business and hire your dumbasses.

Stop being greedy stupid cunts and get back to work

I was under the impression that the owners want to take $1 Billion dollars away from the players and split it among themselves as profit to the owners? Didn't the players offer to extend the current CBA in order to prevent the busting up of the union? :confused0082:

Edited by FloridaJetsFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JetNation    4,280

nfl.jpg

If you are a fan of the NFL lockout, the news just got better.  For everyone else, the news is not good.

According to The Red Zone.org:

The 8th circuit Court of Appeals has granted the NFL’s motion for a stay on the appeal  which means until at least the first week of June and possibly much longer according to the
Associated Press
.

The 2-1 decision similar to the decision last month from the same judges, including a lengthy dissent from the same judge.

The appellate court said it believed the NFL has proven it “likely will suffer some degree of irreparable harm without a stay.” It also cast doubt on the conclusions of U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson, who ruled April 25 that the lockout should be lifted — only to have the 8th Circuit panel put her decision on hold four days later.

“In sum, we have serious doubts that the district court had jurisdiction to enjoin the league’s lockout, and accordingly conclude that the league has made a strong showing that it is likely to succeed on the merits,” the majority wrote.

Football fans are past tired of this lockout and are discussing in the NFL forum on JetNation.

di</img>di</img>

6wWgQTk0YdM

View the full article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
flgreen    23,537

This is only part of the story. I believe it was in 2005 (not sure) the owners extended the CBA in an attempt to avoid a work stoppage. They excepted a CBA they weren’t comfortable with in the hopes that they could agree with the players on a long term CBA. They were smart enough to leave an opt out clause in the contract in the event that the NFLPA wouldn’t negotiate in good faith.

People seldom willing surrender something they already have, and wouldn’t come to the table to cut a long standing CBA. The owners exercised their opt-out clause.

The union decertified in order to settle it by litigation, rather then negotiation.

Here we are, and I don’t think it is going to get much better for some time.

That’s my understanding of it at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scott Dierking    129,440

I was under the impression that the owners want to take $1 Billion dollars away from the players and split it among themselves as profit to the owners? Didn't the players offer to extend the current CBA in order to prevent the busting up of the union? :confused0082:

The owners claim they they get bent over by an overzealous Tagliabue who only wanted usher a deal, and not have to deal with a work struggle. The former deal does not account for all of the revenue streams, does not adequately address revenue sharing and does not account for all the outlays the owners have,

Extending a deal only continues to allow discontent to fester, and doesn't solve the problems. They need to work this out.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jason423    7,830

This is only part of the story. I believe it was in 2005 (not sure) the owners extended the CBA in an attempt to avoid a work stoppage. They excepted a CBA they weren’t comfortable with in the hopes that they could agree with the players on a long term CBA. They were smart enough to leave an opt out clause in the contract in the event that the NFLPA wouldn’t negotiate in good faith.

People seldom willing surrender something they already have, and wouldn’t come to the table to cut a long standing CBA. The owners exercised their opt-out clause.

The union decertified in order to settle it by litigation, rather then negotiation.

Here we are, and I don’t think it is going to get much better for some time.

That’s my understanding of it at least.

Thats more or less what happened. JMO, but I think the league was caught totally off guard when the NFLPA elected D. Smith to head the union. All along the NFL had assumed that what was going to happen was that Troy Vincent was going to naturally assume Upshaws role once Upshaw stepped down. Vincent had worked with the NFL during the last labor deal and the assumption was he would be business as usual and there would be a smooth transaction once he got elected. It never happened as the new NFLPA leadership, probably headed by Kevin Mawae at the time, pushed for a new type of head- one with a legal background rather than a former player with a relationship with the NFL heads. It totally threw the NFL off. I also dont think they ever expected the union leader to go on the TV and radio and be so vocal and in the spotlight with the rhetoric. That is probably where alot of the bad feelings on the owners side come from and they have been unjustifiably nasty at times to certain players.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FloridaJetsFan    671

The owners claim they they get bent over by an overzealous Tagliabue who only wanted usher a deal, and not have to deal with a work struggle. The former deal does not account for all of the revenue streams, does not adequately address revenue sharing and does not account for all the outlays the owners have,

Extending a deal only continues to allow discontent to fester, and doesn't solve the problems. They need to work this out.

Thanks for the insight!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scott Dierking    129,440

Thats more or less what happened. JMO, but I think the league was caught totally off guard when the NFLPA elected D. Smith to head the union. All along the NFL had assumed that what was going to happen was that Troy Vincent was going to naturally assume Upshaws role once Upshaw stepped down. Vincent had worked with the NFL during the last labor deal and the assumption was he would be business as usual and there would be a smooth transaction once he got elected. It never happened as the new NFLPA leadership, probably headed by Kevin Mawae at the time, pushed for a new type of head- one with a legal background rather than a former player with a relationship with the NFL heads. It totally threw the NFL off. I also dont think they ever expected the union leader to go on the TV and radio and be so vocal and in the spotlight with the rhetoric. That is probably where alot of the bad feelings on the owners side come from and they have been unjustifiably nasty at times to certain players.

Good point on Smith.

Both Smith and Goodell are in their first rodeo. This becomes more of a game of "chicken", as legacies are at stake here.

That is unfortunate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bitonti    36,751

This is good news, the players just lost all their leverage. They will cave quickly.

the type of people who cave quickly do not make a living as NFL players

these people never cave. Not even if they are in extreme physical pain

this fight is far from over.

as for the decision last night... the 8th court did some activist judging thats all there is to it. The idea that decertifying was a fraudulent act is flat out untrue. it was a tactic but it was within the rules of the game. all lawyering is tactics.

The court ruled a certain way based on their political/philosophical beliefs and that's not the way the American judicial system is supposed to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
T0mShane    90,860

The court ruled a certain way based on their political/philosophical beliefs and that's not the way the American judicial system is supposed to work.

george-w-bush.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JohnnyHector    152,029

the type of people who cave quickly do not make a living as NFL players

these people never cave. Not even if they are in extreme physical pain

this fight is far from over.

There is absolutely no parallel between playing on a bum knee after taking a cortisone shot and some demerol and being able to weather financial distress when you've got a wife/ex-wife (or ex-wives) and kids that you need to provide for, all while keeping up a lifestyle to which you've become accustomed.

If the players were not to get any of the "Doty money", it would be a tremendous blow to them.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
flgreen    23,537

the type of people who cave quickly do not make a living as NFL players

these people never cave. Not even if they are in extreme physical pain

this fight is far from over.

as for the decision last night... the 8th court did some activist judging thats all there is to it. The idea that decertifying was a fraudulent act is flat out untrue. it was a tactic but it was within the rules of the game. all lawyering is tactics.

The court ruled a certain way based on their political/philosophical beliefs and that's not the way the American judicial system is supposed to work.

After the Nelson, and Doty rulings aren’t you supposed to put a :P at the end of that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dbatesman    35,758

the 8th court did some activist judging thats all there is to it.

Fortunately, the people who support the owners are the type of people who've never had a problem with activist judges.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doggin94it    21,547

the type of people who cave quickly do not make a living as NFL players

these people never cave. Not even if they are in extreme physical pain

this fight is far from over.

as for the decision last night... the 8th court did some activist judging thats all there is to it. The idea that decertifying was a fraudulent act is flat out untrue. it was a tactic but it was within the rules of the game. all lawyering is tactics.

The court ruled a certain way based on their political/philosophical beliefs and that's not the way the American judicial system is supposed to work.

Bit, this is silly. The 8th Circuit didn't rule, at all, on the decertification issue. All they ruled was:

1) That the Norris-LaGuardia Act, which removes Federal Courts' ability to issue injunctions in "labor disputes" defines "labor dispute" broadly, and isn't limited to labor disputes involving unions (relying on pretty clear Supreme Court precedent from New Negro Alliance v. Sanitary Grocery Co., in which the Supreme Court held that the Norris-Laguardia act barred courts from enjoining the New Negro Alliance - a non-union - from picketing a store to protest its lack of hiring of black clerks);

2) That, in any event, the Norris-LaGuardia Act, by its terms, applies not only to cases "involving a labor dispute" but also cases "growing out of a labor dispute", so even if the Act applied only to labor disputes involving unions, this case clearly "grew out of" the dispute between a union (the NFLPA, pre-decertification) and an employer (the NFL teams, as a collective bargaining unit)

3) The Norris-LaGuardia Act likely applies to bar both injunctions aimed at unions and injunctions aimed at employers

4) Based on that, the League has a strong likelihood of success on the merits of its appeal of the injunction

5) That both parties will be irreparably harmed if the ruling doesn't go their way (League if it's enjoined, players if it isn't)

6) That the expedited appeal pretty much eliminates most of the harm to the players

The dissenting judge, btw, dissented purely on the issue of irreparable harm; he did not disagree with his colleagues that the NFL was likely to prevail in getting the injunction dismissed on appeal, if only because the Norris-LaGuardia Act means the district judge really had no authority to issue the injunction in the first place

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
flgreen    23,537

Bit, this is silly. The 8th Circuit didn't rule, at all, on the decertification issue. All they ruled was:

1) That the Norris-LaGuardia Act, which removes Federal Courts' ability to issue injunctions in "labor disputes" defines "labor dispute" broadly, and isn't limited to labor disputes involving unions (relying on pretty clear Supreme Court precedent from New Negro Alliance v. Sanitary Grocery Co., in which the Supreme Court held that the Norris-Laguardia act barred courts from enjoining the New Negro Alliance - a non-union - from picketing a store to protest its lack of hiring of black clerks);

2) That, in any event, the Norris-LaGuardia Act, by its terms, applies not only to cases "involving a labor dispute" but also cases "growing out of a labor dispute", so even if the Act applied only to labor disputes involving unions, this case clearly "grew out of" the dispute between a union (the NFLPA, pre-decertification) and an employer (the NFL teams, as a collective bargaining unit)

3) The Norris-LaGuardia Act likely applies to bar both injunctions aimed at unions and injunctions aimed at employers

4) Based on that, the League has a strong likelihood of success on the merits of its appeal of the injunction

5) That both parties will be irreparably harmed if the ruling doesn't go their way (League if it's enjoined, players if it isn't)

6) That the expedited appeal pretty much eliminates most of the harm to the players

The dissenting judge, btw, dissented purely on the issue of irreparable harm; he did not disagree with his colleagues that the NFL was likely to prevail in getting the injunction dismissed on appeal, if only because the Norris-LaGuardia Act means the district judge really had no authority to issue the injunction in the first place

Dam politically motivated judges. What right do they have to base their decisions on established precedent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
#27TheDominator    203,589

I think the NFLPA brought this on itself. I've been complaining about it from the start. It's obviously a sham decertification, but they didn't even pretend. They decertified the way Michael Scott declared "bankruptcy". At least go through the motions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PFSIKH    101,506

the type of people who cave quickly do not make a living as NFL players

these people never cave. Not even if they are in extreme physical pain

this fight is far from over.

as for the decision last night... the 8th court did some activist judging thats all there is to it. The idea that decertifying was a fraudulent act is flat out untrue. it was a tactic but it was within the rules of the game. all lawyering is tactics.

The court ruled a certain way based on their political/philosophical beliefs and that's not the way the American judicial system is supposed to work.

They caved during the last lockout.

You are confusing what they do to get on the field and how the live their lives. Two totally separate issues.

If the owners can keep it out of the courts long enough, players will concede.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×