Players union disolved

[SMC]

I think its more like greedy owners and greedy players.

Serious question: under these circumstanes, how are the players being "greedy"?

The players didn't opt out of the CBA and they aren't the ones asking for $1 billion extra money. The owners are the ones doing that.

[SMC]

By decertifying, what offseason activities can continue besides the draft?

Everything.

Only a lockout stops offseason activities.

[madmikeisback]

I think its more like greedy owners and greedy players.

Wrong. The players are being asked to give BACK money in a period where the league is getting all time record ratings and revenues despite the country being in a recession. There is ZERO reason for the players to be taking any amount of paycut and the fact that a judge has already ruled that the owners were engaging in unfair business practices with that dirty TV deal shows who is pushing this work stoppage. It's 100% on the owners.

[Jetfan13]

F*#k them all. Lock them out, the greedy pricks. If true that they never were interested in negotiating, that litigation was their goal from the start, F*#K them all to hell. On average, living in S. Fla, it costs us $1,500-2,000 per game to see a game, with travel cost, hotel and tix. f*# them, we will spend our money in a National Park or somewhere else. I am just fed up.

[SMC]

BTW guys, it was just reported on Twitter: Nine players (Brees, Peyton, Brady, Osi, et al) have already filed the antitrust lawsuit against the NFL seeking a temporary and permenant injunction preventing the NFL from locking out the players.

[FloridaJetsFan]

From what I "think" I know about the situation, I support the players. It seems to me that the owners are not being upfront with their intentions or their situation. I think the owners will settle once the judge requires them to show their real books.

[hoping4ASuperBowl]

Serious question: under these circumstanes, how are the players being "greedy"?

The players didn't opt out of the CBA and they aren't the ones asking for $1 billion extra money. The owners are the ones doing that.

Well considering the players decertified I side with them more than the owners considering they still want football more than the owners who would be willing to wait it out. I don't believe all the players should take a pay cut while increasing the amount of money they invest in the game.

It's a fight over millions and what are the players getting out of all this? My anger is more towards the fact that neither side has resolved the situation when this day has been looming for quite some time. Is a new CBA gonna lower the cost of ticket prices or PSL's? Either way the fans get nothing from this and still pay for their season tickets if they have them.

[Larz]

both sides are dug in, lawyered up and pissed off

I just don't see this ending soon

and we all know who will lose in the end......

[nycdan]

both sides are dug in, lawyered up and pissed off

I just don't see this ending soon

and we all know who will lose in the end......

We already lost. PSLs, skyrocketing cost of DirecTicket subscription, $9 hot dogs...

[Larz]

We already lost. PSLs, skyrocketing cost of DirecTicket subscription, $9 hot dogs...

yeah, but the games were still on

I can't see any way with this level of rhetoric and mistrust that there will be anything normal until the lawsuits are settled, and if the players win, all it will mean is the teams are going to have to make up the money somehow

I wonder where they will get it from ?

pay per view ?

[#27TheDominator]

There's no more union. That's a fact. You can argue about what it's called all you want. What I wrote is 100% spot on. That was the whole purpose of decertifying.

The NFL can't legally lockout the players.

That was probably meant for me.

F*#k them all. Lock them out, the greedy pricks. If true that they never were interested in negotiating, that litigation was their goal from the start, F*#K them all to hell. On average, living in S. Fla, it costs us $1,500-2,000 per game to see a game, with travel cost, hotel and tix. f*# them, we will spend our money in a National Park or somewhere else. I am just fed up.

I understand the sentiment, but I don't see how decertification brought this on. Decerrtifying lets the season continue. It doesn't do anything to lower your costs, but nothing that either side has offered is going to do that.

[Bergen Jet]

Interesting names in the Antitrust suit including Von Miller. Decertification was the only real card the players had in their deck and it is pretty much the trump card. Other than a new CBA this is a good as it gets.

[NJ]

Serious question: under these circumstanes, how are the players being "greedy"?

The players didn't opt out of the CBA and they aren't the ones asking for $1 billion extra money. The owners are the ones doing that.

And they're asking for it without any reasonable justification. I'm sorry, but "because" or "onaccounta" don't cut it for justification. If the greedy pricks even want a sniff of a larger cut they HAVE to show just cause with audited P/L's. I hope the courts azz slam the bastards.

[hoping4ASuperBowl]

yeah, but the games were still on

I can't see any way with this level of rhetoric and mistrust that there will be anything normal until the lawsuits are settled, and if the players win, all it will mean is the teams are going to have to make up the money somehow

I wonder where they will get it from ?

pay per view ?

Lets say the players win this anti-trust lawsuit, are the owners really gonna take it on the chin and let the players come out and play next season without any backlash? I must imagine the owners have something in their back pockets to help make this situation uglier than it already is.

I want football just as much as everyone else but I don't want the owners take their losses out on the fans when we have no voice in this fiasco.

[Larz]

Lets say the players win this anti-trust lawsuit, are the owners really gonna take it on the chin and let the players come out and play next season without any backlash? I must imagine the owners have something in their back pockets to help make this situation uglier than it already is.

I want football just as much as everyone else but I don't want the owners take their losses out on the fans when we have no voice in this fiasco.

I agree, the owners have been expecting this, they must have a strategy. I don't think they will literally take it out on the fans, but I know prices aren't going down. as a fan for almost 30 years, all I want is for the sport and the league to be strong and to grow, I honestly don't really care for any particular player, I root for the logo.

I would 100 % prefer to see the league and ownership come out the winner here, cuz that means the logo is strong and that's all I care about.

I also have a bad feeling the reason the owners aren't showing all the financial details isn't just a blind money grab, but it may reveal some teams are in worse shape than imagined, and are carrying huge debts, something they just don't want out there

I mean, in the current economy, is it sane on any level to just let your payroll rise 10% a year ?

what's good for the game is bad for the players (draft, cap, player movement restrictions)

I'm pulling for the owners all the way

I really don't wan to see dallas become the yankees and win 8 titles over 12 years because they can buy all the players

[SMC]

Lets say the players win this anti-trust lawsuit, are the owners really gonna take it on the chin and let the players come out and play next season without any backlash? I must imagine the owners have something in their back pockets to help make this situation uglier than it already is.

I want football just as much as everyone else but I don't want the owners take their losses out on the fans when we have no voice in this fiasco.

What are the owners going to do???

The owners trump card was the lockout insurance and that got blown to bits by Judge Dotty. The owners thought they were going to steamroll the union like they had in the past with Gene Upshaw.

The owners have loan defaults to worry about. They're not going to "take it out on the fans." The owners wanted to crush the union by August with a lockout and players afraid of not getting paid. Judge Dotty essentially made sure that wasn't going to happen.

The problem with the owners is that they're led by the worst commish in sports, Goodell, and a no nothing loud mouth owner in Jerry Richardson.

[Larz]

What are the owners going to do???

The owners trump card was the lockout insurance and that got blown to bits by Judge Dotty. The owners thought they were going to steamroll the union like they had in the past with Gene Upshaw.

The owners have loan defaults to worry about. They're not going to "take it out on the fans." The owners wanted to crush the union by August with a lockout and players afraid of not getting paid. Judge Dotty essentially made sure that wasn't going to happen.

The problem with the owners is that they're led by the worst commish in sports, Goodell, and a no nothing loud mouth owner in Jerry Richardson.

32 billionaires sure as hell aint gonna take it on the chin. do any of these developments lead you to believe the cost of going to a game is going down ?

the best thing for a fan is for the owners to win. I don't think they are going to court over just the money, I think they are going after the cap, the draft, franchise tags, all the restrictions. I really don't want the NFL to look like baseball in a few years

the owners do need to put more money into the players health plan and give up on an 18 game season, but after that I'm rooting 100% for the owners

[SMC]

32 billionaires sure as hell aint gonna take it on the chin. do any of these developments lead you to believe the cost of going to a game is going down ?

the best thing for a fan is for the owners to win. I don't think they are going to court over just the money, I think they are going after the cap, the draft, franchise tags, all the restrictions. I really don't want the NFL to look like baseball in a few years

the owners do need to put more money into the players health plan and give up on an 18 game season, but after that I'm rooting 100% for the owners

I understand the sentiment but, no, the players aren't going after the cap and other restrictions. I really don't understand where this notion of the NFL looking like baseball is coming from.

THE OWNERS OPTED OUT OF THE CBA.

Again ...

THE OWNERS OPTED OUT OF THE CBA.

The CBA had TWO YEARS left, but the owners wanted out of the deal so they can force the players to give up an extra $1 billion through a lockout. The owners tried to get lockout insurance with the TV deals but Judge Doty nixed that.

The players want to play and get paid, that's why they went to court. There was no other option for that to happen except decertification.

[Larz]

ok, now my head hurts

where is that hot chicks thread ?

linky

Michael McCann is a sports law professor and Sports Law Institute director at Vermont Law School and the distinguished visiting Hall of Fame Professor of Law at Mississippi College School of Law. He also teaches a sports law reading group at Yale Law School.

Now that the NFL Players Association has decided to decertify, here's a road map of what might happen next.

1. The NFL will immediately file a grievance with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in an attempt to block the decertification. The NFL will argue that the NFLPA is acting in bad faith and that the NFLPA's true goal is to get the NFL exposed to antitrust litigation as a way of grabbing owners' money.

2. The NLRB takes no immediate action on the NFL's grievance over the weekend as its offices will be closed. The NFLPA proceeds as if it has decertified. Monday comes along and the NLRB schedules a hearing, possibly for later in the week, to review the NFLPA's decertification.

3. In addition to the NFL's NLRB grievance, the NFLPA will file a request for a temporary restraining order with U.S. District Judge David Doty in an attempt to block the NFL from executing a lockout. The NFLPA, with Tom Brady and Peyton Manning as named plaintiffs, will argue that the lockout would violate players' employment contracts with NFL teams and would constitute a group boycott under federal antitrust law, which it can now turn to since the NFLPA has decertified. Federal antitrust law is very threatening, as damages in a successful antitrust lawsuit are automatically multiplied by three.

4. I believe Judge Doty would grant the NFLPA's temporary injunction on the condition that the NFLPA temporarily withdraw its decertification papers, thus temporarily removing the NLRB from the situation, and that he hears substantive arguments from both parties in the following week or two concerning the legality of the NFL's proposed lockout.

5. The NFL then files papers for emergency appeal of Judge Doty's decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, which can review Judge Doty. The NFL states that it does not trust Doty's objectivity and will offer legal arguments that the NFLPA has no law to support blocking a lockout.

6. The NFL's emergency appeal attempt will be unlikely to work; appellate courts normally don't take them absent compelling circumstances. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit took the Clarett v. NFL case on emergency appeal after Clarett won before U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin and was temporarily eligible for the 2004 NFL Draft.

7. Assuming 8th Circuit does not reverse Judge Doty, he then informs the NFL and NFLPA to prepare arguments before his court. His doing so gives the NFL and NFLPA more time to bargain before Doty's hearing. During this time, the expired CBA would still have legal effect and NFL business would proceed as normal -- free agency signings still happen, consistent with current CBA rules, teams continue to prepare for 2011 NFL Draft etc. A week or two after the hearing, Doty makes his decision on whether an NFL lockout would be legal. Possible twist: NFL and NFLPA reach a deal in the interim (unlikely).

8. Assuming there is no deal between NFL and NFLPA and assuming Judge Doty rules in favor of NFL -- meaning the lockout would be given the green light -- league operations would then stop and the players would then continue their decertification. The NLRB would then conduct a hearing on the decertification. NFLPA would likely win that NLRB hearing since bad faith will be hard for NFL to show.

Assuming NFLPA wins the NLRB hearing, the nuclear outcome would emerge: no union, no bargaining (since decertification removes the NFLPA's power to collectively bargain) and no football. Such a stalemate could go on potentially for years, but that would not necessarily mean no football the whole time. If the owners wanted to restore football, they could end their lockout while the NFLPA was decertified and NFL players and teams would operate as if the expired CBA was still in effect. The NFLPA could then be recertified when NFL players were ready to strike a new CBA with the owners. This is what happened in the late '80s/early '90s, with games played in spite of an expired CBA and a decertified NFLPA.

The risk for the players is if the NFLPA decertifies (and assuming NFL fails to block that) and if the owners commence a lockout (and assuming NFLPA fails to block that), then the players better be prepared for the owners not restoring football and just waiting out the players to see if they capitulate and walk back to the bargaining table almost like beggars, offering to recertify and take whatever offer the NFL gives them.

9. Assuming there is no deal between NFL and NFLPA and assuming Judge Doty rules in favor of NFLPA -- meaning the lockout would be given the red light -- players would obtain tremendous leverage in negotiations. They could decertify and bring antitrust lawsuits and the league wouldn't be able to block those lawsuits. The players, however, would likely not decertify in this situation (or, if already decertified, they would recertify), since they are reasonably comfortable with the terms of the current CBA and it would remain in effect until a new CBA is reached. In this scenario, NFL teams would operate as normal and the 2011 season would be restored -- at least until the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit reviews Doty's decision.

10. Whether the NFL or NFLPA win before Judge Doty regarding the legality of the NFL's lockout, his decision would be subject to review by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit and potentially (though unlikely) the United States Supreme Court. If the 8th Circuit reverses in favor of the NFL, the players would then return to the decertification route and there would be no football and no negotiations. If the 8th Circuit reverses in favor of the NFLPA, the owners cannot execute a lockout and the players obtain leverage in negotiating a new CBA and probably don't decertify.

The loser in this could petition the U.S. Supreme Court for writ of certiorari. The Supreme Court rejects approximately 98 or 99% of writs, with accepted ones usually involving splits in authority among federal circuits (not applicable here) or other novel questions of law (possibly applicable here).

11. It's also possible that after all this, the NFL's proposed lockout could be deemed illegal and the NFLPA's proposed decertification could also be deemed illegal, meaning the parties would then have to negotiate.

It's not unfathomable to think that President Obama would eventually get involved, not by forcing any action by the NFL or NFLPA, but by using the power of the Presidency to pressure both parties to stop being so selfish. He could end up playing a huge role here, and with the 2012 re-election campaign gearing up, the timing may be ripe for that.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/michael_mccann/03/11/whatnext/index.html#ixzz1GLW3iBSR

[SMC]

UPDATE:

PFT got a copy of the players' antitrust complaint from court. The players argue that the NFL waived the "sham decertification" argument, here's PFT's explanation of it:

Paragraph 45 of the civil complaint explains that, when settling the Reggie White antitrust lawsuit in 1993, the league “insisted on the right to terminate the [agreement] if the players did not reform a union within thirty days.” To get that provision, the NFL agrees that, “if a majority of players decided to end their collective bargaining representation upon or after the [agreement's] expiration,” the NFL would waive the right to argue, among other things, that the decertification was “a sham or otherwise ineffective.”

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/11/antitrust-lawsuit-alleges-that-nfl-has-waived-sham-defense-to-decertification/

If that's the case, then the NFL is stuck. They won't be able to fight the decert and can't impose a lockout. THAT'S GOOD NEWS for the fans.

[Larz]

UPDATE:

PFT got a copy of the players' antitrust complaint from court. The players argue that the NFL waived the "sham decertification" argument, here's PFT's explanation of it:

http://profootballta...ecertification/

If that's the case, then the NFL is stuck. They won't be able to fight the decert and can't impose a lockout. THAT'S GOOD NEWS for the fans.

32 billionaires don't get stuck that easily

5. The NFL then files papers for emergency appeal of Judge Doty's decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, which can review Judge Doty. The NFL states that it does not trust Doty's objectivity and will offer legal arguments that the NFLPA has no law to support blocking a lockout.

My link

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Unable to decide how to divvy up $9 billion a year, NFL owners and players put the country's most popular sport in limbo Friday by breaking off labor negotiations hours before their contract expired. The union decertified; the league imposed a lockout.

Ten players, including MVP quarterbacks Tom Brady and Peyton Manning, sued the owners in federal court in Minneapolis. Then, at midnight, the owners locked out the players -- signaling the NFL's first work stoppage since 1987.

"We are locked out," union president and former player Kevin Mawae said in a text message to The Associated Press. "We were informed today that players are no longer welcome at team facilities."

[PatriotReign37]

There's no more union. That's a fact. You can argue about what it's called all you want. What I wrote is 100% spot on. That was the whole purpose of decertifying.

The NFL can't legally lockout the players.

Im not arguing that there is a union.

NFLPA still exists, but is no longer a union.

[PatriotReign37]

Interesting names in the Antitrust suit including Von Miller. Decertification was the only real card the players had in their deck and it is pretty much the trump card. Other than a new CBA this is a good as it gets.

A draft prospect so the NFL draft and proposed rookie salary cap could be argued in court.

[PatriotReign37]

AND, who is going to hear the NFL's lawsuit??? Judge Dotty who just held that the owners breached their fidiciary duty to the players by negotiating lockout insurance into the TV deals.

Judge Dotty has jurisdiction over all CBA related labor litigation. It's going to be hard to argue that the NFLPA didn't negotiate in good faith when the judge has already held the owners have been planning a lockout for at least 2 years.

The lockout insurance was an idiotic move by the owners.

Everything sounds like its going to go the players way.

I find that hard to believe that the owners are just going to bendover and take this without a fight.

[CTM]

I am not paying attention to this at all. But I did hear Demaurice Smith (sp?) say something to the affect of "players will be making less in 2011 then they did in 2009, players will be making the same in 2011 and 2010, and that's not fair".. I think that was a stupid thing to say and instantly makes me side with the owners just for the stupidity. I'm sure the average slob whose now strapped with PSL's and higer ticket/concession/parking prices, doesn't want to hear anyone whine about "fair"..

[SMC]

I am not paying attention to this at all. But I did hear Demaurice Smith (sp?) say something to the affect of "players will be making less in 2011 then they did in 2009, players will be making the same in 2011 and 2010, and that's not fair".. I think that was a stupid thing to say and instantly makes me side with the owners just for the stupidity. I'm sure the average slob whose now strapped with PSL's and higer ticket/concession/parking prices, doesn't want to hear anyone whine about "fair"..

You shouldn't be high when you try to pay attention to stuff like this.

Smith was talking about the owners' last proposal which would have reduced the 2011 salary cap to below 2009 levels when the NFL has enjoyed record revenue (much more than 2009 and prior).

[SMC]

32 billionaires don't get stuck that easily

5. The NFL then files papers for emergency appeal of Judge Doty's decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, which can review Judge Doty. The NFL states that it does not trust Doty's objectivity and will offer legal arguments that the NFLPA has no law to support blocking a lockout.

My link

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Unable to decide how to divvy up $9 billion a year, NFL owners and players put the country's most popular sport in limbo Friday by breaking off labor negotiations hours before their contract expired. The union decertified; the league imposed a lockout.

Ten players, including MVP quarterbacks Tom Brady and Peyton Manning, sued the owners in federal court in Minneapolis. Then, at midnight, the owners locked out the players -- signaling the NFL's first work stoppage since 1987.

"We are locked out," union president and former player Kevin Mawae said in a text message to The Associated Press. "We were informed today that players are no longer welcome at team facilities."

The 8th Circuit isn't reversing Doty on the lockout insurance case. The NFL had no law to support what they did and were left with arguing that even if they breached their fiduciary duty to the players the players weren't hurt yet because payments hadn't been made. The NFL is toast on the lockout insurance case.

Challenging a district judge's objectivity to a higher court is a dead end. Appellate Courts scoff at that. They look at the law and whether the district court had legal authority backing its decision. Doty did.

And, the players already are seeking an injunction to stop the lockout. The NFL will argue sham, but they already waived that defense in the 1993 case and the waiver is explicitly listed in the prior CBA.

The NFL's whole plan was based on lockout insurance and they don't have it.

[billo83]

The 8th Circuit isn't reversing Doty on the lockout insurance case. The NFL had no law to support what they did and were left with arguing that even if they breached their fiduciary duty to the players the players weren't hurt yet because payments hadn't been made. The NFL is toast on the lockout insurance case.

Challenging a district judge's objectivity to a higher court is a dead end. Appellate Courts scoff at that. They look at the law and whether the district court had legal authority backing its decision. Doty did.

And, the players already are seeking an injunction to stop the lockout. The NFL will argue sham, but they already waived that defense in the 1993 case and the waiver is explicitly listed in the prior CBA.

The NFL's whole plan was based on lockout insurance and they don't have it.

I just have a hard time believing that the owners are that stupid. I mean, they didn't become billionares by being idiots. They must have something up their sleeve, some kind of back up plan.

[Bugg]

I just have a hard time believing that the owners are that stupid. I mean, they didn't become billionares by being idiots. They must have something up their sleeve, some kind of back up plan.

I don't. They are very used to getting their way,rolling municipalities and states like 3 card monty marks for new stadium deals, and I currently am paying a PSL(silly me!). The owners are so invested in always getting their way they assume everyone else will roll over and play dead. And playing games with federal courts like this when you have an antitrust exemption is very dangerous game. You can knock the players for questionable leadership regarding Demaurice Smith; clearly he likes to hear his own voice. But they have the legal high ground and they have a winning streak going,not because Judge Doty is biased, but because the owners' legal case-we want more money, therefore we're locking you guys out- sucks balls.

[CTM]

You shouldn't be high when you try to pay attention to stuff like this.

Smith was talking about the owners' last proposal which would have reduced the 2011 salary cap to below 2009 levels when the NFL has enjoyed record revenue (much more than 2009 and prior).

I'm well aware of the context of the comments blockhead, doesn't change the fact that I think it was a stupid thing to say when it comes to PR

[SMC]

I'm well aware of the context of the comments blockhead, doesn't change the fact that I think it was a stupid thing to say when it comes to PR

FUUSPOS

[Sperm Edwards]

I just have a hard time believing that the owners are that stupid. I mean, they didn't become billionares by being idiots. They must have something up their sleeve, some kind of back up plan.

Some became billionaires by having moms who slept with billionaires (or the then-dollar equivalent) and being the fastest sperm once upon a time while she was ovulating. You really think Woody Johnson is a billionaire because of his unequivocal brilliance?

[PFSIKH]

I don't. They are very used to getting their way,rolling municipalities and states like 3 card monty marks for new stadium deals, and I currently am paying a PSL(silly me!). The owners are so invested in always getting their way they assume everyone else will roll over and play dead. And playing games with federal courts like this when you have an antitrust exemption is very dangerous game. You can knock the players for questionable leadership regarding Demaurice Smith; clearly he likes to hear his own voice. But they have the legal high ground and they have a winning streak going,not because Judge Doty is biased, but because the owners' legal case-we want more money, therefore we're locking you guys out- sucks balls.

I agree w/Billo.

While owners do have their way w/local governments to foot and/or largely subsidize stadium building.

Owners have an equally long history of continually losing ground to the NFLPA in regards to player benefits after it goes to litigation.

Unless they have a strong case, I seriously doubt they would want to the NFLPA to de-certify and force this issue into the courts. Especially, when you consider their losing history in it.

It would seem there is no compelling reason for the owners to allow it to get to this point.

The owners gave more financial information than is legally obligated in the CBA. Yet, it was not enough for DeMaurice. I wonder if they set a trap for the brand new NFLPA president who obviously wants to win his players over to keep his job.

[#27TheDominator]

I agree w/Billo.

While owners do have their way w/local governments to foot and/or largely subsidize stadium building.

Owners have an equally long history of continually losing ground to the NFLPA in regards to player benefits after it goes to litigation.

Unless they have a strong case, I seriously doubt they would want to the NFLPA to de-certify and force this issue into the courts. Especially, when you consider their losing history in it.

It would seem there is no compelling reason for the owners to allow it to get to this point.

The owners gave more financial information than is legally obligated in the CBA. Yet, it was not enough for DeMaurice. I wonder if they set a trap for the brand new NFLPA president who obviously wants to win his players over to keep his job.

Set a trap? I think you are giving them way too much credit. I think the issue is that the owners are far from a united front. Opening the books will give them more trouble with each other than with the players.

[ylekram]

The owners are money grubbing PIGS. I hope they get destroyed in court.

and the players are not???still trying to figure this entire deal out,but both the owners and players are grossly overpaid.seems the only real losers are going to be the broke folks(the fans and lower level employees),and not the millionaire players or billionaire owners.you know what would be great?if after all the dust settles after this lockout b.s,the fans create their own lockout and boycott football for the year