Roger Goodell won't address rumors of a total NFL shutdown

[SMC]

The NFL can't simply shut down; the teams are individual businesses, and individual businesses collectively deciding not to operate would, in and of itself, be an antitrust violation.

The NFL's head office could shut down, though, I guess - refusing to approve player contracts or sanction games . . .Interesting

+1

Goodell is a godawful commishioner. Just imagine if the NFL was in financial difficulty like the NBA and there was a CBA negotiation. The man can't get a deal done on a $9.3 billion enterprise with every team making a profit.

[SMC]

BTW, Baumer, you're dead wrong and Doggin is 100% correct.

[LWC611]

What Goodell either doesn't grasp or doesn't say; a "new" NFL would lose it's antitrust exemption. The NFL has lost case after case-the USFL, Freeman McNeil, etc. and they are losing right now. This would be another loss,and the exemption is what makes them especially profitable. And once that antitrust exemption goes out the window the NFL as we know it is no longer going to be able to dictate terms. Also, even with decertification, Bell Biv DeMaurice is pretty hooked into the Obama Adminsitration, which means the NLRB could get involved if Goodell tries to take his ball and go home for a year; that amounts to definitial unfair labor practices. Further, for all the tough talk the big market/new stadium teams need the revenue of some 2011 season or face ruin. At some point Jerry Richardson is going to be told to shut the f__ up by Jerry Jones. That wonderful story about Wellington Mara agreeing to split revenue with all the other teams is no longer valid when some owners buy in on the cheap and do nothing to grow the revenue or try to win, while others like Jones and the Jets and Giants spend serious cash to generate new revenue.At some point the big amrket guys are going to jump up and demand they get a 2011 season, even if only for 10-12 games.

This is the most bizarre labor dispute ever; ownership wants to preserve a legally-exempted socialized monopoly, labor wants a free market. Every time Goodell opens his motuh it becomes clearer he has no idea what the eff he is talking about, and that he is merely carrying water for small market teams. For now.The only thing the owners have is players have finite careers and missed game checks aren't coming back.

Four points:

1. Only baseball has an antitrust expemtion. Football does not have one and never did, which is why they lost to the USFL back in the day. The union decertified beacause as a union they cannot sue under antitrust law. However as individuals, the collusion of the teams is is subject to scrutiny under antitrust laws.

2. Wheher or not Demaurice Smith is hooked into the Obama administration is irrelevant for the purposes of invoking the jurisdiction of the NLRB. The NLRB is responsible for for the administration of private sector labor law. They will get involved upon the filing of an appropriate charge that triggers their jursdiction. The same way the NLRB's jusridiction was invoked during the baseball strike in the 90s.

3. The owners want to increase their share of the profits and the players want to maintain or increase their share. The players want better retirement benefits. Alot of Unions go to the table trying to insure the employees get a fair share of company profits. Unions often go to the table seeking improved retirement benefits. This is not bizzare it is labor relations. What makes it bizzare is that while billionaires may be owners who have organized labor, usually organized labor is not made up of millionares.

4. The players do not want a free market, they just want to maintain their share of the league money. If this could have been resolved without the nuclear option of decertification, it would have been. Stated differntly, the players do not have a problem with a monopoly as long as they get theirs.

[LWC611]

Scott, I think you hit the nail!

The NFL plans to disband, should the courts go against them - The teams do not.

No league means no new CBA discussions - which to the players is a worse scenario than them (Players) attempting an Anti-Trust Suit against the NFL.

No league means each team is an individual company, which is not a monopoly and as such, they do not have to deal with Anti-Trust issues when negotiating contracts.

The NFL could return as only the promoter of the games, which would also not effect Anti-Trust legistration (Can anyone say "WWE" and why it's no longer the "WWF").

Even though the WWF is an entertainment issue (like the Globtrotters, et al...) and even thought it's not truly a sport, The had to become the WWE in order to continue to conduct business as a result of ANTI-TRUST LEGISTLATION.

And the thought of the end of the world on 05/22/2011 was an issue (and I truly do not think the world will end) - the end of the NFL as we know it, may come on 06/06/11!

The WWF did not have to change it's name because of antitrust law. It was actually a trademark infringement case broght forward by the World Wildlife Fund who also used WWF as their logo..... the fund won the federation lost that is why the name was changed.

[BaumerJet]

BTW, Baumer, you're dead wrong and Doggin is 100% correct.

I will be the 1st to admit that I mistook an ANTI-TRUST suit by the WWF & Jacks Pacific in 2003 as the reason they became the WWF.

The WWF became the WWE due to a lawsuit by the World Wildlife Fund, which Doggin was quite correct on. I was totally wrong and I apologize for it.

That being said:

The main reason that the NFL, NHL, NBA & MLB are guaranteed Anti-Trust protection is simply because they are a GROUP of INDIVIDUAL teams that use their League to run the day to day Exhibition & Promotion sales of the entire group. This also includes acting as legal council for the individual team, which includes negotiations of all contracts.

By dis-banning, the NFL could place the negotiation issue to the individual teams. That would allow teams, such as the Green Bay Packers, to justify their negotiations with the individual players based on state laws & not federal. That would prohibit the NFLPA or any agency from negotiating a new CBA based entirely on the fact that the laws dealing with Wisconsin state & city employees prohibit the negotiation of anything except retirement & sick leave issues.

By the way, since the Green Bay Packers are owned by the city of Green Bay, a change in degree of ownership would put them along side the teachers of Wisconsin.

[SMC]

Sorry, Baumer, but you're wrong again.

The NFL, NBA, and NHL are not guaranteed antitrust protection. Only MLB has a full antitrust exemption. The NFL, NBA, and NHL have TV deals which are antitrust exempted but all other operations are subject to antitrust laws.

The ONLY reason why the NFL, NBA, and NHL do not run afoul of the antitrust laws in their day-to-day operations is because of the CBA. A collective bargaining agreement permits the NFL to have a draft, free agency, revenue sharing, etc. Without a CBA the NFL can't do any of that.

Finally, the Packers are NOT owned by the city of Green Bay. They're owned by thousands of individuals as a public held company.

[Bugg]

Four points:

1. Only baseball has an antitrust expemtion. Football does not have one and never did, which is why they lost to the USFL back in the day. The union decertified beacause as a union they cannot sue under antitrust law. However as individuals, the collusion of the teams is is subject to scrutiny under antitrust laws.

2. Wheher or not Demaurice Smith is hooked into the Obama administration is irrelevant for the purposes of invoking the jurisdiction of the NLRB. The NLRB is responsible for for the administration of private sector labor law. They will get involved upon the filing of an appropriate charge that triggers their jursdiction. The same way the NLRB's jusridiction was invoked during the baseball strike in the 90s.

3. The owners want to increase their share of the profits and the players want to maintain or increase their share. The players want better retirement benefits. Alot of Unions go to the table trying to insure the employees get a fair share of company profits. Unions often go to the table seeking improved retirement benefits. This is not bizzare it is labor relations. What makes it bizzare is that while billionaires may be owners who have organized labor, usually organized labor is not made up of millionares.

4. The players do not want a free market, they just want to maintain their share of the league money. If this could have been resolved without the nuclear option of decertification, it would have been. Stated differntly, the players do not have a problem with a monopoly as long as they get theirs.

The NFL as per their $3 treble damages loss loss in the USFL case is in fact and legally a monopoly.Goodell and the NFL plays with fire every time it goes to court considering that legal finding. The entire structure inculding the draft, salary caps and revenue sharing could all be imperiled, which is why the NFL and Al Davis were in court forever. If you had 10 or 15 big market owners do what Al Davis did they would probably win .Goodell keeps making these messes needlessly and carelessly.By the way, Donald Trump, who was the bagholder of what was left of the USFL, has never cashed that $3 check.

The players would like a more free labor market, and only that did not supress wages, which is what a salary cap does. That's exacerbated by nonguaranteed contracts, which no other major sports league in North America has.

Sadly both sides pay a great deal of lip service to improved or earlier vesting retirement and medical coverage for retirees. But it's mostly just that; this could be solved in about 10 minutes if both sides agreed.

Simply if there is not a football season, the NLRB is going to face serious pressure from TV networks and other related businesses to help address this.May be saner heads would think thr NFL is not a business which is important enough to merit such attention, but there are $9 billion+ of revenues and God knows how many ancilalry businesses will be effected. A nonseason is going to hurt a lot of people who don't own teams or play. And when that happens(and it's not an if), Goodell will once again find himself stepping on his dick and making a mess. And he's doing this because Ralph Wilson won't simply move an hour north to Toronto and Jerry Richardson and Mike Brown are cheap effs. That's insane.

[Klecko73isGod]

The NFL as per their $3 treble damages loss loss in the USFL case is in fact and legally a monopoly.Goodell and the NFL plays with fire every time it goes to court considering that legal finding. The entire structure inculding the draft, salary caps and revenue sharing could all be imperiled, which is why the NFL and Al Davis were in court forever. If you had 10 or 15 big market owners do what Al Davis did they would probably win .Goodell keeps making these messes needlessly and carelessly.By the way, Donald Trump, who was the bagholder of what was left of the USFL, has never cashed that $3 check.

The players would like a more free labor market, and only that did not supress wages, which is what a salary cap does. That's exacerbated by nonguaranteed contracts, which no other major sports league in North America has.

Sadly both sides pay a great deal of lip service to improved or earlier vesting retirement and medical coverage for retirees. But it's mostly just that; this could be solved in about 10 minutes if both sides agreed.

Simply if there is not a football season, the NLRB is going to face serious pressure from TV networks and other related businesses to help address this.May be saner heads would think thr NFL is not a business which is important enough to merit such attention, but there are $9 billion+ of revenues and God knows how many ancilalry businesses will be effected. A nonseason is going to hurt a lot of people who don't own teams or play. And when that happens(and it's not an if), Goodell will once again find himself stepping on his dick and making a mess. And he's doing this because Ralph Wilson won't simply move an hour north to Toronto and Jerry Richardson and Mike Brown are cheap effs. That's insane.

Wrong, former USFL executive Steve Ehrhart has the check. If Trump had it, you can rest assured it would have been cashed.

[Bugg]

Wrong, former USFL executive Steve Ehrhart has the check. If Trump had it, you can rest assured it would have been cashed.

You are correct.Stand duly corrected.