Is De Smith willing to do a deal?

[F.Chowds]

AP

We addressed a couple of times on Wednesday the current status of the talks from the players’ perspective. They fear that the players, sensing a deal is coming, will agree to whatever the owners propose in order to get a resolution. Complicating matters is the perception by the players that the owners have engaged in a bit of bait and switch, changing numbers and concepts to which the players believed the two sides generally had agreed, in anticipation of an eventual decision by the players to take the best deal that’s offered.

The league believes, we believe, that the ongoing influence of lawyers Jeffrey Kessler and Jim Quinn is keeping a deal from getting done. The league also believes, we believe, that Kessler and Quinn have been trying to derail the process ever since they were kicked out of the room by NFLPA* executive director DeMaurice Smith, possibly to the point of working behind Smith’s back and lobbying members of the NFLPA* Executive Committee to resist Smith’s recommendations.

The league further believes, we believe, that Kessler and Quinn realize they need only to keep a deal from being reached for roughly two more weeks. After that, with the Hall of Fame game scrapped and the NBC money that goes along with it forever lost, the league’s offer will begin to shrink, and the players will be less inclined to do a deal.

Some of the facts seem to support the league’s perception regarding the motivations of Kessler and Quinn. For example, we’ve heard from yet another source (we’re now up to three) that an effort is being made to get “special treatment” for the named plaintiffs in the Tom Brady class action. We can only wonder how much time has been wasted on the issue, the discussion of which serves only to shrink the available time for dealing with the truly important topics. We also wonder whether the named plaintiffs really want to pursue special treatment, if doing so means possibly preventing a deal from being completed by reducing the amount of time available to do so.

Another issue relates to the contours of “total revenue,” of which the players reportedly would receive 48 cents. The players, we’re told by players-side sources, want the sales tax on tickets to be included with the “total revenue” figure. It’s an objectively ludicrous position, in our view, to give the players 48 percent of the sales taxes, since 100 percent of those taxes are never retained by the league. And if Kessler and Quinn are wasting time on this issue, it’s even less time that can be devoted to the important issues.

The real question is whether De Smith has the desire and the will to force Kessler and Quinn to focus on the issues important to getting a deal done, and whether Smith ultimately has the nerve to stand up to them when the time comes to do a deal to which they very well may object, given the league’s perception that Kessler prefers to lose a season (or more) in the hopes of pursuing an antitrust verdict so large that the players ultimately would own part (or maybe all) of the league. Indeed, the general deal that remains within striking distance would be truly fair (in our assessment) to both sides, with plenty of owners not thrilled and plenty of players likewise unhappy. (Mutual discontent is usually the best sign of a truly fair deal.) But the only folks who possibly would completely hate the deal would be Kessler and Quinn, not simply because it would cut off their supply of legal fees but also because it would wipe out their plans (if the league’s perception is correct) of a crippling antitrust verdict that would make Kessler the new Marvin Miller.

Although Smith has done much in the past month to win the respect and admiration of the owners, his biggest test officially has arrived. We think he wants to do a deal, we think he has yet to figure out how to close the deal, and we think he realizes that if he fails to do a deal he won’t be re-elected by the players in March 2012. If the league’s belief that Kessler and Quinn want to keep a deal from happening is accurate, then Kessler and Quinn necessarily want to see De Smith lose his job, since that will be the practical outcome of a lost season.

Thus, De Smith needs to find a way to neutralize Kessler and Quinn. While the owners have the ability to nudge their outside lawyers into a position of practical irrelevance (and we think the owners already have), it’s virtually impossible for 1,900 players to come together and remind the lawyers that the lawyers work for the players, not the other way around. In this specific circumstance, the obligation to put the lawyers in their place falls to De Smith, and his ability to do it — and to then do a deal — will go a long way toward determining whether he’ll be the next Gene Upshaw, or whether his old Patton Boggs nameplate soon will be reattached to the door to his office.

Plenty of people have openly questioned whether De Smith was the right man for the job he now holds. He can prove them all wrong over the next two weeks and, in so doing, he can secure this gig that he surely digs, for as long as he wants it.

[SoFlaJets]

too long and boring-wake me up if these two sides come to a deal

[Sperm Edwards]

too long and boring-wake me up if these two sides come to a deal

Amen.

[T0mShane]

I think Roger Goodell wrote that article.

[Bleedin Green]

The real question is whether De Smith has the desire and the will to force Kessler and Quinn to focus on the issues important to getting a deal done, and whether Smith ultimately has the nerve to stand up to them when the time comes to do a deal to which they very well may object, given the league’s perception that Kessler prefers to lose a season (or more) in the hopes of pursuing an antitrust verdict so large that the players ultimately would own part (or maybe all) of the league.

If this is even slightly true these lawyers are a bunch of freakin' morons. Every single owner would tear apart their team and the entire league before they would ever let anything close to that happen. If it did, all that would be left would be a bunch of meaningless brand names of teams and a league with not a cent left to their names that the players would now own part of with nobody left around to actually pay them.

[Matt39]

So how long will they be this close to deal for?

[slats]

Misleading title. Smith's desire to get a deal done doesn't seem to be in question. The problem (according to this article) is the anti-trust case lawyers, Kessler and Quinn.

[Klecko73isGod]

The league believes, we believe, that the ongoing influence of lawyers Jeffrey Kessler and Jim Quinn is keeping a deal from getting done

If this is true, Jets fans need to rise up, find these two pricks and beat them unmercifully.

If anyone kills the best window of championship opportunity the Jets have had in my lifetime I will make it my personal mission in life to ******* destroy that person in the most heinously evil way I can imagine.

[RutgersJetFan]

Misleading title.

I'll say. That's not even his real nickname.

[JiFtheOracle]

If this is true, Jets fans need to rise up, find these two pricks and beat them unmercifully.

If anyone kills the best window of championship opportunity the Jets have had in my lifetime I will make it my personal mission in life to ******* destroy that person in the most heinously evil way I can imagine.

Kissing them to death?

[Klecko73isGod]

Kissing them to death?

I'll make him hang out with you in the Miami Airport.

[T0mShane]

I'll make him hang out with you in the Miami Airport.

I believe that was deemed illegal under the Articles of the Geneva Convention.

[JiFtheOracle]

I'll make him hang out with you in the Miami Airport.

LMFAO!!!

[joebabyny]

AP

We addressed a couple of times on Wednesday the current status of the talks from the players’ perspective. They fear that the players, sensing a deal is coming, will agree to whatever the owners propose in order to get a resolution. Complicating matters is the perception by the players that the owners have engaged in a bit of bait and switch, changing numbers and concepts to which the players believed the two sides generally had agreed, in anticipation of an eventual decision by the players to take the best deal that’s offered.

The league believes, we believe, that the ongoing influence of lawyers Jeffrey Kessler and Jim Quinn is keeping a deal from getting done. The league also believes, we believe, that Kessler and Quinn have been trying to derail the process ever since they were kicked out of the room by NFLPA* executive director DeMaurice Smith, possibly to the point of working behind Smith’s back and lobbying members of the NFLPA* Executive Committee to resist Smith’s recommendations.

The league further believes, we believe, that Kessler and Quinn realize they need only to keep a deal from being reached for roughly two more weeks. After that, with the Hall of Fame game scrapped and the NBC money that goes along with it forever lost, the league’s offer will begin to shrink, and the players will be less inclined to do a deal.

Some of the facts seem to support the league’s perception regarding the motivations of Kessler and Quinn. For example, we’ve heard from yet another source (we’re now up to three) that an effort is being made to get “special treatment” for the named plaintiffs in the Tom Brady class action. We can only wonder how much time has been wasted on the issue, the discussion of which serves only to shrink the available time for dealing with the truly important topics. We also wonder whether the named plaintiffs really want to pursue special treatment, if doing so means possibly preventing a deal from being completed by reducing the amount of time available to do so.

Another issue relates to the contours of “total revenue,” of which the players reportedly would receive 48 cents. The players, we’re told by players-side sources, want the sales tax on tickets to be included with the “total revenue” figure. It’s an objectively ludicrous position, in our view, to give the players 48 percent of the sales taxes, since 100 percent of those taxes are never retained by the league. And if Kessler and Quinn are wasting time on this issue, it’s even less time that can be devoted to the important issues.

The real question is whether De Smith has the desire and the will to force Kessler and Quinn to focus on the issues important to getting a deal done, and whether Smith ultimately has the nerve to stand up to them when the time comes to do a deal to which they very well may object, given the league’s perception that Kessler prefers to lose a season (or more) in the hopes of pursuing an antitrust verdict so large that the players ultimately would own part (or maybe all) of the league. Indeed, the general deal that remains within striking distance would be truly fair (in our assessment) to both sides, with plenty of owners not thrilled and plenty of players likewise unhappy. (Mutual discontent is usually the best sign of a truly fair deal.) But the only folks who possibly would completely hate the deal would be Kessler and Quinn, not simply because it would cut off their supply of legal fees but also because it would wipe out their plans (if the league’s perception is correct) of a crippling antitrust verdict that would make Kessler the new Marvin Miller.

Although Smith has done much in the past month to win the respect and admiration of the owners, his biggest test officially has arrived. We think he wants to do a deal, we think he has yet to figure out how to close the deal, and we think he realizes that if he fails to do a deal he won’t be re-elected by the players in March 2012. If the league’s belief that Kessler and Quinn want to keep a deal from happening is accurate, then Kessler and Quinn necessarily want to see De Smith lose his job, since that will be the practical outcome of a lost season.

Thus, De Smith needs to find a way to neutralize Kessler and Quinn. While the owners have the ability to nudge their outside lawyers into a position of practical irrelevance (and we think the owners already have), it’s virtually impossible for 1,900 players to come together and remind the lawyers that the lawyers work for the players, not the other way around. In this specific circumstance, the obligation to put the lawyers in their place falls to De Smith, and his ability to do it — and to then do a deal — will go a long way toward determining whether he’ll be the next Gene Upshaw, or whether his old Patton Boggs nameplate soon will be reattached to the door to his office.

Plenty of people have openly questioned whether De Smith was the right man for the job he now holds. He can prove them all wrong over the next two weeks and, in so doing, he can secure this gig that he surely digs, for as long as he wants it.

If this is even remotely true, D Smith is a moron for letting the tail wag the dog. At this point, with everything I have read and heard, I am not anti owner or anti player, I am anti D Smith, I just think he was the wrong guy for this job and he is a fish out of water.

And this article is a pretty terrible read, but one thing that stuck out is the calculation of tax on tickets in total revenue. If the players are held up on that, wanting the taxes collected to be figured in the total revenue number, then that shows just how out of touch they are with business and the real world. Sadly, it is not surprising to me that a bunch of guys with fake diplomas (if they graduated at all) and elementary school reading levels who are forced to take usurious bridge loans because they spent too much on "jewry" and cars can't understand why state sales taxes should not be figured into revenue numbers for the purpose of splitting revs.

[bitonti]

If this is even remotely true, D Smith is a moron for letting the tail wag the dog. At this point, with everything I have read and heard, I am not anti owner or anti player, I am anti D Smith, I just think he was the wrong guy for this job and he is a fish out of water.

gotta read between the lines, D Smith is actually brilliant.

the owners want to lean on the players, and say they want first refusal on 6 years of free agency. so Smith holds a call with pro bowlers where he says a deal isn't close. the details leak out (of course) and it lets the owners know that Smith is not just gonna cave.

it's a negotiation. I think the way it's set up now, the vets are in no hurry to have a training camp or a preseason and certain owners like Jones and the Wood-man can't even lose 1 preseason's game worth of business because of their crippling stadium debts. Smith is doing a great job looking out for his side of the negotiation.

it's funny how the richest people are also the cheapest but here we are. PLayers are more willing to miss game checks than owners are willing to miss games.

don't forget this is a lockout not a strike, the onus is on the owners to prove why the last deal was unsustainable or why exactly they needed to lock out. they never actually did that.

we could get mad at the players for hiring someone who knows how to play hardball to lead them... I guess that's one way to look at it... the NFL has a team of sharks, the players wanted a strong leader too.

[T0mShane]

gotta read between the lines, D Smith is actually brilliant.

the owners want to lean on the players, and say they want first refusal on 6 years of free agency. so Smith holds a call with pro bowlers where he says a deal isn't close. the details leak out (of course) and it lets the owners know that Smith is not just gonna cave.

it's a negotiation. I think the way it's set up now, the vets are in no hurry to have a training camp or a preseason and certain owners like Jones and the Wood-man can't even lose 1 preseason's game worth of business because of their crippling stadium debts. Smith is doing a great job looking out for his side of the negotiation.

it's funny how the richest people are also the cheapest but here we are. PLayers are more willing to miss game checks than owners are willing to miss games.

don't forget this is a lockout not a strike, the onus is on the owners to prove why the last deal was unsustainable or why exactly they needed to lock out. they never actually did that.

we could get mad at the players for hiring someone who knows how to play hardball to lead them... I guess that's one way to look at it... the NFL has a team of sharks, the players wanted a strong leader too.

100% agreed. Simply by keeping the players from rioting amongst themselves for this long, Smith has been a huge success. He's essentially played chicken with the owners and now they're backed into a corner whereby they start losing the megabucks if this isn't settled in another two, three weeks. I hate to say it, but if Smith looked and spoke like Marvin Miller or Donald Fehr, he'd currently find himself hailed as a shrewd, tough negotiator. Instead, he's treated in muchnof the media like some clown whose buffoonery is keeping us all from watching football. It's a shame.

[Sperm Edwards]

100% agreed. Simply by keeping the players from rioting amongst themselves for this long, Smith has been a huge success. He's essentially played chicken with the owners and now they're backed into a corner whereby they start losing the megabucks if this isn't settled in another two, three weeks. I hate to say it, but if Smith looked and spoke like Marvin Miller or Donald Fehr, he'd currently find himself hailed as a shrewd, tough negotiator. Instead, he's treated in muchnof the media like some clown whose buffoonery is keeping us all from watching football. It's a shame.

You don't hate to say it. You love to say it because you think everyone is as big a racist as you are.

[kelticwizard]

gotta read between the lines, D Smith is actually brilliant.

I haven't been following the negotiations in detail, but with all the posts from the pro-owner posters calling Smith a moron who doesn't know what he is doing, I began to reach the same conclusion.

If your opponents and their supporters are sceraming and hollering about you all the time, chances are you're doing a good job.

[Sperm Edwards]

I haven't been following the negotiations in detail, but with all the posts from the pro-owner posters calling Smith a moron who doesn't know what he is doing, I began to reach the same conclusion.

If your opponents and their supporters are sceraming and hollering about you all the time, chances are you're doing a good job.

People also screamed and hollered that Vernon Gholston sucked.

[joebabyny]

gotta read between the lines, D Smith is actually brilliant.

the owners want to lean on the players, and say they want first refusal on 6 years of free agency. so Smith holds a call with pro bowlers where he says a deal isn't close. the details leak out (of course) and it lets the owners know that Smith is not just gonna cave.

it's a negotiation. I think the way it's set up now, the vets are in no hurry to have a training camp or a preseason and certain owners like Jones and the Wood-man can't even lose 1 preseason's game worth of business because of their crippling stadium debts. Smith is doing a great job looking out for his side of the negotiation.

it's funny how the richest people are also the cheapest but here we are. PLayers are more willing to miss game checks than owners are willing to miss games.

don't forget this is a lockout not a strike, the onus is on the owners to prove why the last deal was unsustainable or why exactly they needed to lock out. they never actually did that.

we could get mad at the players for hiring someone who knows how to play hardball to lead them... I guess that's one way to look at it... the NFL has a team of sharks, the players wanted a strong leader too.

Brilliant? Sorry, but no. Brilliant would have been being able to work out a deal getting the players mostly what they wanted without their being a decertification and lockout. Brilliant would have been getting a deal done before july. This is hardly brilliant. He knows the players ar close to folding like a deck of cards so he is doing damage control.

This call was to the high paid vets, the guys most likely to be able to weather the storm. Lets here him get the players that make in the bottom 50% on the phone and see how they react to his.

Another thing, Smith going in front of the media and being optimistic about a deal coming soon, and then going to the players and saying otherwise and leaking it does not make him look honest to the public or the owners, and does nothing to make him look stronger, it just makes him look desperate and even worse, disingenuous about really working to get a deal done.

And this is only a lockout because the union had their sham decertification, they forced the lockout knowing the league had no choice, it was either that or face individual anti trust lawsuits from every player in the league (and maybe even some guys who couldn't make an nfl roster). And it was the owners right to exercise an option in the cba to opt out of it early, an option they took. They don't need to explain or prove why they had to opt out, it was an agreed upon provision of the last cba.

Plain and simple though, I don't know how in the world anyone can think Smith has done anything but a terrible job here, as we are in July and according to him apparently we aren't even close to a deal yet. If what you say is true and players are more willing to forgo the money than owners, than he has the upper hand, why hasn't he been able to capitalize on that if that is the case?

[T0mShane]

You don't hate to say it. You love to say it because you think everyone is as big a racist as you are.

I wish everybody was the same color so I could hate them equally without being labeled a racist.

[T0mShane]

Brilliant? Sorry, but no. Brilliant would have been being able to work out a deal getting the players mostly what they wanted without their being a decertification and lockout. Brilliant would have been getting a deal done before july. This is hardly brilliant. He knows the players ar close to folding like a deck of cards so he is doing damage control.

This call was to the high paid vets, the guys most likely to be able to weather the storm. Lets here him get the players that make in the bottom 50% on the phone and see how they react to his.

Another thing, Smith going in front of the media and being optimistic about a deal coming soon, and then going to the players and saying otherwise and leaking it does not make him look honest to the public or the owners, and does nothing to make him look stronger, it just makes him look desperate and even worse, disingenuous about really working to get a deal done.

And this is only a lockout because the union had their sham decertification, they forced the lockout knowing the league had no choice, it was either that or face individual anti trust lawsuits from every player in the league (and maybe even some guys who couldn't make an nfl roster). And it was the owners right to exercise an option in the cba to opt out of it early, an option they took. They don't need to explain or prove why they had to opt out, it was an agreed upon provision of the last cba.

Plain and simple though, I don't know how in the world anyone can think Smith has done anything but a terrible job here, as we are in July and according to him apparently we aren't even close to a deal yet. If what you say is true and players are more willing to forgo the money than owners, than he has the upper hand, why hasn't he been able to capitalize on that if that is the case?

He said De Smith was a genius, not that he had a bag of fairy dust in his pocket that made wishes come true, no matter how unrealistic they are. And people have been saying that the players were "about to crack" since May and they haven't come close. The reason there's a lockout is because the owners decided they wanted to take another billion+ out of the player's salary pot, not because they decertified. That's like saying Abe Lincoln died because he liked theater.

[JiFtheOracle]

I wish everybody was the same color so I could hate them equally without being labeled a racist.

Doesnt matter what color you are, everyone hates you equally.

[Scott Dierking]

it's funny how the richest people are also the cheapest but here we are. PLayers are more willing to miss game checks than owners are willing to miss games.

don't forget this is a lockout not a strike, the onus is on the owners to prove why the last deal was unsustainable or why exactly they needed to lock out. they never actually did that.

Bit, you have this skewed.

Rich people are rich for a reason (unless they had lucky genes). They are rich because they know how to make money and more importantly keep money. That is not being cheap-that is being smart.

There is no "onus" in this negotiation-this is not a court of law where anything has to be proven. It is a negotiation. Both sides have to come together (hopefully in the middle) and walk away feeling like they achieved something in the process.

[T0mShane]

Doesnt matter what color you are, everyone hates you equally.

Not true. I'm huge in the quadroon community. Drake and Alicia Keys should write a song about me.

[slats]

And this is only a lockout because the union had their sham decertification, they forced the lockout knowing the league had no choice, it was either that or face individual anti trust lawsuits from every player in the league (and maybe even some guys who couldn't make an nfl roster). And it was the owners right to exercise an option in the cba to opt out of it early, an option they took. They don't need to explain or prove why they had to opt out, it was an agreed upon provision of the last cba.

You don't even understand what's going on. You're so pro-owner/anti-player that you have blinders on here.

The players only decertified in an attempt to prevent the owners from locking them out. That was the single intent of decertification. By no longer being a union, they hoped the league would not be able to lock them out. The union had been planning this lockout for about two years. It was no secret. And it was happening no matter what extreme measure the union took to prevent it - up to and including dissolving the union itself.

[bitonti]

The reason there's a lockout is because the owners decided they wanted to take another billion+ out of the player's salary pot, not because they decertified. That's like saying Abe Lincoln died because he liked theater.

LOL i love this line

to be technical the owners unanimously opted out of the CBA in 2008... 3 years ago. They didn't have to do that. the old CBA had provisions for a 2011 and a 2012 season and it expired before 2013. they also could have negotiated a new CBA with the players in any time during those 3 years since. They chose to lockout because they felt it gave them the best negotiation stance (i.e. hungry poor players not getting paid).

look at the NBA situation. the league is locking out because they lost 300 million last year. I think that's justified. they are trying to change the situation so that the league doesn't fold. I can condone that lockout. what the NFL owners are doing wasn't necessary it was something they did for more profit. it's not like they were in the red.

[Scott Dierking]

LOL i love this line

to be technical the owners unanimously opted out of the CBA in 2008... 3 years ago. They didn't have to do that. the old CBA had provisions for a 2011 and a 2012 season and it expired before 2013. they also could have negotiated a new CBA with the players in any time during those 3 years since. They chose to lockout because they felt it gave them the best negotiation stance (i.e. hungry poor players not getting paid).

look at the NBA situation. the league is locking out because they lost 300 million last year. I think that's justified. they are trying to change the situation so that the league doesn't fold. I can condone that lockout. what the NFL owners are doing wasn't necessary it was something they did for more profit. it's not like they were in the red.

And it is something they did because the world is different than when the old CBA was written.

There are different revenue streams, there are changing marketing pieces.

[bitonti]

And it is something they did because the world is different than when the old CBA was written.

There are different revenue streams, there are changing marketing pieces.

even if we accept that statement at face value, why haven't CBA negotiations happened since 2008? the owners want leverage. they want to break the players and get a sweet deal.

[Scott Dierking]

even if we accept that statement at face value, why haven't CBA negotiations happened since 2008? the owners want leverage. they want to break the players and get a sweet deal.

Of course they do. That is BUSINESS. Happens every day. These people did not amass fortunes by having weak spines and even weaker hearts.

Heck, if Leon Hess did not have a backbone, he would never been at the tables negotiating face to face with Quadafi.

I know fans hate to hear this, but here is a business side to football, and OF COURSE the owners are going to look to extract as much profit as they can.

Also know this, they are smart, and that is why there will be a full season.

[joebabyny]

You don't even understand what's going on. You're so pro-owner/anti-player that you have blinders on here.

The players only decertified in an attempt to prevent the owners from locking them out. That was the single intent of decertification. By no longer being a union, they hoped the league would not be able to lock them out. The union had been planning this lockout for about two years. It was no secret. And it was happening no matter what extreme measure the union took to prevent it - up to and including dissolving the union itself.

I have blinders on? Please, every time something comes out that is negative toward the players it is swiftly met with incredulousness. Case in point the word coming out now that players are sticking to the position of including tax money in the revenue split formula. Everyone here that has THEIR blinders on is all "i'm not so quick to believe this" and "its just a bargaining tactic that will be quickly dropped." Hey MAYBE the players are being hoodwinked by their lawyers that this should be included. Maybe the lawyers really want to stick it to the owners and fans and miss a year of football. Maybe they don't want to give an ounce and have no desire to compromise. Lets not forget that the players made the ultimate decision not to extend the deadline for negotiating before decertifying. They could have extended and kept negotiating. And they planned on this lockout just as long as the owners did, they set up their own player fund 2 years ago.

[joebabyny]

LOL i love this line

to be technical the owners unanimously opted out of the CBA in 2008... 3 years ago. They didn't have to do that. the old CBA had provisions for a 2011 and a 2012 season and it expired before 2013. they also could have negotiated a new CBA with the players in any time during those 3 years since. They chose to lockout because they felt it gave them the best negotiation stance (i.e. hungry poor players not getting paid).

look at the NBA situation. the league is locking out because they lost 300 million last year. I think that's justified. they are trying to change the situation so that the league doesn't fold. I can condone that lockout. what the NFL owners are doing wasn't necessary it was something they did for more profit. it's not like they were in the red.

it was their right to opt out of the cba, as was negotiated in the last cba. Let me ask you this, once the players decertified, was there really any legal way the league could have continued operations as before without locking out? Without facing anti trust lawsuits? Far as I know, once their was no more player union, all the anti trust exemptions the NFL had went out the window. I may be wrong though so please enlighten me?

[slats]

it was their right to opt out of the cba, as was negotiated in the last cba. Let me ask you this, once the players decertified, was there really any legal way the league could have continued operations as before without locking out? Without facing anti trust lawsuits? Far as I know, once their was no more player union, all the anti trust exemptions the NFL had went out the window. I may be wrong though so please enlighten me?

You are wrong, and I've tried to enlighten you numerous times - to no avail.

The players only decertified in an attempt to block the owners from locking them out. That was the entire goal of decertification. The league shouldn't actually technically be allowed to lock out a work force that isn't in a union. The players decertified in hopes of keeping operations running as before.

The anti-trust exemption still remains safely inside the window. The courts are holding off on deciding on that issue while the players and owners work out their differences. The anti-trust case is separate from the decertification. Definitely a tactic to exert some leverage on the owners, but still separate from decertifying the union.

Simply put, there would've been no decertification of the union or anti-trust lawsuits without the owners locking the players out first.

[Bleedin Green]

You are wrong, and I've tried to enlighten you numerous times - to no avail.

The players only decertified in an attempt to block the owners from locking them out. That was the entire goal of decertification. The league shouldn't actually technically be allowed to lock out a work force that isn't in a union. The players decertified in hopes of keeping operations running as before.

The anti-trust exemption still remains safely inside the window. The courts are holding off on deciding on that issue while the players and owners work out their differences. The anti-trust case is separate from the decertification. Definitely a tactic to exert some leverage on the owners, but still separate from decertifying the union.

Simply put, there would've been no decertification of the union or anti-trust lawsuits without the owners locking the players out first.

Well based on order of events that's technically not true, the decertification happened first, but I'm just being difficult.

Really, the purpose for decertification wasn't to stop the lockout though, because they knew it was happening either way, it was to allow them to take the NFL to court over the lockout. Only problem with that was the NFL's stance that the decertification was a sham designed specifically to allow them to sue the NFL, and as douchey as the NFL has been in this scenario, they are actually right about that. I think it's silly to take a definitive stance 100% on either side, because both sides have shown themselves to be a bunch of greedy douchebags, and each have their share of the blame for this mess. This situation isn't where it's at now if not for actions done by both sides, so the idea that there has to be any one group to blame is short-sighted. The reality is the fault lies with the players/owners combined and the ones really getting the shaft are all of us.

[slats]

Well based on order of events that's technically not true, the decertification happened first, but I'm just being difficult.

Really, the purpose for decertification wasn't to stop the lockout though, because they knew it was happening either way, it was to allow them to take the NFL to court over the lockout. Only problem with that was the NFL's stance that the decertification was a sham designed specifically to allow them to sue the NFL, and as douchey as the NFL has been in this scenario, they are actually right about that. I think it's silly to take a definitive stance 100% on either side, because both sides have shown themselves to be a bunch of greedy douchebags, and each have their share of the blame for this mess. This situation isn't where it's at now if not for actions done by both sides, so the idea that there has to be any one group to blame is short-sighted. The reality is the fault lies with the players/owners combined and the ones really getting the shaft are all of us.

Yes you are. Shocking, too, because that's totally unlike you.

Please tell joebaby the players wouldn't've decertified without the impending lockout then. You're gonna confuse him.