One more lockout question (apologies if this has already been addressed somewhere...)
 

What happens to the draft if this lockout is still effect on April 28th?

Re: One more lockout question (apologies if this has already been addressed somewhere
 

Nothing. As has been widely written and talked about for months now Armen. The expired CBA included as it's last piece of business that a draft would be held in 2011. Once teams turn in their card and select a player, however, they will not be able to speak to him any further until a new CBA is agreed to or until a new league year commences under some other terms. Just like all the other players who are locked out.

Re: One more lockout question (apologies if this has already been addressed somewhere
 

Rather than open yet another thread, I'll ask a related question here. Why can't teams talk to players? There is no union, they decertified? What is stopping them from contacting players (that want to be contacted), draftee's etc, and getting deals done, having camps, etc.

I assume it's because this is a lockout and not a strike by the union, but whats the legaleese behind this?

Re: One more lockout question (apologies if this has already been addressed somewhere
 

There are no work rules in effect at this juncture or template for contracting with rookies and the kind of work rules that a revenue partnership like this (or any other) 32 team owner operated league needs in order to operate within the law require collectively bargained terms to allow the to not run afoul of anti trust law.

Which is why I think it's kind of silly to anticipate a court forcing them to reopen their doors under terms they have stated are unpaletable or worse invite slam dunk litigation... Of course that's just my common sense opinion, although I heard the Dean of Indiana University Law School say the same thing the other day... And it's never a slam dunk that courts operate on common sense principles since they are run by lawyers.

Re: One more lockout question (apologies if this has already been addressed somewhere
 

Ahhh, so thats the catch. The NFL could setup rules/framework to allow them to contact players individually, etc, but that would open the door to antitrust lawsuits, gotcha.

Bah, just give me my football, they're ruining my offseason....:mad:

Re: One more lockout question (apologies if this has already been addressed somewhere
 

More evidence that that the players are being unreasonable:

Report: NFLPA* source says there’s “no chance” of negotiations before April 6 | ProFootballTalk

So the player don't want to negotiate under any circumstance for three weeks. Yeah, that's reasonable. It is quite clear, if Schefter's report is true, that they never really wanted to negotiate and they wanted the league to take or leave their offer or they would just let the courts decide.

Not saying the owners are being any more reasonable, but it seems clear the players were never going to settle for anything other than basically keeping the 2006 system in place or very incremental changes.

I agree with Florio in that since they won the Lockout insurance case, the NFLPA basically decided that negotiation was never a real option because they think they will win in court.

Re: One more lockout question (apologies if this has already been addressed somewhere
 

Yet more distortion. Well, at least one thing is clear - the players are losing the PR battle and most of the public has no idea what is actually happening, they are now just EATING UP the spin being spit out by the owners painting the players as greedy and lawsuit-happy without understanding the details or history for why the current deal expired.

Re: One more lockout question (apologies if this has already been addressed somewhere
 

Must've missed that or just didn't really c are that much until now, when I am faced with this BS ruining football season!

Also, I heard the union (which I thought no longer existed) was asking the top draft propects to boycott the draft.

Re: One more lockout question (apologies if this has already been addressed somewhere
 

The Association (NFLPA) no longer exists as a union, if it ever really was one. However it still exists as an entity that represents it's members interests. Apparently it thinks it's in it's members interest to ask the agents it no longer controls to urge their clients projected as top tier selections who are not yet members of the organization and whom the NFLPA is only too willing to agree to cap contractually going forward to show solidarity with them by boycotting the draft festivities. Same thing they were rumored to have asked agents (who at the time laughed at the suggestion) to do over a month ago, although they officially denied having done so at that time... Turning out to be a petty PR nightmare that impacts coverage only and that includes ESPN as well. Those players will still be drafted whether they allow the Association to use them as PR pawns or not...

The league still intends to do what it has done in the past, extend invitations to those draftees and their families to attend the once in a lifetime festivities in NY as all expense paid guests of the league.

There is also reportedly a plan being discussed to have celebrity veteran pickets protest outside the venue in order to create a situation where any draftees who do attend will be portrayed as crossing the line...

Re: One more lockout question (apologies if this has already been addressed somewhere
 

I can see it now.
Brady et. al. outside with Tom threatening to unleash Gisselle's twin mini-poodles on the hapless draftees.