"8th circuit grants NFL's motion for stay on appeal"

[Patjew]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

i'd rather have no football for a year, and the league to get fixed , then to have to go through this **** again anytime soon

Yeah, but your elite QB is younger than ours.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

Congratulations. A big win for everyone who hates workers and doesn't want football to return. Awesome.

This is not exactly Norma Rea we are talking about here. I'd love to have one of the players pay stubs.

There are no good guys or bad guys, just rich, richer, and richist. all I care about is that there is football and the loser here can cry all the way to the bank.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

Judge Nelson almost assuredly knew this was going to be the outcome, so why did she rule as she did? Was she bound by the law to rule as she did? One of these courts is grossly disserving the people, which one is it? The district court (Nelson) or the 8th circuit? Are the laws in question so vague that the judiciary cannot help but look confused & political?

Judges get reversed all the time. She thought she was right but the court of appeals disagreed. It happens all the time. It doesnt mean it is political or that anyone was acting in bad faith. The legal issues are hard. There are precedents but they are not exactly on point. You have great lawyers on both sides. These are hard issues.

I have been very public here saying I thought Nelson got the law wrong. But that doesnt mean she was being dishonest just because the 8th circuit is leaning the other way. Often it is the very close cases that get this far in the judicial process -- precisely because reasonable people can disagree. Note that one of the 8th circuit judges dissented. So this is a close one.

There is a saying about appellate courts -- they are not necessarily final because they are right. They are right because they are final.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

Townsie, this has NOTHING to do with "workers". This entire court case is a legal abuse of a necessary law being misused for selfish purposes. In other words, lawyers using the "system" to benefit themselves and to some degree their clients....but mostly to build up their egos, reputations, and most importantly...... billable hours. .

BTW- I wouldn't over estimate this "victory" for the owners. If I read it correctly (and who knows if I am), what they are basically saying is that the 8th circuit doesn't think that the Players are currently incurring "irreparable harm", which they are not. It doesn't say ANYTHING about the overall merits (pro or con) about the actual case in play.

IF it gets them back to talking about a workable CBA, instead of a legal case, then it is a ruling well served. However, if it just bruises some egos and causes sides to dig more firmly into their entrenched positions, then it means.....nothing.

On one side I have to believe that the lawyers behind the players expected this ruling, and have plans for it, just as the owners knew that the Nelson ruling wasn't the "last word". So I have doubts that the people running this strategy will suddenly change their goals.

However what I'm hoping for is that the ACTUAL players, like the 500 odd FAs or those not even knowing if they can become FAs. You know the guys who are actually BEING hurt by all of this. I'm hoping that THOSE guys start to pressure the "leadership" to start to take these negotiations seriously. Just as I am hoping that those running the "owners" case, don't take this opportunity to get something done, instead of "going for the jugular."

In other words, is there anyone out there who has the power to please get the "lawyers" out of the room!

The case itself will take years to fight if it goes to final verdict. The 8th Circuit decision will be huge because it is doubtful the Supreme Court will take this case no matter who wins. That means that if the owners win, the players are locked out until the situation is resolved. That means there might not be football until 2014, 2015, or 2016 if by the unlikely chance this case sees to the conclusion. On the other hand, if the players win, there could be football without a CBA for years until the suit is settle or a verdict is give like what happened in 1987 through 1993.

You are downplaying the verdict on the appeal. It is very likely that the players will cave before the actual case goes to trial if they lose because the case won't actually go to trial for years.

I guess in theory the players could be willing to sit out for a few years in hopes that they will get billions from the owners, but odds are that if they lose in early June that lower and mid tiered players will break from the ranks and press for a their leaders to get a deal done.

 

[SteveBsFan]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

What is your idea of "fair"????

The players did not opt out of the CBA, the owners did. The owners wanted an additional $1B off the top of the pie, plus a higher % of the remainder, all without backing up claims that they were supposedly losing money. They also brokered back door deals with TV networks to get cash even if there wasn't a season. They planned a long term strategy over a few years to get out of the CBA and try to bully their way into a new deal. They just expected the players to fold and be crushed like little peons.

For those trying to relate the NFL to society or capitalism, stop. 1/3 of these owners inherited their teams, they did not take any business risk. The vast majority of these owners got the public to take most of the financial risk and subsidize their stadiums and businesses.

Fair is a deal that benefits the owners (those who take the risks), the players (those who we actually watch), and the league as a whole. No side should feel they were pressured into a deal like the owners were a few years back otherwise it's going to lead to resentment and an eventual stalemate like we see now.

The 1 billion off the top was a very high number, but it has since been brought down, and if the owners do what they say they are going to with the additional money (re-invest back in the growth of the league), that does benefit all parties involved. The problem is the players don't care about that because it likely won't impact 75%+ of the league. If and when the re-investment pays off and revenue surpasses 10+ billion, increasing the pie for the players, the current ones will be retired and won't see it.

That being said, if the players won and this was dragged through the courts, this was going to get extremely ugly on many levels. The lockout would be lifted, yet what rules would they go by? Free Agency would be ugly, draft picks will still make way more than they should, re-signing players will be tough due to an uncertain future/cap. It's an ugly situation all around, and this ruling may be the kick in the ass the players need to get something legitimate done.

 

[jcdavey]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

Yeah, but your elite QB is younger than ours.

i just want the league fixed. even if my qb had 2 years left in the league


we're all day to day anyway really, but this needs to get fixed as close to once and for all as possible

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

The case itself will take years to fight if it goes to final verdict. The 8th Circuit decision will be huge because it is doubtful the Supreme Court will take this case no matter who wins. That means that if the owners win, the players are locked out until the situation is resolved. That means there might not be football until 2014, 2015, or 2016 if by the unlikely chance this case sees to the conclusion. On the other hand, if the players win, there could be football without a CBA for years until the suit is settle or a verdict is give like what happened in 1987 through 1993.

You are downplaying the verdict on the appeal. It is very likely that the players will cave before the actual case goes to trial if they lose because the case won't actually go to trial for years.done.

I'm not sure you entirely understand the NFL's position. They are not claiming a perpetual right to lock out. Nor is the 8th circuit saying they can do so.

The NFL is arguing that this is still a labor dispute, which means it can't go to court YET. But even the NFL understands that after a cooling off period, it does stop being a labor dispute and the decertification is effective. The NFL has suggested this period is around 6 months or until the NLRB rules on parallel matters. So the league bought itself perhaps one season at most. After the cooling off a lockout would plainly violate anti trust law and the league doesnt seriously argue otherwise. This ruling simply means the players have to go back to the bargaining table. And the NFL hopes they will crack under economic pressure, which eventually they will.

 

[Frezo]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

I guess in theory the players could be willing to sit out for a few years in hopes that they will get billions from the owners, but odds are that if they lose in early June that lower and mid tiered players will break from the ranks and press for a their leaders to get a deal done.

We're also looking at vet players that only have a scant few years left of earning potential. I would think they would want to get back ASAP too.

 

[mb6592]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

Judges get reversed all the time. She thought she was right but the court of appeals disagreed. It happens all the time. It doesnt mean it is political or that anyone was acting in bad faith. The legal issues are hard. There are precedents but they are not exactly on point. You have great lawyers on both sides. These are hard issues.

Judges getting reversed all the time is not the ideal (and, though I don't have data to prove it, is probably a fairly recent, say post 1970, phenomenon). It is fairly clear, even if one chooses to ignore it, that this practice is symptomatic of a big problem in our democracy. Either law makers are writing crappy, indecipherable laws - or something more nefarious is transpiring. I wouldn't be so cavalier about chalking it up to business a usual, nothing to see here, move on....

 

[mb6592]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

The legal issues are hard.

I have a hard time reconciling this with "[W]e have serious doubts that the district court had jurisdiction to enjoin the League’s lockout."

Seems the 8th circuit doesn't agree with you about it being a close call in which she acted in good faith. Are they wrong? Are the laws that incomprehensible that you could have such varied interpretations?

Also, the fact that one judge dissented does not, necessarily, speak to how close a call the legal merits of the district judge's decision were.

 

[NEGoldenAge]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

Lotsa peeps are falling for the propoganda spewed by the NFL. If they took a tenth of the time they spend posting and actually looked at the last offer from the NFL, they would understand what is going on. It is no wonder scammers and cons are so successful in this country.

 

[dhamz]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

Lotsa peeps are falling for the propoganda spewed by the NFL. If they took a tenth of the time they spend posting and actually looked at the last offer from the NFL, they would understand what is going on. It is no wonder scammers and cons are so successful in this country.

You think the NFL is the only one spewing propoganda?

Here is NFLPA head honcho De Smith on yesterday's ruling:

"As far as we can tell, this is the first sports league in history that's sued to not play its game."

The league didn't sue the players. The players sued and yesterday lost a ruling in their law suit with written arguments that strongly indicate they will lose the next ruling in a couple weeks. So this is where Smith goes - a blatant lie he thinks makes for a good clip on Sportscenter? He assumes probably correctly that most people are too stupid to know the difference.

Smith, Kessler, and co. decided probably long ago that the best course of action was to decertify, sue, get the injunction forbidding a lockout, and then play for years under the old rules while they either won their lawsuit or came close enough to winning that they could force the owners to accept their CBA terms. The plan falls apart without the injunction because their union isn't going to stay together when they start missing checks for millions. The time has come for them to go negotiate the best deal they can.

 

[NEGoldenAge]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

You think the NFL is the only one spewing propoganda?

Here is NFLPA head honcho De Smith on yesterday's ruling:

"As far as we can tell, this is the first sports league in history that's sued to not play its game."

The league didn't sue the players. The players sued and yesterday lost a ruling in their law suit with written arguments that strongly indicate they will lose the next ruling in a couple weeks. So this is where Smith goes - a blatant lie he thinks makes for a good clip on Sportscenter. He assumes probably correctly that most people are too stupid to know the difference.

Smith, Kessler, and co. decided probably long ago that the best course of action was to decertify, sue, get the injunction forbidding a lockout, and then play for years under the old rules while they either won their lawsuit or came close enough to winning that they could force the owners to accept their CBA terms. The plan falls apart without the injunction because their union isn't going to stay together when they start missing checks for millions. The time has come for them to go negotiate the best deal they can.

I know that both sides are spewing propoganda, but all one has to do is look at the NFL's last offer to get the real scoop. It is that simple.

 

[Triumph]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

I know that both sides are spewing propoganda, but all one has to do is look at the NFL's last offer to get the real scoop. It is that simple.

How does anyone outside the court room really know what the offer is?

 

[Rob0729]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

I'm not sure you entirely understand the NFL's position. They are not claiming a perpetual right to lock out. Nor is the 8th circuit saying they can do so.

The NFL is arguing that this is still a labor dispute, which means it can't go to court YET. But even the NFL understands that after a cooling off period, it does stop being a labor dispute and the decertification is effective. The NFL has suggested this period is around 6 months or until the NLRB rules on parallel matters. So the league bought itself perhaps one season at most. After the cooling off a lockout would plainly violate anti trust law and the league doesnt seriously argue otherwise. This ruling simply means the players have to go back to the bargaining table. And the NFL hopes they will crack under economic pressure, which eventually they will.

I guess I am wrong. I admit I don't know all the details of the case.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

I know that both sides are spewing propoganda, but all one has to do is look at the NFL's last offer to get the real scoop. It is that simple.

The NFL had zero intention of ever negotiating a real deal before a lockout. They weren't using the lockout as a bargaining threat to get a deal done, they had a lockout planned for years going back to the hiring of Goodell. They made back door deals with TV, illegal under the CBA by the way, so they could bleed the players dry when their premeditated lockout occurred. Their biggest mistake was it never occurred to them that the players wouldn't just lie down and take it up the shooter, but would decertify and contest it on legal grounds. Now, the court decisions are determined by whether the judge is a Dem or a GWB appointee. Goodell has failed in the reason he was hired and it's reason #43,432,432,047 why he should be fired.

Bob Kraft is extremely rare among NFL owners in that he built up most of his franchise with a lot of his own money. Almost all the other owners had their fan bases to pay hundreds of millions of tax payer money to build, finance, and subsidize their stadiums and businesses. Being an owner of an NFL franchise is dramatically less risky than almost all other entrepreneurs who people sympathize with for capitalistic reasons.

Both sides are putting out a lot of spin, but the basic core actions of either sides shows that the owners in this case are the original cause and continuing reason for why there is no deal right now.

 

[Sean Pa Patriot]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

bottom line.. no football till sept at the earliest.....unless the mother of all miracles happen they negotiate a deal now... the players now have no leverage.. they will the lose the appeal and will hunker down thanks to smith and his retoric.... Collingsthworth is going to be dead on.. they will get a deal done by sept, after the back lash of football canceling on 9/11 then 2 weeks of Fa and udfa signin.... 3 weeks of camp 2 preseason games.. 10/30 opening day of a 10 game season.... its starting to look like that....

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

Look, anyone who deals with the courts, knew that this ruling was coming.....

The law clearly says that the courts can not step into a dispute that arises out of a labor negotiation. The players Judge shopped, got a liberal judge to side with them, and won what everone knew would be a "short lived" victory.

Now what happens next is going to be interesting. The players still have a chance to win the anti-trust lawsuit, if they do that, then the NFL that will emerge (when they start playing again in a year or two) from that will look more like MLB. The Pats will be fine, but the Colts/Bills/Jags and yes, even Green Bay will be screwed!

Hopefully both sides sit down now and hammer something workable out. There is plenty of money out there for everybody. I think that the owners have to keep the salary cap, the franchise tag, the draft, a rookie salary scale, and 4-6 years before unrestricted free agency. I have no idea about the finances, but I'm guessing the 50-50 split that they are using now is unacceptable to the owners maybe a 55-45 revenue split would make then happy. If I were a player, I would agree to the above IF they gave the players: *guaranteed contracts like every other major league sport has. This will lessen the amount of forced salary cuts and salary dumps that the teams make now.
*Some sort of retirement health insurance plan/pension plan.
*Agree to the 18 game schedule IF and only IF they add 5 more players to the Active/gameday rosters. (and of course, increase everyone's current contracts by 2/16 of their current pay).

I doubt that there is any cahnce that this thing gets settled anytime soon (because right now, no one is losing moeny). I find it hard to believe that games will NOT be missed.

 

[Sean Pa Patriot]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

lets not forget the players may win damages from the tv money that was put aside from a lockout, which will allow them to dig in longer for the fight... the only winners in this mess will be the lawyers, get ready for opening day prob in late oct early nov.... its a shame it came to this.. both sides are now at fault in imo.... poor leaders in smith and goodell , and they should be ashamed of themeselves.....

 

[NEGoldenAge]

Re: Breaking News: 8th circut court...

How does anyone outside the court room really know what the offer is?

The details of the NFL's last offer at noon on the final day of the extension have been made public.