Brady & Mankins agree to be plaintiffs/update: lawsuit filed

[PatsFanSince74]

Wish Brady wasn't the headline player suing Bob Kraft and the NFL. When you are the highest paid player in the history of the NFL at any position, suing for more money doesn't help your image. Losing three straight playoff games, as BB says, is what it is, and the Mr. Gisele lady headband thing is little more than a meaningless sideshow. But Brady being the headline player suing the owners is something we could do without.

I think we have to see how this all plays out before we understand what it will mean for TB's legacy. He's the "headline" because of the alphabet, but still I kind of admire Brady and Manning for what they are doing, especially when we consider that Joe Montana crossed the Union picket line to join the "Replacement Players" in 2007. It's not out of the question that the Players will win some major concessions in the history of labor relations in professional sports. I'm not sure what your remark about the "Mr. Gisele lady headband thing" is all about, but if it reflects your own insecurities, I'd just leave it out next time.

 

[Richard Camembert]

I don't know, you and many posters seem to know a lot more than do I about this topic. I assume the owners locked out to divide the union by pressuring the less wealthy players into accepting more owner-friendly terms. As I read the players' case, they argue that the owners can't lock them out because a lockout breaches the individual contracts the players have, and, anticipating the owners' next move of arguing that decertifying is not in good faith, claim the owners bargained away the good faith argument. [I never thought I would ever write anything remotely similar to that last sentence.] Meanwhile, ultimately I think the players are fighting all of this in an effort to maintain the current system. Do you agree?

I'm not convinced Doty is acting at the behest of the players. Perhaps he is, but I don't see any allegations of bribery being floated by the owners, which I would imagine would surface. Or, I guess you mean, "Rule in their favor." I'm not a lawyer and I don't think or speak as a lawyer does.

I have no clue whether this case is a slam dunk but the players' case made sense to me. I do know that employees in most other non collectively bargained businesses have many more rights and options than do NFL players, in exchange for which, I guess, NFL players are compensated at very high levels.

I've yet to see any argument by the owners that doesn't have increasing the amount, and changing the distribution, of revenue, in the owners' favor, as the central theme. Making this at least seem like a pure money grab. The NFL has certainly gotten a huge amount of press from all of this, so maybe the game won't take a huge PR and revenue hit that way baseball has when they locked out. On the other hand, when would you say the owners will begin to face pressure from the networks and advertisers to return to the table and negotiate?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I don't know, you and many posters seem to know a lot more than do I about this topic. I assume the owners locked out to divide the union by pressuring the less wealthy players into accepting more owner-friendly terms. As I read the players' case, they argue that the owners can't lock them out because a lockout breaches the individual contracts the players have, and, anticipating the owners' next move of arguing that decertifying is not in good faith, claim the owners bargained away the good faith argument. [I never thought I would ever write anything remotely similar to that last sentence.] Meanwhile, ultimately I think the players are fighting all of this in an effort to maintain the current system. Do you agree?

I'm not convinced Doty is acting at the behest of the players. Perhaps he is, but I don't see any allegations of bribery being floated by the owners, which I would imagine would surface. Or, I guess you mean, "Rule in their favor." I'm not a lawyer and I don't think or speak as a lawyer does.

I have no clue whether this case is a slam dunk but the players' case made sense to me. I do know that employees in most other non collectively bargained businesses have many more rights and options than do NFL players, in exchange for which, I guess, NFL players are compensated at very high levels.

I've yet to see any argument by the owners that doesn't have increasing the amount, and changing the distribution, of revenue, in the owners' favor, as the central theme. Making this at least seem like a pure money grab. The NFL has certainly gotten a huge amount of press from all of this, so maybe the game won't take a huge PR and revenue hit that way baseball has when they locked out. On the other hand, when would you say the owners will begin to face pressure from the networks and advertisers to return to the table and negotiate?

Here is why the owners should prevail on the lockout:

Article LVII, Section 3(b) of the CBA, which states as follows: “The Parties agree that, after the expiration of the express term of this Agreement, in the event that at that time or any time thereafter a majority of players indicate that they wish to end the collective bargaining status of the NFLPA on or after expiration of this Agreement, the NFL and its Clubs and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, representatives, agents, successors and assigns waive any rights they may have to assert any antitrust labor exemption defense based upon any claim that the termination by the NFLPA of its status as a collective bargaining representative is Article LVII, Mutual Reservation of Rights: Labor Exemption or would be a sham, pretext, ineffective, requires additional steps, or has not in fact occurred.”


That didn't happen. The union decertified at 4PM and the lawsuit was filed at 5PM. The CBA expired at midnight. Which means injunctive relief against the lockout sought by the players should not be granted... The players and the union basically needed to wait through 6 months of a potential lockout to vote to decertify and file their challenges... Otherwise decertification is a sham and the players have no case...not to mention no Judge Doty as his involvement would end with the lockout and the end of the CBA of 1993...

I believe this is why the league continues to say rather offhandedly that eventually they will get back to the bargaining table and even mediation...

 

[Deus Irae]

Here is why the owners should prevail on the lockout:

Article LVII, Section 3(b) of the CBA, which states as follows: “The Parties agree that, after the expiration of the express term of this Agreement, in the event that at that time or any time thereafter a majority of players indicate that they wish to end the collective bargaining status of the NFLPA on or after expiration of this Agreement, the NFL and its Clubs and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, representatives, agents, successors and assigns waive any rights they may have to assert any antitrust labor exemption defense based upon any claim that the termination by the NFLPA of its status as a collective bargaining representative is Article LVII, Mutual Reservation of Rights: Labor Exemption or would be a sham, pretext, ineffective, requires additional steps, or has not in fact occurred.”


That didn't happen. The union decertified at 4PM and the lawsuit was filed at 5PM. The CBA expired at midnight. Which means injunctive relief against the lockout sought by the players should not be granted... The players and the union basically needed to wait through 6 months of a potential lockout to vote to decertify and file their challenges... Otherwise decertification is a sham and the players have no case...not to mention no Judge Doty as his involvement would end with the lockout and the end of the CBA of 1993...

I believe this is why the league continues to say rather offhandedly that eventually they will get back to the bargaining table and even mediation...

You should read Article LVII, Section 3(a).

 

[Ring 6]

After reviewing the PDF, I must say that it is hard to see how the owners win this one. Salary cap, rookie salary cap, franchise tag, transition tag, and the draft do all seem anticompetitive and restrictive of players' rights.

I dont think the intention of the NFLPA is to win the lawsuit. The intention is to reach a settlement which reestablishes the NFLPA and the CBA.
If the anti-trust exemption is removed and no compromise reached there will simply no longer be an NFL.
The NFL can not be a competitive sports league under the rules of anti-trust legislation, to my knowledge.

 

[Deus Irae]

Update: First judge assigned to the case has removed himself:

The Brady case was assigned to Judge Richard H. Kyle. Judge Kyle promptly filed an order disqualifying himself from the case and positioning it for reassignment. He gave no reason for the move, citing 28 U.S.C. § 455 as the basis for the disqualification.

Initial judge steps aside from Brady case | ProFootballTalk

 

[JMarr]

Re: Brady & Mankins agreed to be plaintiffs

Let me let you in on a little secret; you will NEVER become a millionaire. I will NEVER become a millionaire. Your family and neighbors will NEVER become a millionaire. It doesn't matter how hard you work, or how much you want it. You, Joe Smo on Patsfans.com will NEVER EVER EVER EVER become rich. So many people think they will but guess what? It's called the top 0.1% bracket for a reason. Your attitude of wanting to screw over unions and hard workers and support the super rich because you think you will soon be counted among them is what is killing this country. You will continue to vote against your self interest, continue to vote for less rights, and be a pawn of the super rich until the day you die.

:idea2:

Best post (and beatdown of an ignorant argument) that I have ever seen posted on this board. Well done.

 

[JMarr]

Re: Brady & Mankins agreed to be plaintiffs

Perhaps your interpetation of the term "millionaire" is off. Isn't a "millioniaire" someone who's assets-debt > $1,000,000? If you do understand that definition, then the problem is more serious. In this country, if you work hard and plan well, you have a legitimate shot at becoming a "millionaire" before you retire. I grew just above the poverty line, but if everything goes close to plan, I will be a "millionaire" years before I retire. I know that grew up in the same crappy neighborhood that will probably do the same.

By your definition many of us will be millionaires (or close to it) by the time we retire (if the economy ever recovers). Having close to one million dollars in their house and other assets after working one's entire life does not make a person "rich"--merely comfortable. The point being that none of us will ever be anywhere close to as "rich" as most NFL players, and none of us will ever know what it's like to be in the .01% group of billionaires that hoard over 10%of the money in the wealthiest nation on earth.

 

[Ring 6]

If anybody is interested, here is a link to a PDF of the Brady v NFL lawsuit. It's lengthy - 52 pages - but skimming through it I did see some interesting wording and accusations.

NFLPA / Brady v NFL pdf

Quite a read.
IMO if the judge were to rule on the NFLPAs side on every point, this would be the worst thing that ever happened to the players.
I find it very hard to believe that if the players have no collective representation, if there is no draft, and if there are no rules for what a player is paid other than whatever they and the team agree to, like any other employer/employee that they will end up with anywhere near 60% of the revenue, or the 40-some million it has added up to.
Personally, I think the ridiculously high contracts that are being doled out are a result of an agreement owners would never have made if they saw this coming. They have no choice but to pay 40mill signing bonusses because they have a collective agreement that they have to spend the money.
It seems to me the NFL would pay an awful lot less in player contracts if they were not 'forced' to pay a certain percentage of revenues. If every player were declared free tomorrow, I would be a lot of money that the new contracts they would sign would not only be well below the NFLPA proposal, but far, far below even the NFLs last offer.
To me this is a case of be careful what you ask for, because the NFL may be very happy with a free system with no CBA in comparison to what this has grown to.
Do you really think any NFL player would chose to just not play for half of what he is not making if that were the best offer any team would give?

 

[Keyser Söze]

I don't know, you and many posters seem to know a lot more than do I about this topic. I assume the owners locked out to divide the union by pressuring the less wealthy players into accepting more owner-friendly terms. As I read the players' case, they argue that the owners can't lock them out because a lockout breaches the individual contracts the players have, and, anticipating the owners' next move of arguing that decertifying is not in good faith, claim the owners bargained away the good faith argument. [I never thought I would ever write anything remotely similar to that last sentence.] Meanwhile, ultimately I think the players are fighting all of this in an effort to maintain the current system. Do you agree?

I'm not convinced Doty is acting at the behest of the players. Perhaps he is, but I don't see any allegations of bribery being floated by the owners, which I would imagine would surface. Or, I guess you mean, "Rule in their favor." I'm not a lawyer and I don't think or speak as a lawyer does.

I have no clue whether this case is a slam dunk but the players' case made sense to me. I do know that employees in most other non collectively bargained businesses have many more rights and options than do NFL players, in exchange for which, I guess, NFL players are compensated at very high levels.

I've yet to see any argument by the owners that doesn't have increasing the amount, and changing the distribution, of revenue, in the owners' favor, as the central theme. Making this at least seem like a pure money grab. The NFL has certainly gotten a huge amount of press from all of this, so maybe the game won't take a huge PR and revenue hit that way baseball has when they locked out. On the other hand, when would you say the owners will begin to face pressure from the networks and advertisers to return to the table and negotiate?

Of course that's your contention. You're a first year grad student. You just got finished some Marxian historian, Pete Garrison prob’ly, you’re gonna be convinced of that until next month when you get to James Lemon, then you’re gonna be talkin’ about how the economies of Virginia and Pennsylvania were entrepreneurial and capitalist back in 1740. That's gonna last until next year, you’re gonna be in here regurgitating Gordon Wood, talkin’ about you know, the Pre-revolutionary utopia and the capital-forming effects of military mobilization.

Were you gonna plagiarize the whole thing for us- you have any thoughts of- of your own on this matter? Or do- is that your thing, you come into a bar, you read some obscure passage and then you pretend- you pawn it off as your own- your own idea just to impress some girls? Embarrass my friend?

See the sad thing about a guy like you, is in about 50 years you’re gonna start doin' some thinkin' on your own and you’re gonna come up with the fact that there are two certainties in life. One, don't do that. And two, you dropped a hundred and fifty grand on a f***in’ education you coulda' got for a dollar fifty in late charges at the Public Library.

 

[Major **********]

Of course that's your contention. You're a first year grad student. You just got finished some Marxian historian, Pete Garrison prob’ly, you’re gonna be convinced of that until next month when you get to James Lemon, then you’re gonna be talkin’ about how the economies of Virginia and Pennsylvania were entrepreneurial and capitalist back in 1740. That's gonna last until next year, you’re gonna be in here regurgitating Gordon Wood, talkin’ about you know, the Pre-revolutionary utopia and the capital-forming effects of military mobilization.

Were you gonna plagiarize the whole thing for us- you have any thoughts of- of your own on this matter? Or do- is that your thing, you come into a bar, you read some obscure passage and then you pretend- you pawn it off as your own- your own idea just to impress some girls? Embarrass my friend?

See the sad thing about a guy like you, is in about 50 years you’re gonna start doin' some thinkin' on your own and you’re gonna come up with the fact that there are two certainties in life. One, don't do that. And two, you dropped a hundred and fifty grand on a f***in’ education you coulda' got for a dollar fifty in late charges at the Public Library.

Oh, you arrogant ****! That's why I don't come to the goddamned reunions, 'cause I can't stand that look in your eye. Ya know, that condescending, embarrassed look. You think I'm a failure. I know who I am, and I'm proud of what I do. It was a conscientious choice, I didn't **** up! And you and your cronies think I'm some sort of pity case. You and your kiss-ass chorus following you around going, "The Fields Medal! The Fields Medal!" Why are you still so ******' afraid of failure?

Good Will Hunting. Great movie.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Update: First judge assigned to the case has removed himself:



Initial judge steps aside from Brady case | ProFootballTalk

I guess everyone was assuming that was to make way for Doty...

UPDATE: Will Brinson of CBSSports.com tells us that the case already has been reassigned to Judge Patrick J. Schiltz. Nominated for the bench by George W. Bush in 2005, Judge Schiltz served as a law clerk for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Though we currently don’t know anything about Judge Schiltz’s track record of rulings, he’s likely not a liberal, which likely plays into the league’s hands.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

You should read Article LVII, Section 3(a).

I have. That is the one that stipulates if the NFLPA doesn't decertify players cannot file suit after the expiration of the agreement until the later of...basically 6 months.

Section 3. CBA Expiration:
(a) Following the expiration of the express term of this Agreement,
then, if the NFLPA is in existence as a union, the Parties agree that none of
the Class Members (as defined in the Settlement Agreement) nor any player
represented by the NFLPA shall be able to commence an action, or assert
a claim, under the antitrust laws for conduct occurring, until either: (i)
the Management Council and NFLPA have bargained to impasse; or (ii) six
(6) months after such expiration, whichever is later; at that time, the Parties
reserve any arguments they may make regarding the application of the
labor exemption.

 

[Richard Camembert]

Of course that's your contention. You're a first year grad student. You just got finished some Marxian historian, Pete Garrison prob’ly, you’re gonna be convinced of that until next month when you get to James Lemon, then you’re gonna be talkin’ about how the economies of Virginia and Pennsylvania were entrepreneurial and capitalist back in 1740. That's gonna last until next year, you’re gonna be in here regurgitating Gordon Wood, talkin’ about you know, the Pre-revolutionary utopia and the capital-forming effects of military mobilization.

Were you gonna plagiarize the whole thing for us- you have any thoughts of- of your own on this matter? Or do- is that your thing, you come into a bar, you read some obscure passage and then you pretend- you pawn it off as your own- your own idea just to impress some girls? Embarrass my friend?

See the sad thing about a guy like you, is in about 50 years you’re gonna start doin' some thinkin' on your own and you’re gonna come up with the fact that there are two certainties in life. One, don't do that. And two, you dropped a hundred and fifty grand on a f***in’ education you coulda' got for a dollar fifty in late charges at the Public Library.

You like apples?

BASH.

How do you like them apples?

 

[Deus Irae]

I have. That is the one that stipulates if the NFLPA doesn't decertify players cannot file suit after the expiration of the agreement until the later of...basically 6 months.

Yes, but you were citing to (b). (b) doesn't give the owners a "win" on the lockout. You seemed to be misunderstanding its import. (b), combined with (a), will allow the owners to make the "sham" argument, if the court buys the owner side of the argument. It's not a guarantee of victory.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Yes, but you were citing to (b). (b) doesn't give the owners a "win" on the lockout. You seemed to be misunderstanding its import. (b), combined with (a), will allow the owners to make the "sham" argument, if the court buys the owner side of the argument. It's not a guarantee of victory.

I was only citing to (b) because that was what Florio was citing regarding the timing aspect of the decertification. And I never said it's a guarantee of victory, but if the courts adhere to the language of the CBA that was collectively bargained for and and agreed to 18 years ago (under Doty's auspices) it should mean that at this time they don't have a leg to stand on in securing an injunction against the lockout or in filing suit for anti trust. They want to wait until September and take a whack at it...different story. Thing is I don't think even the NFLPA believes the players will remain united that long...

The players have never shown more than tepid support for a work stoppage. I think De sold them on decertification being their ace in the hole to circumvent it. If that is not the case, they are not going to be real happy with De.

Best thing the courts could do at this juncture is point the players and the union back in the direction of collective bargaining. Let the process take it's natural course, which was never intended to be all that paletable for either side because when it is that is when folks don't negotiate in good faith or compromise for the greater good or find solutions to their own problems.

 

[Triumph]

No Doty. Whooops

Those optimistic for a 2011 NFL season are really kidding themselves. The Owners have lawyered up with some heavy hitters and are about to kick the players arses.

Free Agency was rumored to possibly begin 3/12/11. Now, Schefter reports were looking at the very least 1 month before it could begin.

 

[dhamz]

No Doty. Whooops

Those optimistic for a 2011 NFL season are really kidding themselves. The Owners have lawyered up with some heavy hitters and are about to kick the players arses.

Free Agency was rumored to possibly begin 3/12/11. Now, Schefter reports were looking at the very least 1 month before it could begin.

Current judge assignment is not final and it is still highly probable Doty gets the case based on its relation to the previous cases he has heard.

 

[E Belichick Unum]

Re: Brady & Mankins agreed to be plaintiffs

:idea2:

Best post (and beatdown of an ignorant argument) that I have ever seen posted on this board. Well done.

I hope you don't have any kids. Having parents that tell their kids that they will never be able to be anything better than a second class citizen and will never be able to succeed because the boogie man is too rich is criminal. As a matter of fact, that alone is reason to crush the union.

I repeat, having a judge tell a business owner that he has to bow to extortion from a group of thugs because a century ago businesses allegedly abused their workers is wrong. With any luck, Walmart will be hiring during the lockout, or maybe Stop and Shop, because there will be a lot more minimum wage workers on the market.

 

[Patjew]

Re: Brady & Mankins agreed to be plaintiffs

:idea2:

Best post (and beatdown of an ignorant argument) that I have ever seen posted on this board. Well done.

It was a great post describing why he (and you, I guess) will never be millionaires.

Being a millionaire isn't that big a deal anymore, even for people (like me) that were once on welfare. Get over it.