Judge Nelson denies stay

[mb6592]

Deleted.

Looking at the other thread and what happened to it, I've changed my mind and think I'm going to sit this one out.

Don't go wobbly on me.

 

[Deus Irae]

FYI, conservative/liberal is not, at least in the US, a political party. My parents are as conservative (social) as they come but vote Democratic because of the toys (they're over 70). You're excused for accusing me of making this about political parties. What it's become about (which PatsFaninAZ has already pointed out' - "the law states "and the statutes recognize it as such -- barring not just labor disputes but also actions "growing out of" labor disputes"), at least as it now stands within the courts, is how a particular judge rules from the bench (liberally - living, breathing.... or conservatively - what does the law actually say).

You're trying to politicize something by party and/or place on the political spectrum. I'm avoiding doing just that.

You neglected that part.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Thanks for the assessment of the timeline. It would still very likely be mid-June before before the appeals court would hear arguments so best case scenario would be mid to late June before their decision. What should we expect in the meantime as far as a stay of Judge Nelson's ruling? Is that something that would be hours / days / weeks away?
I'm not a lawyer but have been involved in enough litigation to know that speed is a very relative term in legal proceedings.

NFL has filed its motion for stay and sought expedited review. The players have committed to filing their opposition to the stay today at noon. (Not sure it has been filed yet.)

The NFL has asked for an "administrative stay" pending consideration of its application for a stay. These are usually routinely granted in emergency cases, but the players submitted a letter opposing it.

The options in the next day and a half are likely these:

1) The 8th Circuit will grant the administrative stay. This will be a decent signal that it finds something in the stay application worth thinking about. That stay will stay in place until the court rules on the application for a stay proper, at which point it will continue or dissolve the stay. If it dissolves the stay, it's pretty much game over for the NFL, at least in the short-term, unless they can get the U.S. Supreme Court to issue a stay. (A long-shot, although perhaps not in this case.)

2) The 8th Circuit will deny the administrative stay. This would be a good indication to the world that they aren't going to grant the stay.

3) The 8th Circuit will avoid the administrative stay completely and simply make a very fast ruling on the stay itself. I think this is unlikely but possible.

4) The 8th Circuit will do nothing. In this case, there is no stay and the NFL is at risk of contempt, and things will be uncertain. This is unlikely, but possible.

I think your expectation of mid-June is about right. However, we will probably get a very strong sense of where the 8th Circuit is well before that. If they grant a stay, it will be a strong indication they think Nelson erred.

 

[VJCPatriot]

But the stay was denied right? So that means everyone goes back to work. I don't think the process matters so much to me or other fans so long as there is football! Who cares if owners or players 'win'? Just play the damn game!

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Update: Moments ago, the 8th Circuit entered an order:

Players' response to stay is due Friday at noon. NFL's reply brief is due at 9:00 a.m. on Monday. The order says, "The League's motion for a temporary stay remains pending before the court," which is probably an indication that a ruling on that is forthcoming in the next day and a half.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

But the stay was denied right? So that means everyone goes back to work. I don't think the process matters so much to me or other fans so long as there is football! Who cares if owners or players 'win'? Just play the damn game!

Nelson denied the stay. The appellate court is now considering whether to enter one. There was never a significant chance that Nelson would enter a stay, but you have to ask the court that entered the order to stay it before you ask the court of appeals (usually).

Her denial of the stay was their ticket to ask the higher court for a stay, which they've now done. The court of appeals has ordered briefing on the stay to be complete by Monday morning.

 

[PATSNUTme]

OK, stay with football. I know that the make up of a court or a judge has something to do with their rulings.

But getting into if a judge is liberal or conservative and bringing other rulings not related to football is not what we are looking for here. Just keep your political opinions to yourself or post them on the political forum - not here.

I played golf with a friend this morning and he asked me who's side I was on, players or owners. I said I didn't care as long as there is football and a reasonable salary cap. I'm going to be really pissed if this goes into June.

 

[PATSNUTme]

If we have to start to take our time deleting post because of politics, people are going to get kicked off the thread and infactions are going to be given.

Last warning: NO POLITICAL POST ON THE FOOTBALL FORUM.

 

[Mike in 333]

NFL has filed its motion for stay and sought expedited review. The players have committed to filing their opposition to the stay today at noon. (Not sure it has been filed yet.)

The NFL has asked for an "administrative stay" pending consideration of its application for a stay. These are usually routinely granted in emergency cases, but the players submitted a letter opposing it.

The options in the next day and a half are likely these:

1) The 8th Circuit will grant the administrative stay. This will be a decent signal that it finds something in the stay application worth thinking about. That stay will stay in place until the court rules on the application for a stay proper, at which point it will continue or dissolve the stay. If it dissolves the stay, it's pretty much game over for the NFL, at least in the short-term, unless they can get the U.S. Supreme Court to issue a stay. (A long-shot, although perhaps not in this case.)

2) The 8th Circuit will deny the administrative stay. This would be a good indication to the world that they aren't going to grant the stay.

3) The 8th Circuit will avoid the administrative stay completely and simply make a very fast ruling on the stay itself. I think this is unlikely but possible.

4) The 8th Circuit will do nothing. In this case, there is no stay and the NFL is at risk of contempt, and things will be uncertain. This is unlikely, but possible.

I think your expectation of mid-June is about right. However, we will probably get a very strong sense of where the 8th Circuit is well before that. If they grant a stay, it will be a strong indication they think Nelson erred.

Again, many thanks. I guess what I'm looking for is something that would drive both sides back to the bargaining table. It might not take the final ruling to do it but signals sent by the 8th Circuit could probably be strong enough to persuade one side or the other (or both) to actually negotiate? My sense, based on some experience, is that negotiations are rarely done in earnest until A. time has run out, or B. one side is weakened enough by something such as a pending, apparently unfavorable court order that it becomes a matter of minimizing their losses.

Ultimately I think that both sides have the NFL's best interests at heart and I can't see either side trying to be fatally unreasonable. I just don't think that, until one side or the other faces an adverse ruling that is likely to stick, any real progress will be made.

 

[Deus Irae]

Again, many thanks. I guess what I'm looking for is something that would drive both sides back to the bargaining table. It might not take the final ruling to do it but signals sent by the 8th Circuit could probably be strong enough to persuade one side or the other (or both) to actually negotiate? My sense, based on some experience, is that negotiations are rarely done in earnest until A. time has run out, or B. one side is weakened enough by something such as a pending, apparently unfavorable court order that it becomes a matter of minimizing their losses.

Ultimately I think that both sides have the NFL's best interests at heart and I can't see either side trying to be fatally unreasonable. I just don't think that, until one side or the other faces an adverse ruling that is likely to stick, any real progress will be made.

If the 8th slaps down the stay request with a ruling that seems to back up Nelson pretty strongly, the league will likely become much more amenable to a return to the bargaining table.

If the 8th eventually grants the league the stay, it'll be a while before the league feels any pressure.

The players will feel pressure individually and at different rates, based upon their wallets.


If you want a quick resolution, you want the 8th to strongly back Nelson.

 

[Why?PJ]

But the stay was denied right? So that means everyone goes back to work. I don't think the process matters so much to me or other fans so long as there is football! Who cares if owners or players 'win'? Just play the damn game!

Do you actually want to be able to watch the games?

If you do then you really need to back the owners. If you don't care if all games are pay per view and tickets prices are quadrupled, then go ahead and back the players.

If the 8th slaps down the stay request with a ruling that seems to back up Nelson pretty strongly, the league will likely become much more amenable to a return to the bargaining table.

If the 8th eventually grants the league the stay, it'll be a while before the league feels any pressure.

The players will feel pressure individually and at different rates, based upon their wallets.


If you want a quick resolution, you want the 8th to strongly back Nelson.

If you want to change the game radically, you want the 8th to back Nelson. If you want to NFL to continue as we know it, you will realize Nelson stepped way out of bounds and is pretty nigh clueless. She is one of the generation of lawyers who think it is ok to ignore actual law and make rulings on feelings.

If the players lawyers get their way 1 of 2 things will happen. Either the teams will be forced to stop sharing all revenue and the NFL will become the MLB, with 4 teams sharing the Super Bowl wins, or the prices of everything will go up sharply as the NFL teams try to cope with the greed of idiots like Snyder and the faiders morons. A free market system in the NFL would be a terrible thing.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

If the 8th slaps down the stay request with a ruling that seems to back up Nelson pretty strongly, the league will likely become much more amenable to a return to the bargaining table.

If the 8th eventually grants the league the stay, it'll be a while before the league feels any pressure.

The players will feel pressure individually and at different rates, based upon their wallets.


If you want a quick resolution, you want the 8th to strongly back Nelson.

I think you meant to say IMHO...

Because IMHO the best case scenario that sends the two sides back to not mediation but actual negotiation is the 8th grants the stay. In which case the union will move a lot sooner to recertify to close that $350M gap that is currently the sum total of the divide... But my opinions are generally based on simple common sense...

And IMHO a quick solution is also less important than a sustainable one. Neither side is going to drag this out to the point they lose games. In which case I say, let the best men (to decide how to continue to run this multi billion dollar business we all love in the manner to which we have become accustomed) win.

 

[Deus Irae]

If you want to change the game radically, you want the 8th to back Nelson. If you want to NFL to continue as we know it, you will realize Nelson stepped way out of bounds and is pretty nigh clueless. She is one of the generation of lawyers who think it is ok to ignore actual law and make rulings on feelings.

If the players lawyers get their way 1 of 2 things will happen. Either the teams will be forced to stop sharing all revenue and the NFL will become the MLB, with 4 teams sharing the Super Bowl wins, or the prices of everything will go up sharply as the NFL teams try to cope with the greed of idiots like Snyder and the faiders morons. A free market system in the NFL would be a terrible thing.

Given that it's the players want the status quo, and the owners want radical change, your argument makes absolutely no sense.

 

[Deus Irae]

I think you meant to say IMHO...

Because IMHO the best case scenario that sends the two sides back to not mediation but actual negotiation is the 8th grants the stay. In which case the union will move a lot sooner to recertify to close that $350M gap that is currently the sum total of the divide... But my opinions are generally based on simple common sense...

And IMHO a quick solution is also less important than a sustainable one. Neither side is going to drag this out to the point they lose games. In which case I say, let the best men (to decide how to continue to run this multi billion dollar business we all love in the manner to which we have become accustomed) win.

Since Nelson hasn't ruled on the merits, and since players aren't really losing any major money yet, the players would have no incentive to cave, or negotiate, under your scenario. If your opinion was actually based upon common sense, you'd have noted that.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Given that it's the players want the status quo, and the owners want radical change, your argument makes absolutely no sense.

The owners aren't suing the players because they want the status quo. The status quo was lost in 2006. The players have no intention of going back to the status quo, and are in FACT asking for radical changes to the way the business of football is conducted that will change the way it's played on the field. Unless of course you're claiming the whole decertification and lawsuit thing is a tactical sham...

 

[VJCPatriot]

Do you actually want to be able to watch the games?

If you do then you really need to back the owners. If you don't care if all games are pay per view and tickets prices are quadrupled, then go ahead and back the players.

What is this based on?

If you want to change the game radically, you want the 8th to back Nelson. If you want to NFL to continue as we know it, you will realize Nelson stepped way out of bounds and is pretty nigh clueless. She is one of the generation of lawyers who think it is ok to ignore actual law and make rulings on feelings.

If the players lawyers get their way 1 of 2 things will happen. Either the teams will be forced to stop sharing all revenue and the NFL will become the MLB, with 4 teams sharing the Super Bowl wins, or the prices of everything will go up sharply as the NFL teams try to cope with the greed of idiots like Snyder and the faiders morons. A free market system in the NFL would be a terrible thing.

Again, I don't really care as long as there's football. I don't see where this pessimism comes from that only 'an owners' win' will give us the same old football we've been watching. In the end the owners run the teams and sign the television contracts. Whether or not the players 'win', it will be the owners who decide how to get the revenue.

Just get back to work!! And tonight the DRAFT IS ON! YES, FINALLY!!!
(That's one thing at least the lockout couldn't ruin.)

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Since Nelson hasn't ruled on the merits, and since players aren't really losing any major money yet, the players would have no incentive to cave, or negotiate, under your scenario. If your opinion was actually based upon common sense, you'd have noted that.

But they are losing major money and their very careers hang in the balance...that was the basis of the her granting the injunction to begin with.

Enough of them are in financial disarray at any given time to provide ample incentive for them to get back to the negotiating table in earnest.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

What is this based on?



Again, I don't really care as long as there's football. I don't see where this pessimism comes from that only 'an owners' win' will give us the same old football we've been watching. In the end the owners run the teams and sign the television contracts. Whether or not the players 'win', it will be the owners who decide how to get the revenue.

Just get back to work!! And tonight the DRAFT IS ON! YES, FINALLY!!!
(That's one thing at least the lockout couldn't ruin.)

But the lawsuit can and possibly will. You want the NFL, the best and most successful league model in sports, to morph into a worse version of MLB or the NBA. No thanks.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Because IMHO the best case scenario that sends the two sides back to not mediation but actual negotiation is the 8th grants the stay.

That's my sense too. (He types grudgingly, despite knowing he will draw 40 messages from the most strident poster on this forum, and whom he fully intends to give the last word without further debate.)

I don't think all-best-off anarachy with a pending anti-trust lawsuit that the players don't really even need or want to win is not exactly the environment in which the matter gets settled. But either way, Nelson's opinion is results oriented and, IMHO, wrongly decided, so I'd like to see it reversed for that reason, regardless of my desires for football or sympathies in the case. Ultimately, I think the tortured path she needed to take to get to her result is worse for labor than management, even though it sticks it to management in this particular case.

 

[Deus Irae]

The owners aren't suing the players because they want the status quo. The status quo was lost in 2006. The players have no intention of going back to the status quo, and are in FACT asking for radical changes to the way the business of football is conducted that will change the way it's played on the field. Unless of course you're claiming the whole decertification and lawsuit thing is a tactical sham...

The players were more than willing to continue with the CBA. It was the owners who opted out. The players repeatedly stated their willingness to continue playing under the rules in place. The league turned down the offer.