OT: Supreme Court says Flores vs. NFL should be heard in court, not by arbitrator

[Thelonious]

You have a lot of faith in the ethics of employers. Sounds nice, but ultimately you gotta put bread on the table.

I expect them to act in their own enlightened self interest, an expectation which is at the very basis io a market economy. As for "putting food on the table" (I am always amused at this argument in a country in which the "poor people" are nearly all garbage-eating fatsos), the best way to accomplish this is to reap the benefits of a free market. You might want to examine the disml record of command economies down through the ages. They do not work. It is also pathologically absurd for you to offer an argument on behalf of the "poor, hungry professional athletes" in this country. You cannot be serious. For a broader perspective on your argument's deficiencies, you might view a few videos of street life in major cities where the politicians share your bleeding heart concern for the poor and where the solution to the plight of the poor is government "help." Your views may please you, but they bear no meningful connection with the reality of the situation.

 

[XLIX]

I'm no law expert but it seems like an employee under contract would have to have some kind of a contractual violation to be fired. I don't think an owner could say that he's firing a player just because he wants to.

Absent a CBA saying otherwise, you can fire a guy under contract for any reason you want (assuming you don't violate his civil rights) but you have to pay out the contract. This tends to happen to coached (although they often have contractual offsets in place).

As for firing players, there is a CBA in place which spells out that you don't have to pay the non-guaranteed balance of their contracts.