JoeF Posted March 11, 2011 Posted March 11, 2011 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/03/11/source-free-agency-could-start-at-midnight/ Wow....
Mike32282 Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 That would make no sense! How can the players sign contracts with teams if they have no one to represent them anymore?
McBeane Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 That would make no sense! How can the players sign contracts with teams if they have no one to represent them anymore? If it happens like the article suggests, I believe that they would adopt the old CBA and use that until they can negotiate a new one. I may be wrong though, this is such a convoluted situation.
Erik Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 But if owners don't want it to happen why wouldn't they all just not take part in free agency?
Delete This Account Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 if NFL elects to not lockout players, then there is no real block to free agency at this point, though there are other questions that could be raised in regards to no contract. i am informed that if free agency did begin ... and that's an IF ... it would begin after the weekend. jw
Chuck Norris Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 Judge Doty can rule that the league continue under the old cba If free agency was supposed to be begin at midnight tonight/tomorrow morning then technically you could see signings
truth on hold Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 Free agency has already been taking place. Why is it such a big "wow" if it continues.
purple haze Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 But if owners don't want it to happen why wouldn't they all just not take part in free agency? Because that would be collusion and open up another can of worms they do not want to deal with.
BillsfaninFl Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 Either way, it will have no affect on the Bills. Buddy Nix's bedroom light just went out.
Chuck Norris Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 (edited) Free agency has already been taking place. Why is it such a big "wow" if it continues. If Judge Doty rules that the league has to operate on old CBA then why wouldn't players sign when it was the owners who opted out early? Not saying its going to happen but its a possibility Edited March 12, 2011 by Chuck Norris
spartacus Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 if NFL elects to not lockout players, then there is no real block to free agency at this point, though there are other questions that could be raised in regards to no contract. i am informed that if free agency did begin ... and that's an IF ... it would begin after the weekend. jw I thought it was a slam dunk that the owners would lock out the players- because any other course would involve litigation the league could not win good thing you were on top of this possible outcome from day 1
boyst Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 if NFL elects to not lockout players, then there is no real block to free agency at this point, though there are other questions that could be raised in regards to no contract. i am informed that if free agency did begin ... and that's an IF ... it would begin after the weekend. jw Judge Doh'ty, who has single handly shaped this in to a political powerhouse situation of being pro Union, will not be able to do so because the NFL has announced it is going to be issuing a lockout this evening. He cannot force employment of a contracted employee when the guidelines and document it was written under and through is no longer valid at the urging of the players Union, as well.
ChevyVanMiller Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 if NFL elects to not lockout players, then there is no real block to free agency at this point, though there are other questions that could be raised in regards to no contract. i am informed that if free agency did begin ... and that's an IF ... it would begin after the weekend. jw Thanks for the clarification, John.
Delete This Account Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 (edited) I thought it was a slam dunk that the owners would lock out the players- because any other course would involve litigation the league could not win good thing you were on top of this possible outcome from day 1 and it looks like the nfl is going to lockout the players, so what's your point. decertification was an option, and the players elected to go that route to protect their legal rights. is it the smart move, i don't know. we'll see. there is a great risk involved here. and in speaking to numerous people in the know, it's a gamble some would not take. even one union rep informed this evening that there's a 50-50 chance that the courts will side with the players. in the thread in question, i had raised the point that the legal route is frought with obstacles and risks. that has not changed. ADD: and in re-reading that thread -- don't really know why -- i happened upon a point that remains as valid today as it did then. i wrote: and really, why in every post do you make it so freaking personal, in that you come off to be so godam high and mighty that leads me to wonder why you don't have a job in this business. or are all of us stupid reporters simply beneath you. jeezus, you're an arrogant, pompous know it all, who makes it difficult to allow me to reply respectfully or without holding my nose. jw Edited March 12, 2011 by john wawrow
Green Lightning Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 John, Nice b'slap of Spartacus. Now back to the point. Where the Hell are we now? I can't see a court telling owners they can't lock out just because a few high profile QBs sue.
Delete This Account Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 (edited) John, Nice b'slap of Spartacus. Now back to the point. Where the Hell are we now? I can't see a court telling owners they can't lock out just because a few high profile QBs sue. GL, there are too many options here to hazard a guess, aside from my belief -- and i wrote this a few months back -- that the best case scenario is for a deal to be reached by july 31. eventually -- because i don't see a court ordering a deal here -- it's going to come down to 1) the two sides hammering something out. 2) one side caving, leading to the two sides hammering something out in favor of the side that did not cave. the worst case scenario is i think there will still be a season, but it won't start unitl middle of october. there could be other options, but i'd wait to see what falls out over the weekend. i'd sit tight and not worry too much. as George Wilson told me this everning: (i'm paraphrasing) have patience, take a breath, it's March. and, before anyone starts laying blame, read up on the issues and get a perspective on what's going on. (good advice) jw Edited March 12, 2011 by john wawrow
Green Lightning Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 Thanks John, as lame as it sounds, I just keep thinking about FA, picking up a RT and looking forward to the draft. I have to deal with litigation and union issues all the time and I would love it if we could just talk football! Thanks for hanging in at TSW.
Nanker Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 No Fun League. The fans are screwed, yet again. At least now the misery is league-wide, and not just in western NY.
Thoner7 Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 But if owners don't want it to happen why wouldn't they all just not take part in free agency? Thats exactly what Buddy should convice the other 31 teams do to before swooping in and signing all the studs we need!
Recommended Posts