Jerry Jabber Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 Here's the latest lockout update: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81fdfb5e/article/sides-mum-as-they-arrive-for-day-2-of-supervised-mediation?module=HP_headlines The NFL is expected to put another offer on the table today. If the players don't accept it, looks like everyone will have to wait anywhere from mid-June to mid-July on the ruling from the judges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 (edited) De Smith is living for the court date. I don't see the players accepting anything the NFL puts on the table until those rulings take place. It may well bite them in the ass though. GO BILLS!!! Edited May 17, 2011 by K-9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangarang Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 "Right now, our guys are out there working out for free, because they dig the game." Give me a !@#$ing break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockinon Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 De Smith is living for the court date. I don't see the players accepting anything the NFL puts on the table until those rulings take place. It may well bite them in the ass though. GO BILLS!!! If he is not smart enough to realize that he is going to go down with that ship, then he deserves what he has coming. The players have lost their leverage and it would be in their own best interest to negotiate before litigation decides their fate for them. I hope they make some progress at the negotiating table now before that happens. Otherwise, this is going to be very long summer with very little time for FA or OTAs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 Now talks are on hiatus and will resume in June. Like the last thing this needs is more breaks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockinon Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 Now talks are on hiatus and will resume in June. Like the last thing this needs is more breaks No, the way I understand it, they were negotiating yesterday and today in an effort to bypass further litigation. Not only that, if things are not worked out today, they may resume further negotiations at some point prior to the June 3rd hearing. There is a possibility still that it won't come litigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 Give me a !@#$ing break. I understand his point. I mean think of all the other people in the world that get paid to work out. /sarcasm off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanInUticaTampa Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 I understand his point. I mean think of all the other people in the world that get paid to work out. /sarcasm off ah kno No, the way I understand it, they were negotiating yesterday and today in an effort to bypass further litigation. Not only that, if things are not worked out today, they may resume further negotiations at some point prior to the June 3rd hearing. There is a possibility still that it won't come litigation. talks ended about 90 minutes ago. Both sides aren't doing anything until june 3rd. Then they probably won't do anything again until they get a decision, in mid june. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 What a train wreck. I actually blame Upshaw and Tagliabue for this. They rammed through that last deal and now the chickens have flown the coop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderweb Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 The owners themselves poisoned the waters beginning in 2008 when they opted out of the agreement they signed two years before and then sought and received TV revenue in the event of a lockout, which they have sole control over. .............and you expect the NFLPA not to be upset? Cry poverty, but won't prove it? If it wasn't for the owners backing out on a deal they signed two years before under the ruse that they are being financial hurt and need relief, I'd tell the NFLPA, no you can't see the books, yet it was the owners themselves that made their financial positions as being in need of relief. So, OK, prove it or drop the ruse all together. The NFLPA's de-certification isn't a sham, and it's never been one. It was simply one of their few options in dealing with the hand the owners are dealt them, and it was an obvious choice to anyone who isn't totally blind. Physics would dictate that for every action, there will be an equal and opposite reaction and it was the NFLPA that was left to react when the owners opted out of the 2006 agreement and protected themselves financially from a lockout they control. The ball has always been in the owners court and they chose this path, and even planned for it years ago. With that said, maybe Ralph is 100% in that the deal was bad right from the beginning and the new breed owners refused to listen to him, or even ask him a question, yet they did the deal and it's up to them to show why it doesn't work, and not just demand a great leap of faith for the players to believe them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted May 18, 2011 Share Posted May 18, 2011 No, the way I understand it, they were negotiating yesterday and today in an effort to bypass further litigation. Not only that, if things are not worked out today, they may resume further negotiations at some point prior to the June 3rd hearing. There is a possibility still that it won't come litigation. There is no reason for the league to make any offer different than what they already have. If they had more room to compromise off their bottom line, they should have done it before the deadline for decertification ran out in March. I don't expect the league is making any new offers likely to resolve the situation. Its a lockout for as long as the league doesn't get what it wants and as long as the players can hold out financially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted May 18, 2011 Share Posted May 18, 2011 (edited) If he is not smart enough to realize that he is going to go down with that ship, then he deserves what he has coming. The players have lost their leverage and it would be in their own best interest to negotiate before litigation decides their fate for them. I hope they make some progress at the negotiating table now before that happens. Otherwise, this is going to be very long summer with very little time for FA or OTAs. There will be no FA or OTA's as long as the owners won't let them play while they negotiate. The player's only leverage is, and has always been, an anti-trust suit. Giving that away now would have the same result as losing the case so I don't think they would be worse off. All the court is deciding in July (it will take 30-45 days after oral argument to issue a decision) is the stay of the lower court's injunction. Losing that fight doesn't lose the case, it just means the players will have to survive financially a lot longer than they would have otherwise. And it will mean the lockout by the owners will continue to deprive us of football. The legal position of hte players on the injunction is much more tenuous than on the anti-trust suit. The injunciton is procedural and the burden on showing the need for one, and that it is an available remedy, is on the players. Most injunctions are turned down. As for anti-trust issues, the players have won almost every time they have litigated the issue to a conclusion. The league has zero incentive at this point to sweeten their offer since, for now, the lockout is in place. They have every reason, in the short term, to continue with their strong arm tactics and see how long the players can wait it out. At the same time they are fighting for the injunciton, I don't see why the players aren't trying to get an expedited discovery schedule ordered by the trial court judge. What they want is to see the books and they can do that with a Notice to Produce. Discovery rules are very, very broad. I haven't read anything about discovery demands. My money is on the 8th circuit's court of appeals decision resulting in no football until mid-July when the decision comes out which will probably be another 2-1 decision against the players. That could be appealed to the Supreme Court, though I am not sure they have the power to decide a preliminary, procedural issue like that so early in the history of the case. In other words, the gate is now open, thanks to those two judges on the 8th Circuit, for there to be missed games. On a side note, I can't believe that the courts are going to interpret Norris to forever and ever prohibit employees from pursuing anti-trust claims against an employer because at some point in the past they were in a union. An industry shouldn't be granted a lifetime exemption from anti-trust laws because there was a union at some point. Edited May 18, 2011 by Mickey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted May 18, 2011 Share Posted May 18, 2011 On a side note, I can't believe that the courts are going to interpret Norris to forever and ever prohibit employees from pursuing anti-trust claims against an employer because at some point in the past they were in a union. An industry shouldn't be granted a lifetime exemption from anti-trust laws because there was a union at some point. I could be wrong, but didn't the 8th Circuit follow old but never overturned U.S. Supreme Court precedent indicating that "growing out of a labor dispute" (or whatever the exact Norris statutory language is) doesn't even require that there was ever a union at all? I have not gone back to read it a second time, but I seem to recall reading a citation to a US Supreme Court case to that effect in an NFL 8th Circuit brief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete This Account Posted May 18, 2011 Share Posted May 18, 2011 What a train wreck. I actually blame Upshaw and Tagliabue for this. They rammed through that last deal and now the chickens have flown the coop. why blame Upshaw? he did his job, didn't he? jw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Goodell Posted May 18, 2011 Share Posted May 18, 2011 why blame Upshaw? he did his job, didn't he? jw He did his job too well. We should treat Upshaw like an oil company and not let him take any tax deductions next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete This Account Posted May 18, 2011 Share Posted May 18, 2011 He did his job too well. We should treat Upshaw like an oil company and not let him take any tax deductions next year. uhh, you do know that Gene Upshaw died, right? jw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted May 18, 2011 Share Posted May 18, 2011 uhh, you do know that Gene Upshaw died, right? jw Morbid bastard that I am, I'm reminded of an old Beatle's verse... And my advice to those who die, Declare the pennies on your eyes, 'Cause I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman, And you're working for no one but me. (Hey, it was a great song - Taxman - off of their Revolver album!) OK, sorry...back to thread... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARTnSocal Posted May 18, 2011 Share Posted May 18, 2011 When you've had head negotiators for both sides who have had all this time to land an agreement and there's still not one in sight, it's time to get new ones for both sizes. De Morris Smith needs to go .... just as the NFL needs new representation too, although they now have the upper hand. The free-agents must be having stress-attacks by now, and teams at this point not knowing their roster for 2011 can't be good. Waiting 'til the last minute isn't good. Get both head negotiators out of there now and make a deal already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts