Yahoo Sports - Decertification was failing strategy by NFLPA

[Dallas]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AtWGi9rY_e.1Mr0ZnZfAljpDubYF?slug=lc-carpenter_decertification_strategy_was_bad_move_fo r_union_052511

For all of his shouting and table pounding and proclamations that the NFL Players Association “went to the mattresses” with the NFL, here is where DeMaurice Smith has his decertified union two months into the lockout: about to argue a case it will probably not win in a labor battle his constituents will soon tire of fighting.

The NFLPA’s rhetoric in the months leading up to this spring’s work stoppage never matched the issues. Nothing was serious enough to warrant a shutdown. Nobody will ache for the rookies who won’t get $40 million guaranteed in whatever new deal emerges, while the splitting of $1 billion in a league that has made so many rich is hardly a horrible problem to have. And yet the leaders of the players union were dying to decertify as far back as 2008, apparently screening executive director candidates on their willingness to push the nuclear option.

So now we are mired in the doldrums as each side waits to go through the motions with the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, a body that has already signaled its intent to uphold the lockout. All of this is less a legal wrangle – if it ever was one – than a bout between egos tussling to see who can claim momentum and thus a victory before sitting down to the negotiations which could have been done in March.


At stake is only the football season.

[superpunk]

“This is so unbelievably easy to solve – that would be if there was leadership on either side,” Cramer said. “This is a contract that should be agreed to tomorrow. That these two goofballs [Smith and NFL commissioner Roger Goodell] are waiting around for the courts to tell them what to do to get this solved is crazy.”

lol...

[stasheroo]

This article sums up my feelings on the subject well. There are no angels in all of this, but I think Smith has painted himself - and those he represents - into a corner.

I just hope that when this ruling comes down, he will realize it and do the best job of negotiating that he can.

[Hoofbite]

lol...

I was just going to post that quote.

I got a laugh out of it too.

[Hostile]

One source with knowledge of the negotiations said the message delivered by the players’ leadership was that the show of demanding the owners’ books had become too valuable a PR move to give up. Then, after threatening to blow up the talks with decertification and lawsuits, they did just that – leaving many to wonder if this is what they wanted to do all along.I wonder what crow tastes like.

Oh yeah, Jon Kitna...well, at least this serving isn't mine.

[CCBoy]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AtWGi9rY_e.1Mr0ZnZfAljpDubYF?slug=lc-carpenter_decertification_strategy_was_bad_move_fo r_union_052511

For all of his shouting and table pounding and proclamations that the NFL Players Association “went to the mattresses” with the NFL, here is where DeMaurice Smith has his decertified union two months into the lockout: about to argue a case it will probably not win in a labor battle his constituents will soon tire of fighting.

The NFLPA’s rhetoric in the months leading up to this spring’s work stoppage never matched the issues. Nothing was serious enough to warrant a shutdown. Nobody will ache for the rookies who won’t get $40 million guaranteed in whatever new deal emerges, while the splitting of $1 billion in a league that has made so many rich is hardly a horrible problem to have. And yet the leaders of the players union were dying to decertify as far back as 2008, apparently screening executive director candidates on their willingness to push the nuclear option.

So now we are mired in the doldrums as each side waits to go through the motions with the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, a body that has already signaled its intent to uphold the lockout. All of this is less a legal wrangle – if it ever was one – than a bout between egos tussling to see who can claim momentum and thus a victory before sitting down to the negotiations which could have been done in March.


At stake is only the football season.

Thanks, Dallas...that was some good lead edge journalism by Les Carpenter.

Following Rugby Tournaments with Fort Polk, La., a bladder award was given to the biggest arse in the party following a game.

[JIGGYFLY]

I wonder what crow tastes like.

Oh yeah, Jon Kitna...well, at least this serving isn't mine.

You are really reaching here.

Why would anyone eat crow because many are "wondering" about something.

Only someone desperate to make a point would latch on to something so innocuous, you are going into desperate territory.

[Hostile]

You are really reaching here.

Why would anyone eat crow because many are "wondering" about something.

Only someone desperate to make a point would latch on to something so innocuous, you are going into desperate territory.Reaching for what? That article said exactly what I have been saying that keeps getting rejected as my agenda. Sorry, but I was never guessing.

[JIGGYFLY]

Reaching for what? That article said exactly what I have been saying that keeps getting rejected as my agenda. Sorry, but I was never guessing.

Reaching by acting like people who are "wondering" about something proves your point.

As for the article why does Les Carpenter have the final opinion on this issue why should he be so respected that others need to "eat crow".

Like I said it was a desperate attempt at legitimacy on your part, for some reason you need to quote any part of a article that fits to lend credence to your argument.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Reaching for what? That article said exactly what I have been saying that keeps getting rejected as my agenda. Sorry, but I was never guessing.

Thing is that you have been saying it for what three months now and nothing except a few more anxious players without contracts saying something ever happens.

There is a process to get a group of laborers to certify so either they have been very hush, hush about going about it and actually doing anything about changing leadership or your entire scenario is overblown at best.

[Hostile]

Reaching by acting like people who are "wondering" about something proves your point.

As for the article why does Les Carpenter have the final opinion on this issue why should he be so respected that others need to "eat crow".

Like I said it was a desperate attempt at legitimacy on your part, for some reason you need to quote any part of a article that fits to lend credence to your argument.If you need to see it that way go ahead.

Tell me, when is the NFL actually suing the players to prevent them from playing?

[Hostile]

Thing is that you have been saying it for what three months now and nothing except a few more anxious players without contracts saying something ever happens.Yes, for three months. Thank you for validating that for me. Sit back and watch as more of what I have been trying to tell you unfolds exactly the way I said it would.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Yes, for three months. Thank you for validating that for me. Sit back and watch as more of what I have been trying to tell you unfolds exactly the way I said it would.

No, you said it was going to unfold three months ago. There is a temporal order to things.

[Hostile]

No, you said it was going to unfold three months ago. There is a temporal order to things.No I didn't. I specifically said that this making it to the courts was going to drag it on forever. How can anyone forget that? I have been the most anti-take this to litigation person on this forum.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

No I didn't. I specifically said that this making it to the courts was going to drag it on forever. How can anyone forget that? I have been the most anti-take this to litigation person on this forum.

Quite frankly, going from filing to appeals consideration within 3 months is astounding.

And saying that litigation is a lengthy process is not exactly coming up with some startling revalation. The last time the players sued and won took Upshaw 2 years.

[Hostile]

Quite frankly, going from filing to appeals consideration within 3 months is astounding.

And saying that litigation is a lengthy process is not exactly coming up with some startling revalation. The last time the players sued and won took Upshaw 2 years.It might take that again which is why I said what? Oh yeah, that the owners will likely ensure football by enacting the 2010 guidelines of another uncapped year and limited free agency while they try to hash out the litigation so they can get back to the bargaining tables which is what solves this every time.

Try and keep up.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It might take that again which is why I said what? Oh yeah, that the owners will likely ensure football by enacting the 2010 guidelines of another uncapped year and limited free agency while they try to hash out the litigation so they can get back to the bargaining tables which is what solves this every time.

Try and keep up.

I am still waiting for the part where you are Nostradamus.

[Hostile]

I am still waiting for the part where you are Nostradamus.You have a long wait, because I'm not.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Yes, for three months. Thank you for validating that for me. Sit back and watch as more of what I have been trying to tell you unfolds exactly the way I said it would.

You have a long wait, because I'm not.

Come on, man. We just need to let this drop for now.

[Hostile]

Come on, man. We just need to let this drop for now.Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way then.

[Everlastingxxx]

Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way then.

"Only the Sith Think in Absolutes"

[Hostile]

"Only the Sith Think in Absolutes"They must drive Maseratti's. Their slogan is..."Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely."

[casmith07]

No, you said it was going to unfold three months ago. There is a temporal order to things.

Mr. Technicality!

[CCBoy]

"Only the Sith Think in Absolutes"

sith is an Old English term, archaic, for since - and used as a descriptive element

[stasheroo]

sith is an Old English term, archaic, for since - and used as a descriptive element


........ also Star Wars bad guys .............................

:D

[speedkilz88]

........ also Star Wars bad guys .............................

:DYou had to tell him.

[Outlaw Heroes]

It might take that again which is why I said what? Oh yeah, that the owners will likely ensure football by enacting the 2010 guidelines of another uncapped year and limited free agency while they try to hash out the litigation so they can get back to the bargaining tables which is what solves this every time.

I don't see it, Hos. Not unless the 8th Circuit reverses course and decides to keep the injunction in place, thereby lifting the lockout.

So long as the lockout remains in place, the owners have strong incentive to wait until a new CBA is in place before allowing games to be played (under the 2010 rules or otherwise). First, the lockout puts pressure on the players to negotiate and gives the owners leverage, inasmuch as the players are losing paychecks. And second, implementing the 2010 rules without a CBA puts the owners at risk in the litigation. So long as they do nothing, they aren't committing antitrust violations, beyond the lockout itself. But if they try to implement the 2010 rules without a CBA they'll be exposing themselves to treble damages on a whole host of other antitrust violations.

Of course, the owners could decide that the additional antitrust exposure and loss of negotiating leverage is worth risking in order to ensure that they don't miss out on any revenues in 2011. But, as I say, I don't see it. I think we'll have football again when a new CBA is in place.

[CCBoy]

You had to tell him.

Ha, the Son has plastic models of each progessive series from it's beginnings. Some in original boxings as well. Be forewarned, that what YOU picture as senile, has passed through your formative stages of a sense in empowerment. But real old school possessed a sense of fair play that didn't need to hide behind a Masonic sense of entitlement as well as privilege. that also serves up a good dose of vanity as well. But an more old school sideview does include aspects of wisdom that aren't dependent upon a newer version of fad or purely a social convenience.

In topical development, maybe you might attempt the description of the exact characteristics and description to show the abilities that you feign...I provided the origins of that specific word. I kind of like the storm troopers, myself.

Maybe you can, from memory, now provide the name of the clown with Howdie Doodie?

And the Grandson graduates High School in ten days...

[JIGGYFLY]

If you need to see it that way go ahead.

Tell me, when is the NFL actually suing the players to prevent them from playing?

What does the NFL suing have to do with anything I said.

Now you need to bring up non relevant things to make a point. :confused:

You initially said people need to eat crow because one reporter said people were"wondering' about the motivation of the players.

Lets please stay on topic, why should anyone eat crow because people are wondering?

[CCBoy]

I don't see it, Hos. Not unless the 8th Circuit reverses course and decides to keep the injunction in place, thereby lifting the lockout.

So long as the lockout remains in place, the owners have strong incentive to wait until a new CBA is in place before allowing games to be played (under the 2010 rules or otherwise). First, the lockout puts pressure on the players to negotiate and gives the owners leverage, inasmuch as the players are losing paychecks. And second, implementing the 2010 rules without a CBA puts the owners at risk in the litigation. So long as they do nothing, they aren't committing antitrust violations, beyond the lockout itself. But if they try to implement the 2010 rules without a CBA they'll be exposing themselves to treble damages on a whole host of other antitrust violations.

Of course, the owners could decide that the additional antitrust exposure and loss of negotiating leverage is worth risking in order to ensure that they don't miss out on any revenues in 2011. But, as I say, I don't see it. I think we'll have football again when a new CBA is in place.

In my view, I'm counting upon a solid wisdom prevailing and the CBA to actually be the winning stroke and ultimately in a timely manner. I'm optimistic and the NFL is a solidly, at least functionally, atruistic in directions.

[Hostile]

I don't see it, Hos. Not unless the 8th Circuit reverses course and decides to keep the injunction in place, thereby lifting the lockout.

So long as the lockout remains in place, the owners have strong incentive to wait until a new CBA is in place before allowing games to be played (under the 2010 rules or otherwise). First, the lockout puts pressure on the players to negotiate and gives the owners leverage, inasmuch as the players are losing paychecks. And second, implementing the 2010 rules without a CBA puts the owners at risk in the litigation. So long as they do nothing, they aren't committing antitrust violations, beyond the lockout itself. But if they try to implement the 2010 rules without a CBA they'll be exposing themselves to treble damages on a whole host of other antitrust violations.

Of course, the owners could decide that the additional antitrust exposure and loss of negotiating leverage is worth risking in order to ensure that they don't miss out on any revenues in 2011. But, as I say, I don't see it. I think we'll have football again when a new CBA is in place.I do agree with you. I am talking about if this is going to drag on through the courts.

Honestly, this makes me weary. I want to believe we are going to have football, but reality is quite clear that it is in jeopardy because of the litigation and lack of negotiation. What will light a fire under these 2 sides? Waiting for the 8th CCoA seems like a scorched earth strategy to me.

[Hostile]

What does the NFL suing have to do with anything I said.

Now you need to bring up non relevant things to make a point. :confused:

You initially said people need to eat crow because one reporter said people were"wondering' about the motivation of the players.

Lets please stay on topic, why should anyone eat crow because people are wondering?Ah, but the NFL isn't suing the players. That is the point. The head of the NFLPA*, speaking at commencement for the University of Maryland not only lied about this he instructed the fans to chant "you suck" every time Roger Goodell or the NFL owners are mentioned.

Such a competent and professional man. [/sarcasm]

Now the articles are going to begin trickling in that echo this one that litigation was a poor strategy. Yes, I am predicting more fans and media will come to the realization that this was about as wise as peeing on an electric fence.

[Outlaw Heroes]

I do agree with you. I am talking about if this is going to drag on through the courts.

Honestly, this makes me weary. I want to believe we are going to have football, but reality is quite clear that it is in jeopardy because of the litigation and lack of negotiation. What will light a fire under these 2 sides? Waiting for the 8th CCoA seems like a scorched earth strategy to me.

I'm dead tired of it myself. We really should be talking about other things.

The truth is that I don't think we'll see any progress until late June or early July (whenever the 8th Circuit releases its decision on the injunction/lockout), but then I expect things will move quickly one way or the other.

If the lockout is lifted, we'll get football back in fairly short order, since the teams will be forced to open the doors and continue operations (probably under the 2010 rules, as you suggest), but the ongoing negotiations for a new CBA could drag for quite some time, with the players gaining leverage as time passes.

If the injunction is reversed and the lockout stays in place, I expect that will bring the players back to the negotiating table quite quickly and result in an owner-friendly deal. The players will have to realize at that point that the jig is up. Without the injunction on the lockout, it's doubtful they'll be able to go without pay for the years it is likely to take for the litigation to wind its way through the court system (including the likely appeals). They can always try to appeal the 8th Circuit decision to the Supreme Court, but even if the Supreme Court grants leave to appeal, the appeal likely wouldn't be heard until 2012. We're already hearing grumblings from FAs. They'll be joined by a lot more players if it becomes clear that the litigation strategy will take years to bear fruit. As a result, I expect the players go back to the negotiating table with their tails tucked between their legs. It will be unfortunate if it comes to that, but it will likely result in a more lasting peace once the CBA gets negotiated (which could very well still take a few months after that), since it will be on terms that the owners will be happy with.

All to say that I think we will get football this year, one way or another. In the meantime, we're forced to be patient and endure the garbage.

[CCBoy]

I'm dead tired of it myself. We really should be talking about other things.

The truth is that I don't think we'll see any progress until late June or early July (whenever the 8th Circuit releases its decision on the injunction/lockout), but then I expect things will move quickly one way or the other.

If the lockout is lifted, we'll get football back in fairly short order, since the teams will be forced to open the doors and continue operations (probably under the 2010 rules, as you suggest), but the ongoing negotiations for a new CBA could drag for quite some time, with the players gaining leverage as time passes.

If the injunction is reversed and the lockout stays in place, I expect that will bring the players back to the negotiating table quite quickly and result in an owner-friendly deal. The players will have to realize at that point that the jig is up. Without the injunction on the lockout, it's doubtful they'll be able to go without pay for the years it is likely to take for the litigation to wind its way through the court system (including the likely appeals). They can always try to appeal the 8th Circuit decision to the Supreme Court, but even if the Supreme Court grants leave to appeal, the appeal likely wouldn't be heard until 2012. We're already hearing grumblings from FAs. They'll be joined by a lot more players if it becomes clear that the litigation strategy will take years to bear fruit. As a result, I expect the players go back to the negotiating table with their tails tucked between their legs. It will be unfortunate if it comes to that, but it will likely result in a more lasting peace once the CBA gets negotiated (which could very well still take a few months after that), since it will be on terms that the owners will be happy with.

All to say that I think we will get football this year, one way or another. In the meantime, we're forced to be patient and endure the garbage.

And this would indicate that the actual parameters for a then negotiated new CBA have basicly already been established and to go outside of the Court directed mediation levels would present immediate cause for yet another Court's intervention into the mess as well.

[Outlaw Heroes]

Now the articles are going to begin trickling in that echo this one that litigation was a poor strategy. Yes, I am predicting more fans and media will come to the realization that this was about as wise as peeing on an electric fence.

It'll be worse than that if the 8th Circuit panel reverses the injunction, as they've hinted they'll do. The litigation strategy will then have been proven as wise as sticking your you-know-what in a blender.

[JIGGYFLY]

Ah, but the NFL isn't suing the players. That is the point. The head of the NFLPA*, speaking at commencement for the University of Maryland not only lied about this he instructed the fans to chant "you suck" every time Roger Goodell or the NFL owners are mentioned.

Such a competent and professional man. [/sarcasm]

Now the articles are going to begin trickling in that echo this one that litigation was a poor strategy. Yes, I am predicting more fans and media will come to the realization that this was about as wise as peeing on an electric fence.

Please explain what the NFL suing players has to do with you yelping about people "eating crow"

Or are you ready to admit that it was baseless and you want to move on to another topic.

Like I said please stay on topic and address why people need to "eat crow"

And in case you forget here is why you said people should "eat crow"

One source with knowledge of the negotiations said the message delivered by the players’ leadership was that the show of demanding the owners’ books had become too valuable a PR move to give up. Then, after threatening to blow up the talks with decertification and lawsuits, they did just that – leaving many to wonder if this is what they wanted to do all along.

"I wonder what crow tastes like.

Oh yeah, Jon Kitna...well, at least this serving isn't mine."

What about that has to do with the NFL suing the players?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way then.

If leading means predicting the obvious and then acting coy on other predictions that never came to fruit then i will pass.

I actually have you testy. This is interesting. Like I said lets just chill.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It'll be worse than that if the 8th Circuit panel reverses the injunction, as they've hinted they'll do. The litigation strategy will then have been proven as wise as sticking your you-know-what in a blender.

Do you even know what an injunction is?

It still has to be reviewed in court. All an injunction does is stop it early.

[Outlaw Heroes]

Do you even know what an injunction is?

It still has to be reviewed in court. All an injunction does is stop it early.

On a number of occasions, I've allowed your obvious lack of legal knowledge pass without comment. You should not assume that you've therefore managed to fool anyone.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

On a number of occasions, I've allowed your obvious lack of legal knowledge pass without comment. You should not assume that you've therefore managed to fool anyone.

go ahead and comment. that is a weak copout if i have ever heard one.

with all your legal knowledge did it ever occur to you that the NFLPA counsel anticipated the ultraconservative 8th circuit court giving issues?

What happened in American Needle with them just last year. Hell, what happened with White vs the NFL 20 years ago.

All you are doing is aggrandizing.

[1fisher]

Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way then.

That is one of my favorite lines. My high school football coach used that all the time.

[Outlaw Heroes]

go ahead and comment. that is a weak copout if i have ever heard one..

If you are unclear about a legal concept, feel free to ask (or ask theo, pep, Cooter, Doughboy or any of the other lawyers around here). I won't be goaded into educating you.

In the meantime, I'm happy to let you continue to blow smoke (and make no mistake, referencing a few cases you've read an article or two about and passing it off as expertise is nothing other than blowing smoke) so long as you don't lead anyone else too far amiss.

[Hostile]

If leading means predicting the obvious and then acting coy on other predictions that never came to fruit then i will pass.

I actually have you testy. This is interesting. Like I said lets just chill.You have me testy? Fuzzy I am always testy. I have been very subdued in recent months because my Mom's health took a serious turn, but I am back to being my same old abrasive, sarcastic, caustic self.

I cannot be conned. I was raised by a con man and no one pulls the wool over my eyes. You are highly educated and well spoken (I know, that's racist), but brah, no amount of education, training, schooling, or whatever else people want to call it replaces the real world experiences life can give you.

I have mad respect for the guys I have debated on these topics. You, peplaw06, theogt, jterrell, and adbutcher among others. There is not a single one of you guys that I do not respect. But I do not let respect blind me.

You guys are telling me things that do not jive with what I know and have experienced. The defense of the NFLPA* and in particular Demaurice Smith has been admirable, but in my opinion, and I want to stress that harder, MY OPINION, it is misguided.

You are defending a man caught in lies. Time after time after time he has lied to try and garner public support. He is a con man. I refer you again to the opening sentence of my second paragraph.

You are buying lies, but you cannot sell them to me. If that makes me "testy," then I am testy. Guilty as charged. Unharmed by the crime I have committed and unrepentant or it.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

If you are unclear about a legal concept, feel free to ask (or ask theo, pep, Cooter, Doughboy or any of the other lawyers around here). I won't be goaded into educating you.

In the meantime, I'm happy to let you continue to blow smoke (and make no mistake, referencing a few cases you've read an article or two about and passing it off as expertise is nothing other than blowing smoke) so long as you don't lead anyone else too far amiss.

Goaded? Give me a break. If I make any factual or logical errors then point them out. Otherwise just shut up. This smarmy routine is not very compelling. If you do not like me then put me on ignore.

I am not claiming that I have expertise. I have made it very clear that I am not a lawyer and have never attempted to present myself as anything else.

What i have done is read all of the briefs submitted to the court. I have read all three rulings/opinions from the federal and circuit courts. i have read American Needle vs. the NFL, i have read White and Brown vs the NFL. Its not like the arguments are difficult to follow I have probably read about 2/3 of the CBA by now.

If i am following things wrong then so be it but defining standards and applying them is pretty simple, talk of temporal order and arising out of and of public interest certainly are not out of my scope. Following the language used to make Norris-Laguardia work both ways is easy to follow and in reality is quite logical in a literal interpretation.

I am sure that there are some points of law that I am oblivious to but your comments about 'It'll be worse than that if the 8th Circuit panel reverses the injunction, as they've hinted they'll do.' really has nothing to do about legal acumen. A toddler could have gleaned the hint and your predictions about the behavior of players after news of an event falls in the realm of psychology and not of law.

But yeah the smarmy routine is weak. As Hos said, 'either lead, follow or get out of the way.'

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You have me testy. Fuzzy I am always testy. I have been very subdued in recent months because my Mom's health took a serious turn, but I am back to being my same old abrasive, sarcastic, caustic self.

I cannot be conned. I was raised by a con man and no one pulls the wool over my eyes. You are highly educated and well spoken (I know, that's racist), but brah, no amount of education, training, schooling, or whatever else people want to call it replaces the real world experiences life can give you.

I have mad respect for the guys I have debated on these topics. You, peplaw06, theogt, jterrell, and adbutcher among others. There is not a single one of you guys that I do not respect. But I do not let respect blind me.

You guys are telling me things that do not jive with what I know and have experienced. The defense of the NFLPA* and in particular Demaurice Smith has been admirable, but in my opinion, and I want to stress that harder, MY OPINION, it is misguided.

You are defending a man caught in lies. Time after time after time he has lied to try and garner public support. He is a con man. I refer you again to the opening sentence of my second paragraph.

You are buying lies, but you cannot sell them to me. If that makes me "testy," then I am testy. Guilty as charged. Unharmed by the crime I have committed and unrepentant or it.

I just do not put as much importance on Smith as you seem to. I do not think the entire thing revolves around him and I certainly do not try and sell anything that Smith says.

I for example know that he does not sign the briefs submitted in court. I also know that these are the same legal maneuvers of the guy who does sign the briefs that were used by that same man back in 1987.

TBH, I have been amazed by the pass you guys give Kessler. He is the one that wrote these same legal arguments back in 1987.

Anyway this stuff is like religion just with a pigskin. Of course we are never going to agree once we set our minds to it.

[DallasEast]

If the injunction is reversed and the lockout stays in place, I expect that will bring the players back to the negotiating table quite quickly and result in an owner-friendly deal. The players will have to realize at that point that the jig is up. Without the injunction on the lockout, it's doubtful they'll be able to go without pay for the years it is likely to take for the litigation to wind its way through the court system (including the likely appeals). They can always try to appeal the 8th Circuit decision to the Supreme Court, but even if the Supreme Court grants leave to appeal, the appeal likely wouldn't be heard until 2012. We're already hearing grumblings from FAs. They'll be joined by a lot more players if it becomes clear that the litigation strategy will take years to bear fruit. As a result, I expect the players go back to the negotiating table with their tails tucked between their legs. It will be unfortunate if it comes to that, but it will likely result in a more lasting peace once the CBA gets negotiated (which could very well still take a few months after that), since it will be on terms that the owners will be happy with.Bold--> That has always been my take as well.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Bold--> That has always been my take as well.

The only problem with this little scenario is that it leaves out the trial in July concerning the case the injunction arose out of.

The CCoA rules and then its SCOTUS or bust is just wrong.

As Judge Nelson pointed out, she has declined to rule on that yet.

[Sam I Am]

........ also Star Wars bad guys .............................

:D

Because it's relative.

You had to tell him.

It was relative. :laugh2:

[Hostile]

I just do not put as much importance on Smith as you seem to. I do not think the entire thing revolves around him and I certainly do not try and sell anything that Smith says.

I for example know that he does not sign the briefs submitted in court. I also know that these are the same legal maneuvers of the guy who does sign the briefs that were used by that same man back in 1987.

TBH, I have been amazed by the pass you guys give Kessler. He is the one that wrote these same legal arguments back in 1987.

Anyway this stuff is like religion just with a pigskin. Of course we are never going to agree once we set our minds to it.I haven't given Kessler a pass. I started a thread about his insane desire to end the Draft.

Is he lying to people? That is key to me Fuzzy. Smith is a bold faced liar in front of a microphone trying to drum up PR.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I haven't given Kessler a pass. I started a thread about his insane desire to end the Draft.

Is he lying to people? That is key to me Fuzzy. Smith is a bold faced liar in front of a microphone trying to drum up PR.

OK, so we shouldn't listen to him and I know YOU do not give Kessler a pass. Thats not my point. I just have difficulty understanding how you can reconcile what you know about Kessler and then still fixate on Smith.

I actually think their PR 'strategy' might be to get Smith to be the lightning rod so you guys can freak out about him and his buzzwords and ignore what they are actually doing.

[Outlaw Heroes]

I am not claiming that I have expertise. I have made it very clear that I am not a lawyer and have never attempted to present myself as anything else.

You ask a lawyer if he even knows what an injunction is, but don't pretend to have expertise yourself?

Huh. That's rich.

I don't dislike you and I'm not about to put you on ignore. You'll find that I'm not likely to get smarmy with you if you don't initiate our exchange with a provocative challenge that calls into question my knowledge when you're clearly not in a position to do so.

[Hostile]

OK, so we shouldn't listen to him and I know YOU do not give Kessler a pass. Thats not my point. I just have difficulty understanding how you can reconcile what you know about Kessler and then still fixate on Smith.Because at this point I do not feel Kessler is yet damaging the NFL. Smith is.

If this continues unresolved through this season, the 2012 NFL Draft cannot happen without a CBA. The NFL can operate in 2011 without one. But they will lose the Draft until the courts finish. At that point Kessler and his fanaticism should be your public enemy #1. He will be mine.

Right now, the guy standing in the way of a deal is Smith.

I actually think their PR 'strategy' might be to get Smith to be the lightning rod so you guys can freak out about him and his buzzwords and ignore what they are actually doing.Yeah, I've seen this thinking before. Redskins fans over on ES theorized that Joe Gibbs was purposely holding back and losing so that Dallas would get over confident and then they were going to unleash the full fury of Al Saunders 700 page playbook.

[Outlaw Heroes]

The only problem with this little scenario is that it leaves out the trial in July concerning the case the injunction arose out of.

The CCoA rules and then its SCOTUS or bust is just wrong.

As Judge Nelson pointed out, she has declined to rule on that yet.

What are you talking about? Are you simply making things up? The antitrust hearing has not yet been scheduled. While the hearing will be expedited, it almost certainly will not take place in July. Whatever the outcome of the hearing, it will surely be appealed. And there's no reason to believe at this point that the 8th Circuit or (if it comes to it) the Supreme Court will also agree to expedite the appeal. Realistically, this issue will be tied up in court for a long time.

Please stop talking nonsense.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You ask a lawyer if he even knows what an injunction is, but don't pretend to have expertise yourself?

Huh. That's rich.

I don't dislike you and I'm not about to put you on ignore. You'll find that I'm not likely to get smarmy with you if you don't initiate our exchange with a provocative challenge that calls into question my knowledge when you're clearly not in a position to do so.

One does not have to do with the other. I am claiming that I know what an injunction is. You can feel insecure if you want to.

Again my understanding might be wrong but there is a trial in Judge Nelson's court in July which was the basis for the injunction. If she rules that their actions violate antitrust laws then the lockout is lifted or some people are going to go to jail.

Now obviously, the NFL would appeal but once again they would have to request another stay of that ruling and this time they cannot cite NLA to prohibit action by the court. That was argument that the appeals court used.

There were no precedents for that or at least no clear precedents as has been pointed out the other cases could have been construed as not having 'arisen out of a labor dispute.'

The issue of the NFL and the Sherman and Clayton Acts has been very very clear and very very specific especially in the context of labor.

I am sure that an unfavorable ruling is going to put pressure on things but you are trying to sell this notion that it is even close to over or a long process to a favorable outcome if the CCoA rules against the injunction is just wrong.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

What are you talking about? Are you simply making things up? The antitrust hearing has not yet been scheduled. While the hearing will be expedited, it almost certainly will not take place in July. Whatever the outcome of the hearing, it will surely be appealed. And there's no reason to believe at this point that the 8th Circuit or (if it comes to it) the Supreme Court will also agree to expedite the appeal. Realistically, this issue will be tied up in court for a long time.

Please stop talking nonsense.

Nonsense? I thought i read that it was scheduled. I could be wrong but that just means its at a later date. Thats not nonsense and all you are doing is making vague self serving generalizations as to what the truth might be.

[Outlaw Heroes]

Nonsense? I thought i read that it was scheduled. I could be wrong but that just means its at a later date. Thats not nonsense and all you are doing is making vague self serving generalizations as to what the truth might be.

If it's been scheduled I haven't heard. I too could be wrong about that.

[Marktui]

If the Superior Court upholds the lockout, what do the players have left to do? Can they appeal the decision or do they concentrate on the lawsuits against the league?

[THUMPER]

This article sums up my feelings on the subject well. There are no angels in all of this, but I think Smith has painted himself - and those he represents - into a corner.

I just hope that when this ruling comes down, he will realize it and do the best job of negotiating that he can.

I would prefer he just took the honorable way out...

Seriously, the NFLPA should can him as soon as possible. The owners should fire Goodell as well come to think of it.

[Hostile]

If the Superior Court upholds the lockout, what do the players have left to do? Can they appeal the decision or do they concentrate on the lawsuits against the league?They have the same options they do now, but just from a weakened position.

Honestly, and I really mean that, honestly, there is no good excuse for either side to wait for the courts on this. I really think it is a bad move on the part of the NFLPA*.

I think they should got back to negotiations, agree on a deal, recertify and get eh CBA in place so the league year gets under way and the season can go on.

[CCBoy]

Because it's relative.



It was relative. :laugh2:

A thirsting for a snicker....and the implied irony of the origin of the term naming a character as archaic, and implying degree to which a violent or intimidating nature would arise... amplified a pictoral element in comparison. For smack of insult, you three only rush to snicker, never having tasted the depth of flavor from savoring a more complex component upon the meal.

Hey, if you prefer a burn barrel replete with Ripple, go hang out. I'll just settle in within Dallas, and grab a table at El Fennix, and have some great Mexican Food.

If you prefer the approach of 'assume and rush to snicker,' that only leaves more grand cheese enchiladas for those who like a great blend.

Oh, you can purchase a sous vide supreme off the internet and try to be your own gourmet. :D

As to fantasy, I kind of like the The Hobbit and the development of the Trilogy as to Folk inspired legend and tales...but, grab another broken stud and toss it into your burn barrell, Buddy.

But you go, you 'huge' fans of cooking chefs....

[CCBoy]

If it's been scheduled I haven't heard. I too could be wrong about that.

There has been a media generated, but projected time line involved. As to specifics of court dates and calendar specific events, I have seen no such published documents of events in calendar specific dates.

[CCBoy]

They have the same options they do now, but just from a weakened position.

Honestly, and I really mean that, honestly, there is no good excuse for either side to wait for the courts on this. I really think it is a bad move on the part of the NFLPA*.

I think they should got back to negotiations, agree on a deal, recertify and get eh CBA in place so the league year gets under way and the season can go on.

Ego of the council of the 'Association' won't allow for that. He has bet his own career, in his mind, upon delivering the set of goods promised through a course of litigations. He was a Trial Counsel and believes in the merit and direction of his own nose on issues. He is filled with history and remedy, and believes that his knowledge of human nature and tendencies within court itself, will force hands to be played out to his own vindication for journey traveled.

As has been shown through the more recent discussions on site, that is view is not a real rocket science of even a sophisticated application of principals actually behind organizational integrity, but hey, it would support a perfectly legitimate Ghangis Khan.

[CCBoy]

A thirsting for a snicker....and the implied irony of the origin of the term naming a character as archaic, and implying degree to which a violent or intimidating nature would arise... amplified a pictoral element in comparison. For smack of insult, you three only rush to snicker, never having tasted the depth of flavor from savoring a more complex component upon the meal.

Hey, if you prefer a burn barrel replete with Ripple, go hang out. I'll just settle in within Dallas, and grab a table at El Fennix, and have some great Mexican Food.

If you prefer the approach of 'assume and rush to snicker,' that only leaves more grand cheese enchiladas for those who like a great blend.

Oh, you can purchase a sous vide supreme off the internet and try to be your own gourmet. :D

As to fantasy, I kind of like the The Hobbit and the development of the Trilogy as to Folk inspired legend and tales...but, grab another broken stud and toss it into your burn barrell, Buddy.

But you go, you 'huge' fans of cooking chefs....

Oh, and I almost forgot...now run along and tell someone that you are a hulking 6'5" hulking outside linebacker from college and that you bite off the heads of hookers you finish alongside that burn barrell of yours, to someone who is going to buy into your act. Or find a Recruiter, he'll set you on the road to getting straightened out! That or just run along and catch pertussis and hack your way through it.:eek:

[CCBoy]

Oh, and I almost forgot...now run along and tell someone that you are a hulking 6'5" hulking outside linebacker from college and that you bite off the heads of hookers you finish alongside that burn barrell of yours, to someone who is going to buy into your act. Or find a Recruiter, he'll set you on the road to getting straightened out! That or just run along and catch pertussis and hack your way through it.:eek:

Using your own humor base, I'll undumb this for YOU: 'Oh shut up, and start singing Old Man River!:laugh2:

[Erik_H]

........ also Star Wars bad guys .............................

:D

and a female sibling if you have a lisp.

[CCBoy]

and a female sibling if you have a lisp.

Oh sweet socially redemptive features....:)

[CCBoy]

Using your own humor base, I'll undumb this for YOU: 'Oh shut up, and start singing Old Man River!:laugh2:

But if you cross a cow with a snake, you have an adder with an udder.:D