Yahoo Sports - Decertification was failing strategy by NFLPA

[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

 

[Stash]

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

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

 

[speedkilz88]

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

You 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.

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.

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.