Page 3 of 9
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 11:23 am
by Red_One43
Red_One43 wrote:TCIYM wrote: Employees have the options of working for the offered wage or of finding alternative employment.
Let's relook at this one. When I was growing up, if an NFL team drafted a player that player had to play for that team or not play at all. Same as the rules in the civilian world, if you don't like that organization or its pay, you go find another company willing to pay you the better. Well, not the same. There is no other company like the NFL. Your argument of find alternative work does not fly with the Federal Government.
The Federal Government recognized the the NFL borders on the edge of being a monopoly, so to avoid that designation the NFL amended its draft rules to allow a potential "employee" to say no to the wages and position with an employer without any penalty whatsoever. That potential employee sits out at least a year and goes back into the draft. Bo JAckson did this.
Why do you think the Federal Government ruled against the way that the NFL conducted its draft? Because finding work in an equivalent business to the NFL is impossible and that constitutes a monopoly. Monopolies are illegal in Our Great Country. The government cut the NFL some slack.
Don't forget the NFL lost its anti-trust suit agains the USFL - once again the NFL was cut slack and had t pay the USFL $1.
The NFL better hope they get a judge friendly to their position or they might stand to lose even more of their exemptions. The players aren't the only ones gambling here.
My point - There is a special owner/employee relationship between the NFL owners and the NFL players. I know that you know this, but yet, you try to argue your point using a model that doesn't fit.
The NFL owners better hope that the federal courts continue to cut them some slack on the draft period which has no constitutional support.
I think most of us agree with the draft to keep a fair playing field, but all it takes is one judge to look at the constitution and say otherwise and another to uphold it and a Supreme Court to uphold that. The courts are a gamble for everyone.
Judge Doty not involved at this time
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:31 pm
by SkinsJock
I'll bet there are a lot of players that are not too keen on this bit of news
http://eye-on-football.blogs.cbssports. ... 8/27898657
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:10 pm
by TCIYM
ESPN's Adam Schefter now reporting NFLPA seeking to block the NFL Draft:
ESPN
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 3:02 pm
by Red_One43
TCIYM wrote:ESPN's Adam Schefter now reporting NFLPA seeking to block the NFL Draft:
ESPN
This is the same tactic that was used the last time and it got the draft rules to change. This is the gamble that the NFL owners risk going to court. Whether we love the draft or not, goes against the labor laws of this country. The NFL has always been given an exception. The owners risk losing more of those exceptions this time around.
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:43 pm
by SkinsJock
That's interesting - I thought by de-certifying the players are no longer subject to the labor laws - man I've got to get caught up here
the players are just like the owners - they want their cake and they want to eat it too
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 6:16 pm
by Countertrey
Red_One43 wrote:TCIYM wrote:ESPN's Adam Schefter now reporting
NFLPA seeking to block the NFL Draft:
ESPN
This is the same tactic that was used the last time and it got the draft rules to change. This is the gamble that the NFL owners risk going to court. Whether we love the draft or not, goes against the labor laws of this country. The NFL has always been given an exception. The owners risk losing more of those exceptions this time around.
Problem... the NFLPA no longer exists. Problem... the NFLPTA is now a professional association, not a bargaining unit... what is their standing to sue to stop the draft? (this is the reason the current anti-trust suit names individual players as plaintif... not the NFLPTA)
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:37 pm
by Red_One43
Countertrey wrote:Red_One43 wrote:TCIYM wrote:ESPN's Adam Schefter now reporting
NFLPA seeking to block the NFL Draft:
ESPN
This is the same tactic that was used the last time and it got the draft rules to change. This is the gamble that the NFL owners risk going to court. Whether we love the draft or not, goes against the labor laws of this country. The NFL has always been given an exception. The owners risk losing more of those exceptions this time around.
Problem... the NFLPA no longer exists. Problem... the NFLPTA is now a professional association, not a bargaining unit... what is their standing to sue to stop the draft? (this is the reason the current anti-trust suit names individual players as plaintif... not the NFLPTA)
You are right. The NFLPA had reforned when it filed the suit back in 1989; however, these guys are lawyers handling this business, I am sure that they have some plan up there sleeve.
On the day the strike ended, the NFLPA filed an antitrust suit in Federal Court challenging the college draft, restraints on free agency, and other practices alleged to be anti-competitive. (The NBA players had filed a similar suit one month earlier.) The Court of Appeals ultimately rejected the suit on a technicality. NFLPA disbanded, then reformed in 1989 in order to file a new suit that ultimately prevailed at a jury trial. This led to a labor agreement that permitted less restrictive free agency in return for salary caps tied to a formula based on players' share of total league revenues. So the union, while losing the 1987 battle in the short run, won the war in the long run.
http://members.cox.net/mbordelon4345/nfl1987.htm
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:00 pm
by Paralis
TCIYM wrote:ESPN's Adam Schefter now reporting NFLPA seeking to block the NFL Draft:
ESPN
It really, really, REALLY doesn't say anything like that in the article. Telling incoming rookies not to attend doesn't stop them from getting drafted. It's a publicity stunt to make sure the lockout remains the top NFL story on draft weekend.
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:30 pm
by Red_One43
Paralis wrote:TCIYM wrote:ESPN's Adam Schefter now reporting NFLPA seeking to block the NFL Draft:
ESPN
It really, really, REALLY doesn't say anything like that in the article. Telling incoming rookies not to attend doesn't stop them from getting drafted. It's a publicity stunt to make sure the lockout remains the top NFL story on draft weekend.
From what I read you might be right at this time, but after the Players gave in during the 1987 strike, the NFLPA reformed and then went after the draft and free agency with a vengence in 1989 and they got strong concessions. That history could repeat itself.
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:40 pm
by Countertrey
A pox on both their houses. Millionaires fighting over money with Billionaires simply does not evoke sympathy.
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2011 11:39 pm
by langleyparkjoe
Countertrey wrote:A pox on both their houses. Millionaires fighting over money with Billionaires simply does not evoke sympathy.
Trey for president, seriously
Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 2:17 am
by CanesSkins26
Paralis wrote:TCIYM wrote:ESPN's Adam Schefter now reporting NFLPA seeking to block the NFL Draft:
ESPN
It really, really, REALLY doesn't say anything like that in the article. Telling incoming rookies not to attend doesn't stop them from getting drafted. It's a publicity stunt to make sure the lockout remains the top NFL story on draft weekend.
That article doesn't mention it, but in their lawsuit the players are claiming that the NFL draft violates anti-trust laws. This is why Von Miller is included as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, otherwise the existing players would have no standing to make that argument.
Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 9:41 am
by langleyparkjoe
Heard on Mike/Mike that there will be a new procedure for the draft? Missed it though, anyone else know about that? All I heard was players are trying to stop the draft picks from attending the ceremony. Most people including myself think that's pretty stupid. They aren't even on the team yet and this is a once in a lifetime opportunity for them to be in that draft ceremony.
Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 11:19 am
by skinsfan#33
langleyparkjoe wrote:Heard on Mike/Mike that there will be a new procedure for the draft? Missed it though, anyone else know about that? All I heard was players are trying to stop the draft picks from attending the ceremony. Most people including myself think that's pretty stupid. They aren't even on the team yet and this is a once in a lifetime opportunity for them to be in that draft ceremony.
Yeah, I agree, it is stupid.
The Rooks aren't even members of the (former) NFLPA yet and the NFLPA wants them to skip their big chance for a once in a lifetime experience!
What's next, if the lock out is still on going in late July, will the NFLPA ask the 2011 HoF class not to show up at Canton?
The draft will go on, because there is too much money wrapped up into it and it needs to happen anyway, because there will be football in 2011, I don't carre what the ney sayers are saying!
Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 8:33 pm
by Countertrey
skinsfan#33 wrote: there will be football in 2011, I don't carre what the ney sayers are saying!
Optimism is great... it's the disappointment at the end that just sucks.
(I hope you're right, but... I think I'll just continue to sit on my loooooooow expectations... there's no way I can be disappointed)
Posted: Tue May 10, 2011 4:26 pm
by SkinsJock
Countertrey wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote: there will be football in 2011, I don't carre what the nay sayers are saying!
Optimism is great ... it's the disappointment at the end that just sucks.
(I hope you're right, but... I think I'll just continue to sit on my loooooooow expectations... there's no way I can be disappointed)
It's now 8 weeks later - not looking V good
Posted: Tue May 10, 2011 4:32 pm
by Countertrey
SkinsJock wrote:Countertrey wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote: there will be football in 2011, I don't carre what the nay sayers are saying!
Optimism is great ... it's the disappointment at the end that just sucks.
(I hope you're right, but... I think I'll just continue to sit on my loooooooow expectations... there's no way I can be disappointed)
It's now 8 weeks later - not looking V good
It's the same system I use for setting my expectations for the Caps annual post season appearance... I've yet to be disappointed!
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 9:53 am
by Redskin in Canada
BOTH sides are playing the waiting game to their advantage.
The one who blinks first, loses.
The interesting thing is: both sides are losing money. The only question is:
What side is more likely to have the ability and discipline to TOLERATE their immediate losses this year for LONG TERM gain?
If I was a lawyer, negotiator or adviser for either side, I would say to my side: Wait one more week, the pressure is getting to them and the fans are adding more pressure every day.
NFL owners might win because they have deeper pockets and they have placed a greater priority for a LONG TERM deal. Players may not have the discipline to stick together with the NFLPA.
Players can only win if they keep winning the public relations battle and make it politically impossible for the owners not to reach a deal soon.
Yes, it comes down, at least in part, about a waiting game and the public relations by both sides.
As fans, it looks more as if this dispute is more about GREED by both sides rather than justice, freedom and the American way.
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 10:38 am
by SkinsJock
IT IS ABOUT GREED - both the players' and the owners'
the ONLY good thing is that both could also be 'hurt' by this:
there are a lot of players that will be hurt by the change in their free agency status if they 'win' AND the 2010 CBA is brought back in
the owner's are already seeing that this is not looking very good at all
Posted: Wed May 11, 2011 11:26 am
by KazooSkinsFan
Countertrey wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote: there will be football in 2011, I don't carre what the ney sayers are saying!
Optimism is great... it's the disappointment at the end that just sucks.
(I hope you're right, but... I think I'll just continue to sit on my loooooooow expectations... there's no way I can be disappointed)
I'm with you Trey, I'm just waiting it out. It'll get settled when it does
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 5:13 pm
by SkinsJock
There are now rumblings that there is a slight chance the NFL might shut everything down if the players 'win' big in the courts
the fact is these 2 sides are very much against giving in and these players, being competitive, do not want to 'lose' - maybe more than the owners who are business men, not competitors
ain't it fun
Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 9:50 pm
by SkinsJock
Monday, May 16 - and suddenly we go to a decision that some think indicates the players are on the losing side of all this
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/1507 ... mit-defeat
am I the only one that's a little confused - I thought all the indications were the other way
now all of a sudden this - what happens when Doty gives the players the $700M - AND I think he will
this is not good for a lot of franchises and ours is one of them
maybe these guys can get a deal worked out now - I really hope Doty gives the players a big deal and the owners deserve to get screwed too
Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 12:46 am
by Scottskins
on a side note that wasn't being talked about much, if the players were to ultimately win, the draft itself would be illegal because of antitrust laws. MLB and NBA get by this by having a lottery draft. if the players win(which it now looks like they won't) the whole game we have come to love would change. I'm a conservative, and I'm on the owners side in this. I think the players should be paid well, but they are employees, not owners. The sides appear to be making some progress, and I'm confident we will have a season. May not include rookies since there may be no training camps though...
Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 11:04 am
by Cappster
KazooSkinsFan wrote:Countertrey wrote:skinsfan#33 wrote: there will be football in 2011, I don't carre what the ney sayers are saying!
Optimism is great... it's the disappointment at the end that just sucks.
(I hope you're right, but... I think I'll just continue to sit on my loooooooow expectations... there's no way I can be disappointed)
I'm with you Trey, I'm just waiting it out. It'll get settled when it does
Correct there will be football in 2011...College football :-/
Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 2:03 pm
by KazooSkinsFan
Scottskins wrote:on a side note that wasn't being talked about much, if the players were to ultimately win, the draft itself would be illegal because of antitrust laws. MLB and NBA get by this by having a lottery draft. if the players win(which it now looks like they won't) the whole game we have come to love would change. I'm a conservative, and I'm on the owners side in this. I think the players should be paid well, but they are employees, not owners. The sides appear to be making some progress, and I'm confident we will have a season. May not include rookies since there may be no training camps though...
I'm on the side of free markets. Which means the government should stay out of it. The Federal courts have zero Constitutional authority to make any ruling on this. If the owners have the market power they should "win" and if the players do they should.