Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Lockout Watch: 4/29: Stay of injunction granted, LOCKOUT REINSTATED

SonOfWashington

By SonOfWashington
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

Gurgeh

Gurgeh

Posted
Posted

Yeah, that part is confusing. Lockout is over but the NFL isn't obligated to do anything other than open the doors?

.

Taken from a Sports Illustrated article

"Here's the dilemma for the NFL: with the NFLPA decertified, the NFL cannot collectively bargain any rules, and only collectively bargained rules are exempt from antitrust law. The NFL is thus faced with the onerous task of figuring out a set of restraints on competition that would ensure that the league can function effectively, but not prove so anticompetitive that the restraints violate federal antitrust law."

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/michael_mccann/04/27/judge.ruling.qa/index.html?eref=sihp

Things which are possibly in trouble

- the draft (yes, today's draft, as a drafted player unhappy with where he was selected could sue)

- franchise tags

- salary cap

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HigSkin

HigSkin

Posted
Posted

I like what this guy has to recommend except postponing tonights draft.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/michael_mccann/04/27/judge.ruling.qa/index.html

4. So what would you recommend the NFL do?

First, NFL teams should re-open business without any physical or other obstructions to players. A court has told the league to resume operations. It should do just that and not pull any gimmicks. It may be an awkward time for teams and players, but only if they let it be.

Second, the NFL should -- for the time being -- not employ a salary cap, meaning teams should be able to sign free agents without restriction. Teams would still be deterred in their spending because a new CBA will eventually be reached and it will contain a salary cap -- no team wants to be way over the cap when the new CBA is put in place.

Third, teams should remove franchise tag designations and other restrictions on players' free agency rights. History should convince the league of this point: the NFL has lost antitrust cases involving unilaterally imposed restrictions on movement of free agents between teams. Judge Nelson notably stipulated that teams are not obligated to sign free agents. In one respect, that stipulation benefits teams since they cannot be alleged to have engaged in a group boycott under federal antitrust law by not signing free agents. But as a matter of practice, the stipulation may not prove meaningful: teams may not be legally obligated to sign free agents, but if they don't, their competitors will.

Fourth, and more controversially, the NFL should think seriously -- and quickly -- about postponing the draft. While no drafted player may end up commencing an antitrust lawsuit, the NFL draft has been deemed illegal under antitrust law when not borne from collective bargaining. Obviously, postponing the draft with 24 hours till its scheduled start would be very unpopular with teams, players, fans and media, but legally it may be worth doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jflow78

jflow78

Posted
Posted
Things which are possibly in trouble

- the draft (yes, today's draft, as a drafted player unhappy with where he was selected could sue)

- franchise tags

- salary cap

Wrong about the draft. No one can sue for this draft because it's the last thing still included in the last CBA. So, regardless of what happens, THIS draft will still be run and the picks will still be legitimate, meaning rights of players will still be held by the teams that pick those players for a year, just like any other season. Unlike any other season, if the drafted players don't sign contracts, then instead of going back into a draft pool (since there may not be a draft next year) they will just become FAs.

And you're right about everything else. Also, don't forget, the salary cap being gone doesn't just mean the limit to what owners can spend, it also means there's no limit to what they HAVE to spend either. So they can pay the stars of their teams 200 million a year, and pay the 2nd string guys $15 an hour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Destructis

Destructis

Posted
Posted

That tweet was the only thing I have seen so far. Nothing else at this point. I think the Skins will go along with whatever the NFL says to do right now. From what I understand the NFL is saying to stick to the lockout. Going to be an interesting day even without all the draft stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Tris

The Tris

Posted
Posted
AlbertBreer Quinn/Kessler on NFL pursuing stay: "Unless and until such a request is granted, however, we believe the 2011 League Year now has to begin."

AlbertBreer Quinn/Kessler: "The NFL and the Clubs cannot collectively continue to refuse to deal with players. It is our view that the NFL ...

AlbertBreer "...&the Clubs will be in contempt of court if they do not comply with the order unless & until they hear differently from the 8th Circuit."

AlbertBreer That email just went to players and agents [Tris Edit: 17 mins ago], from Quinn & Kessler, sayings FA should be open, players be allowed to work out, meet w/coaches.

AlbertBreer One more thing from the Quinn/Kessler email to players/agents: "The order ending the lockout is in full, immediate force." More on NFL.com.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
darrelgreenie

darrelgreenie

Posted
Posted

This is now the wild west.

The first owner that pulls their head from planet Uranus and realizes the actual state of the league has an opportunity to have first dibs on FA to make their team better.

Then later in a week or two if they are indeed granted an appeal(which I highly doubt) then they can lock the players out again.(which would be stupid)

But, right now teams are passing up a chance to make their teams better via FA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gurgeh

Gurgeh

Posted
Posted
Wrong about the draft. No one can sue for this draft because it's the last thing still included in the last CBA. So, regardless of what happens, THIS draft will still be run and the picks will still be legitimate, meaning rights of players will still be held by the teams that pick those players for a year, just like any other season. Unlike any other season, if the drafted players don't sign contracts, then instead of going back into a draft pool (since there may not be a draft next year) they will just become FAs.

...

AFAIK the CBA ended when the NFLPA de-certified. There are words in the old CBA about the draft taking place without a new CBA, but there's nothing in there about it taking place without the NFLPA. And since there's no longer a union for drafted players, they are individually free to sue the NFL on anti-trust terms. In theory, anyway....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
S.T.real,lights,out

S.T.real,lights,out

Posted
Posted
This is now the wild west.

The first owner that pulls their head from planet Uranus and realizes the actual state of the league has an opportunity to have first dibs on FA to make their team better.

Then later in a week or two if they are indeed granted an appeal(which I highly doubt) then they can lock the players out again.(which would be stupid)

But, right now teams are passing up a chance to make their teams better via FA.

That's what im thinking. If we are tech open for business and we sign someone what can the NFL do about it? Can we be fined or something? I know it prob doesn't look good for the owners as a unit but WTH lets make our team better while we can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chaught76

chaught76

Posted
Posted

QUESTION

I may have missed it. Does this mean players and picks are viable in this year's draft?

Some else to think about. Could this be the new structure moving forward?

What I mean is, could the start of free agency be moved to after the draft?

It certainly would impact on how teams draft and deal with FA. I mean I would think a move like this would force teams to put more of an emphasis on the draft and also reconsider how it deals with its veterans/free agents.

What do you all think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
darrelgreenie

darrelgreenie

Posted
Posted

If the owners wanna keep being stupid I would play for all the marbles, right now.

If I worked for the players I would tell them to raise the stakes.

If the owners don't want football they don't need it, they are the least essential part of the entire process.

The CBA was part of the reason why the public cannot own a team the way the Packers are in essence owned by their community.

And many stadiums are built with money from the city i.e. the public or the community.

If the owners get money from the public to build the stadium and the players generate the revenue why can't the league proceed with a public ownership model that mirrors the structure of the Green Bay Packers?

Without an "owner"?

---------- Post added April-28th-2011 at 10:35 AM ----------

;) remember you heard it here 1st

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coolio47

Coolio47

Posted
Posted

saw this on nfl.com

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81f8862b/article/agents-gms-preparing-as-if-league-year-could-start-monday?module=HP_headlines

Many agents and general managers are bracing for the league year to begin as soon as Monday if the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals does not grant the NFL's request for a stay of the ruling in Minneapolis that granted the players an injunction to lift the lockout.

If that happened, there likely would be undrafted free agents. hitting the market at the same time as veteran free agents.

Many expect the league to implement rules from the 2010 season, though nothing is concrete at this time.

The NFL's stance has been that the beginning of the league year would not occur until the league had a chance to seek a stay, and the league now will try to get one with the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which also will hear the appeal of the injunction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
angel2

angel2

Posted
Posted
I like what this guy has to recommend except postponing tonights draft.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/michael_mccann/04/27/judge.ruling.qa/index.html

4. So what would you recommend the NFL do?

First, NFL teams should re-open business without any physical or other obstructions to players. A court has told the league to resume operations. It should do just that and not pull any gimmicks. It may be an awkward time for teams and players, but only if they let it be.

Second, the NFL should -- for the time being -- not employ a salary cap, meaning teams should be able to sign free agents without restriction. Teams would still be deterred in their spending because a new CBA will eventually be reached and it will contain a salary cap -- no team wants to be way over the cap when the new CBA is put in place.

Third, teams should remove franchise tag designations and other restrictions on players' free agency rights. History should convince the league of this point: the NFL has lost antitrust cases involving unilaterally imposed restrictions on movement of free agents between teams. Judge Nelson notably stipulated that teams are not obligated to sign free agents. In one respect, that stipulation benefits teams since they cannot be alleged to have engaged in a group boycott under federal antitrust law by not signing free agents. But as a matter of practice, the stipulation may not prove meaningful: teams may not be legally obligated to sign free agents, but if they don't, their competitors will.

Fourth, and more controversially, the NFL should think seriously -- and quickly -- about postponing the draft. While no drafted player may end up commencing an antitrust lawsuit, the NFL draft has been deemed illegal under antitrust law when not borne from collective bargaining. Obviously, postponing the draft with 24 hours till its scheduled start would be very unpopular with teams, players, fans and media, but legally it may be worth doing.

Actually, free agency does not exist. The term means freedom to select and will your best offer. When teams put restrictions on free agents they are denying that player the right to bargain with any team the player wants. It says nothing about restrictions have to be enforced to rectify that players movement from one team to another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SonOfWashington

SonOfWashington

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Lockout back on, Folks.

Report: Owners get stay of injunction, lockout back on

Posted by Michael David Smith on April 29, 2011, 1:48 PM EDT

AP

Although NFL players were being welcomed back to team facilities this morning because of Judge Susan Nelson’s injunction to end the lockout, that is changing this afternoon.

ESPN is reporting that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has granted a temporary stay of the injunction and reinstated the lockout, meaning players will now be told to hit the road, and doors to team facilities are being locked this afternoon.

Michael Silver of Yahoo reported this afternoon that NFL players were bracing for a ruling from the Court of Appeals that would give the owners an “administrative” stay, meaning the lockout would be back on at least through the weekend.

Then, as soon as Monday, the Eighth Circuit will hear the players’ argument against a stay. At that point, the lockout could remain on, or the players could be let back in, depending on the Eighth Circuit’s ruling. And either way, it would just be temporary until the appeals court makes a decision on the owners’ appeal of Judge Nelson’s ruling.

So just hours after players were let back into team facilities this morning, they’ll now be told that they’re no longer welcome this afternoon. And we’ll all wait until Monday to see what the appeals court does next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted

Really surprises me. I was under the impression that the only way a stay could be granted was if the court ruled that the NFL would suffer irreparable harm if the players weren't locked out. And I really couldn't see any way they could possibly make such a ruling.

Guess that's why I'm not a Judge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...