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

[88Comrade2000]

Until 24 out of 32 owners approve a new deal and majority of players approve a new deal; it doesn't mean anything. Even if the reach a deal tomorrow; it has to be voted on.

[Son of Gadsden]

Greedy billionaires...but i guess thats how they became billionaires.

Yeah, greedy billionaires....its not like they give up hundreds of millions of dollars for men to throw a ball around....so greedy.

From the same view, greedy millionaire players.

[Unforgiven]

Yeah, greedy billionaires....its not like they give up hundreds of millions of dollars for men to throw a ball around....so greedy.

From the same view, greedy millionaire players.

In fairness the players have a very small window in which to make their money, the owners can profit off the team until the day they die and pass it to their children. If you have a window of only a few years on average to try and make money to support your family for the rest of your life and are risking permanent disability in doing so, you should try for whatever you can. Obviously most players *can* work after football, but that's not an excuse for them to take less money because they're not only employees but the product of the NFL.

I'm not saying either side is right, in fact they're both equally wrong on different points, but I can sympathize more with the players.

[Son of Gadsden]

In fairness the players have a very small window in which to make their money, the owners can profit off the team until the day they die and pass it to their children. If you have a window of only a few years on average to try and make money to support your family for the rest of your life and are risking permanent disability in doing so, you should try for whatever you can. Obviously most players *can* work after football, but that's not an excuse for them to take less money because they're not only employees but the product of the NFL.

I'm not saying either side is right, in fact they're both equally wrong on different points, but I can sympathize more with the players.

See, i just completely disagree with this. I am a manager for a fairly large construction company. Our carpenters are our "product" also. Without the carpenters, we can't operate. We could get rid of them, but some of them have skills that might not be easy to find elsewhere. I disagree with the point. I don't see how NFL players are anything more than employees. They claim to be partners, but a partnership is not "We feel like we are partners". You are, or you arent. If you are a partner you can not be fired, yet players can be cut whenever the owners want to. If the players are partners they share in every expense and every profit. They don't.

I don't buy the window or injury thing either. I raced motocross since i was 4 years old. I suffered several major injuries, including one crippling one. I've been in and out of knee surgery constantly since i was 18. I can't stand up for longer than an hour without severe pain, and its likely ill be in a wheelchair in my 30's. I had to quit because of my injuries just after i got my pro license. I made no millions, i made no thousands. But you know what? I did it because i liked doing it, and i wanted to make money playing a game. I knew the risks, and the possible consequences, and now i reap them. If you don't want to be crippled, don't try and make millions by playing a game, get a real job like everyone else.

Sorry if i come off douchey sounding Unforgiven, I'm not trying to be a dick. These players just drive me nuts when they use their injuries as an excuse for money and sympathy. They make millions of dollars playing football, money that really isnt deserved. It could be used much better on teachers, police officers, and military...and would probably be much more gratefully earned....but thats not the way things are....yet all we hear is pissing and moaning. We live in a capitalist country. Business is based on profit, and the government does not interfere. The owners don't feel like they are making enough money anymore for their troubles...so they are taking more. Don't like it? You have the right to find a new job, that's capitalism. You have the right to call the owner's liars and ask to see the books. They have the right to give you the finger and remind you not to let the door hit you in the ass.

[SnyderShrugged]

The Lawyers on both sides have a vested interest in letting this drag out as long as possible. They dont give a hoot about football, but they will make a ton on their hourly fees.

I think D Smith screwed the pooch when he counter sued IMHO

[Hitman21ST]

I think D Smith screwed the pooch when he counter sued IMHO

I honestly believe if it weren't for De Smith, this thing would have been solved and both sides would have come to a reasonable agreement months ago.

[killerbee99]

I honestly believe if it weren't for De Smith, this thing would have been solved and both sides would have come to a reasonable agreement months ago.

I agree as welll, that guy is a complete douche

[Voice_of_Reason]

This whole thing is such a mess. I really fault the players for getting this thing into the courts. As soon as it goes into the court system, it's just a mess and a huge gamble. They bet (correctly) on the Fed court in Minn. But nobody really knows what the appellate court will do.

D Smith is a complete and total tool. But so is Roger G.

What should have happened is that both of them should have taken separate vacations last summer and ended up in Hawaii or something, "randomly" stumbled into each other at a hotel, and had the following conversation:

DS: "Dude, Roger, so strange to find you hear!"

RG: "I know, you're just where they said you would be."

DS: "So, you're a lying scumbag.:

RG: "And you're a non-football db."

DS: "Ok, but we need to work together, because we're going to have to live together."

RG: "Right. So, here's what I want...."

DS: "Well, that's not what I want. Here's what I want."

RG: "Ok, so that's not going to work. How about we take this off the table, you take that off the table, we negotiate this, and how does that look?"

DS: "Well, that's not good enough. How about this option?"

(This goes on for about 3 Rum Racers.)

RG: "By God I think we've got it. btw, you're still a db."

DS: "Right, and you're still an Ass."

Done.

[Long n Left]

In fairness the players have a very small window in which to make their money, the owners can profit off the team until the day they die and pass it to their children. If you have a window of only a few years on average to try and make money to support your family for the rest of your life and are risking permanent disability in doing so, you should try for whatever you can. Obviously most players *can* work after football, but that's not an excuse for them to take less money because they're not only employees but the product of the NFL.

I'm not saying either side is right, in fact they're both equally wrong on different points, but I can sympathize more with the players.

To add on to what s2 said, yeah, the players risk injury, but they know those consequences going in. The (original) owners risked HUGE amounts of money, some their life savings, investing in a business with unknown risks aplenty. Don't villify the owners because they took the risk and became billionaires, or their heirs, who essentially hit the lottery because of who they were born. These guys are super smart businessmen for the most part, and the NFL is the product they have made, they should profit off of it. It's not as though the players aren't getting paid handsomely for playing a game.

[Kostaskins]

Also keep in mind that many owners n teams want a huge cut of the pie when they are not making ends meat. Example.. The lions, rams, jaguars n any other ones I forgot...

How can they compare to the teams who rake in a huge amount of revenue for the nfl.. Like the skins, packers, steelers n cowgirls..

That's another problem that is being held hush hush which is a huge reason. These teams want more money but they offer so little in return.

[Conn]

They make millions of dollars playing football, money that really isnt deserved. It could be used much better on teachers, police officers, and military...and would probably be much more gratefully earned

You said it yourself later in this post: that's not how our economy works.

It runs, mostly, on supply and demand. And as long as these football players are world-class athletes playing a sport that's tops in American entertainment, they will in fact "deserve" what they get paid: because the market sets the price.

Teachers, police officers, and the military might "deserve" the money more in your opinion, but that's not how it works. There's a huge supply of people ready to fill positions in those fields, for better or worse. And their pay reflects that. They are skilled workers, in comparison to un-skilled laborers working at a Walmart, but in comparison to NFL players? No. That's a special niche that has a special place in this economy, whether you agree with it or not.

But to not like it because its not "fair" or "deserved"? That's not how any economy works.

And that's not even addressing your ridiculous motocross comparison, although I appreciate the personal anecdote. What you do for fun, whether its dangerous or not, has nothing to do with the injury risks players take. They are fairly compensated for the risks they knowingly take with their bodies, because they are good enough in what you could call their "field" to demand the pay that they get in this economy, as a group.

Trust me, if you were "discovered" and were equally good at your hobby, motocross, as these guys are at what was once their hobby, you'd get paid in the top percentage of your "field" to do it for entertainment as well. But you aren't, and either way, there isn't that type of high-paying demand for motocross races from the masses.

Its just not a good comparison in any way. Its like saying "I free-climb and hang-glide for fun, and that's incredibly dangerous! I break all kinds of bones! You don't see me getting paid millions for it, I do it because I love the rush!"

It just doesn't make sense in this conversation. Not one bit.

[A Walton]

This is so ****ing dumb. We the fan will not watch an inferior product(i.e. not the best available) which makes the players invaluable.

Owners want more, in a time frame where the fans who support the entire machine are learning to live with less.

It really is as simple as billionaires fighting with millionaires. Who really loses in this fight? Well that is easy, the fan.

Get the product on the field and stop this nonsense.

[hitmandm]

I honestly believe if it weren't for De Smith, this thing would have been solved and both sides would have come to a reasonable agreement months ago.

It is obvious he is trying to make aname for himself and trying to get cute with negotiations. It is time for owners to crush this pseudo-union and get back to playing football.

[88Comrade2000]

Also keep in mind that many owners n teams want a huge cut of the pie when they are not making ends meat. Example.. The lions, rams, jaguars n any other ones I forgot...

How can they compare to the teams who rake in a huge amount of revenue for the nfl.. Like the skins, packers, steelers n cowgirls..

That's another problem that is being held hush hush which is a huge reason. These teams want more money but they offer so little in return.

**** those teams. If they can't make money in their city then move elsewhere or fold.

As for the labor thing, nothing is going to happen until the players feel the pain and the players aren't going to feel any pain until they start missing checks. I wouldn't expect anything to happen until late September and games probably not played until November.

[Section106]

It is obvious he is trying to make aname for himself and trying to get cute with negotiations. It is time for owners to crush this pseudo-union and get back to playing football.

You haven't been paying attention. There is no union to crush and the owners have appealed the injunction because they believe the union decertification is illegal. It is their position that there is still a union and that the two sides should be at the bargaining table. That is why they went to the NLRB to get a ruling on the NFLPA's decertification. The owners want the union, the CBA, the Draft, and all the other restrictions to free market trade that the CBA creates.

The owners are to blame here, folks. There is simply no fact that any of you can present that will show DeMaurice Smith is the cause of the lockout. You guys need to listen to the re-broadcast of Kevin Mawae's interview on the Sirius Blitz at 11 tonight. He lays it all out brilliantly.

[A Walton]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6559409

An article about how Goodell is going to try and help secure a new stadium for the Vikings.

I am in the **** the owners group.

[Burgold]

This is so ****ing dumb. We the fan will not watch an inferior product(i.e. not the best available) which makes the players invaluable.

Question. Did you watch the Redskins when Zorn and Spurrier was the coach. If so, you know better than most that the fan will watch an inferior product.

[A Walton]

Question. Did you watch the Redskins when Zorn and Spurrier was the coach. If so, you know better than most that the fan will watch an inferior product.

Hah...fair enough and you know what I mean.

[AKM311]

Hah...fair enough and you know what I mean.

I actually don't. Because if everyone had to pick from less talented players, we would all still root for the Redskins. I honestly believe that the NFL is the one sport where it is less about the players than the team.

[Son of Gadsden]

You said it yourself later in this post: that's not how our economy works.

It runs, mostly, on supply and demand. And as long as these football players are world-class athletes playing a sport that's tops in American entertainment, they will in fact "deserve" what they get paid: because the market sets the price.

Teachers, police officers, and the military might "deserve" the money more in your opinion, but that's not how it works. There's a huge supply of people ready to fill positions in those fields, for better or worse. And their pay reflects that. They are skilled workers, in comparison to un-skilled laborers working at a Walmart, but in comparison to NFL players? No. That's a special niche that has a special place in this economy, whether you agree with it or not.

But to not like it because its not "fair" or "deserved"? That's not how any economy works.

And that's not even addressing your ridiculous motocross comparison, although I appreciate the personal anecdote. What you do for fun, whether its dangerous or not, has nothing to do with the injury risks players take. They are fairly compensated for the risks they knowingly take with their bodies, because they are good enough in what you could call their "field" to demand the pay that they get in this economy, as a group.

Trust me, if you were "discovered" and were equally good at your hobby, motocross, as these guys are at what was once their hobby, you'd get paid in the top percentage of your "field" to do it for entertainment as well. But you aren't, and either way, there isn't that type of high-paying demand for motocross races from the masses.

Its just not a good comparison in any way. Its like saying "I free-climb and hang-glide for fun, and that's incredibly dangerous! I break all kinds of bones! You don't see me getting paid millions for it, I do it because I love the rush!"

It just doesn't make sense in this conversation. Not one bit.

You took the least important phrase of my entire post and debated it. I'm not saying cops and soldiers should get tons of money. I'm saying the players are ungrateful, because in my opinion, others are more deserving anyway. They have this chip on their shoulders every time they are on the radio, like they are better than everyone else. "We DESERVE to see the books" while hundreds of others that take paycuts didn't get a look at the books...yet they are so special because they play a ****ing game.

My motocross comparison is COMPLETELY related. Ricky Carmichael made an estimated $4.75 million per year salary from Suzuki, and an estimated 8-10 million per year total income, from motocross. I don't think that's all that different. That's what i wanted to do, however i got hurt doing it. I knew the risks when i was doing it, and i accepted those because i wanted to get rich playing a game. NFL players know the risks, but they decide to accept them so they can get rich. There is no difference. Racers get paid just like everyone else in pro sports. Regardless of how important it may be to you, they are playing a game, just as racers play a game. We're on a football board, so i don't expect you to respect any sport other than your own, but that does not change the validity. These players deserve paycuts to knock their heads down a few sizes. They are showing their greed and arrogance on radio stations and interviews everywhere, proving the owners to be the more mature group anyway. The players got through college because they are good at a game, while people who studied as hard as they could got turned down so they could have their place. These players are so blessed they have no business complaining about anything they have going for them right now.

The players have this idea that they are like soldiers or something. One said today on Sirius "We risk our lives so the owners can get rich!" For starters, thats a damn lie. They do it so THEY can get rich. You know what, if you are "oh so burdened" by the chances of injury, get a real job and stop trying to get rich the easy way. When the government was about to shut down, did the troops get to drop their weapons and stop fighting for the country? No, they kept it up but with the threat of no paycheck at all. Thousands of blue collar workers take paycuts during this bad economy, but for some reason, football players think they are better than everyone else. How many people do you think have said "But i don't want more money, i just want what i've been making" when they got their paycuts from their bosses? Our economy does not work that way.

[jflow78]

You haven't been paying attention. There is no union to crush and the owners have appealed the injunction because they believe the union decertification is illegal. It is their position that there is still a union and that the two sides should be at the bargaining table. That is why they went to the NLRB to get a ruling on the NFLPA's decertification. The owners want the union, the CBA, the Draft, and all the other restrictions to free market trade that the CBA creates.

The owners are to blame here, folks. There is simply no fact that any of you can present that will show DeMaurice Smith is the cause of the lockout. You guys need to listen to the re-broadcast of Kevin Mawae's interview on the Sirius Blitz at 11 tonight. He lays it all out brilliantly.

Yes, DeMaurice is an angel and the owners are the devil and if it weren't for them we'd all be rich and have free healthcare, we should vote Smith for the next President, he will solve all problems. Demaurice didn't bargain fairly, THAT'S why the Owners went to court initially, because it was blatantly obvious that the LAWYER wanted to go to court. This has been their plan from the beginning.

Kevin Mawae, the President of the Player's Union (definitely NOT a fair and balanced opinion, so I won't be giving his interview any more weight than I would give one that RG gives), which is just a trade organization that's really still acting as a union but claiming they're not a union, even though they're planning on recertifying when the owners bow down to their will, and now that their lawyer buddy lost a big appeal, they're willing to finally sit down at the table and honestly negotiate.

DSmith is a douche. And to steal your own words, "There is simply no fact that [you] can present that will show DeMaurice Smith is [NOT] the cause of the lockout" and that the owners are at any more fault than the players over this.

[IronMike]

There are 3 main issues: 1) contracts, 2) antitrust, and 3) NLRB or Labor law. Owners probably win on the contracts issue: the contract with the union provided the opportunity for the owners to cancel it. They did. Players liked the old contract; owners did not; contract provision gave owners an out; they took the out. Players probably win on antitrust, but their argument is weakened because as a union they agreed to the anticompetitive aspects of the deal. Labor law issue is the toss-up. Everybody knows that decertification is just a ploy to avoid the obvious and allow the players to get into court. Democrats in power now appoint NLRB administrative deciders, but courts probably overturn NLRB decision. Players concluded that labor negotiations are a losing hand. Players chose the litigation option. That is their only chance to win, BUT it will result in the longest delay in getting to a final solution. Can the players hang together? Litigation is not the quickest way to resolve anything. You can win a battle but lose the war. Players chose the litigation route; Mawae can spin the truth and blame the owners for the delay, but the players chose this path. Appeals, hearings, rehearings, briefing scheudles,etc. take time. And folks, this is NOT the most important case on this court's (or any court's) docket.

[Devastate]

Some people will look at the situation as simple as "THE OWNERS CAN AFFORD IT!" and just side with the players without a brain cell so much as warming up.. The fact is the players have had just as much if not more of a hand in the delays and the lack of negotiations as the owners.

To me it's a case of give the players and inch and they'll want a mile.

I like the example in the case of the players wanting a piece of the television revs.. Most of us go to work everyday... Tomorrow, wake up go into work and start demanding pieces of the owner's other revenue streams.... Then threaten to take them to court over it.. Then see what happens. I know they are contracted, but still the point still stands.

Players agree to a contract with a team to play for a certain amount for a certain period of time... Seems to me they have forgotten this.

[Section106]

And to steal your own words, "There is simply no fact that [you] can present that will show DeMaurice Smith is [NOT] the cause of the lockout" and that the owners are at any more fault than the players over this.

The owners negotiated TV contracts at a lower price than market value to ensure payment in the case of a lockout. There is your fact. And Judge Doty is about to rule on the amount of damages ("treble" is the word your searching for here) the NFL will have to pay the players. So I've provided you with a fact and you've provided me with an opinion. Point to me.

Look, there is no union if it's members say there isn't a union. That's legal. You might not like it but so what? Your opinion has nothing to do with reality. I think that most fans that support the owners in this mess are missing a glaring fact, that the owners don't want football to be played this season. Why else would they opt out of the CBA and then negotiate the TV contracts the way they did? The owners want to break the resolve of the players to force them to take a bad, one-sided deal. That means no 2011 season.

The owners sued to NOT play football. Now if you can extricate your brain from all that cognitive dissonance maybe you can explain how this is the players fault again?

---------- Post added May-18th-2011 at 12:28 AM ----------

The fact is the players have had just as much if not more of a hand in the delays and the lack of negotiations as the owners.

That is not a fact. That's your opinion.

I like the example in the case of the players wanting a piece of the television revs.. Most of us go to work everyday... Tomorrow, wake up go into work and start demanding pieces of the owner's other revenue streams.... Then threaten to take them to court over it.. Then see what happens. I know they are contracted, but still the point still stands.

No it doesn't. The last CBA gave the players 60% of the TV contract money. That money pays their salaries. As stated in my earlier post, Judge Doty is about to rule to give the players triple damages because the owners did not live up to their legal obligation to negotiate in good fauith to maximize TV revenues for their partners, the players. I don't understand how this fact is lost on so many of you?

[skinsrbeast]

The lockout can easily be summed up as the owners are greedy douches and a lot of players are greedy douches and odds are we will have another one in ten years