8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues

Maybe, but all I know is that everytime I've seen the NFL make a serious offer DeSmith has left and ran directly to the media. He's like a woman. "I'm mad at you but I'm not going to tell you what I did, I will tell Sarah though and then she'll tell you."

De Smith should be going after rapist, pedophiles, and murderers. Not rich NFL fat cats.

Let me help you out....

In Drew Brees statement he added....
You’re just kind of sitting there waiting for judges to make their decision.”

There is no need to wait for a judge to make a decision if your actively in negotiations. If your not counter offering and waiting for a judges decision then clearly you want litigation to resolve the issues.

Frivolous law suits FTW!

•January 2011: The NFLPA files a collusion case, citing that just one of 216 restricted free agents (RFAs) in 2010 was signed to an offer sheet. In 2009, four of 55 RFAs signed offer sheets. The case was filed after the sides extended a December deadline for filing.

I'm not sure it can be proven Smith's strategy all along was to use litigation as a tool

I'm not sure there's much evidence to prove otherwise.

It's not like Smith and Goodell haven't been talking. They spent quite a few hours together today. And maybe instead of serious I should have said good offers.

I understand that the owners concern is more about the long term fate of the NFL than perhaps the players, but from my vantage point I still have a tough time siding with the owners. Regardless of my opinion of how some reps on the player side are handling things.

I'm confident (famous last words?) a deal will be worked out by the time it truly needs to.

I'm sure Smith was prepared all along to go to litigation if he felt it was necessary, but I guess where I differ from you guys is whether he made it necessary. I suppose a lot of people believe, with reason, the only way a deal would be reached was if we got to the breaking point.

But this negotiation will be nothing compared to the NBA

I'm sure Smith was prepared all along to go to litigation if he felt it was necessary, but I guess where I differ from you guys is whether he made it necessary. I suppose a lot of people believe, with reason, the only way a deal would be reached was if we got to the breaking point.

But this negotiation will be nothing compared to the NBA

That one needs to happen. I can live with an NBA lockout mainly because the NBA needs fundamental changes to player movement and acquisition. The NFL system on the other hand works from a competition perspective all it needs is a few tweaks. And unlike the NFL I can in fact believe that the NBA owners are loosing money.

On Sirius (seriously he was on!) I counted at least three blatant, imo, fallacies that D Smith is trying to get people to believe -

1) the deal on the table at the end of mediation was the worst deal in the history of sports. It is a fallacy because regardless if the deal was a good or bad deal, I am confident that the players from the before the early 80s (you know the ones getting maybe 200 a month if they are lucky) was far worse. Rather than stick with a semi valid line that the deal was worse than any since collective bargaining started or some other line he chooses to demonize the other side and misrepresent the truth when the truth could still be seen favoring his side.

2). The owners are the first to ever sue to lock their doors, or something to that effect, again the players were the plaintiffs and filed suit, the owners appealed that decision but that is not the same as suing to shut the doors and as a legal minded individual D Smith certainly understands that. The owners were definitely seeking to shut their doors, but let's be honest and admit that that is a valid labor tool that has been used before. Also I believe the players have gone on strike in the past so both sides have used their tools when it serves their purpose.

3) the last one is a little more touchy, but basically "the players and fan want football and the owners don't". This, if he truly believes it is lunacy. The owners clearly want football, on their terms, just as much as the players want football, on their terms. Both sides need to drop concern for the fans because it is tangential at best. As for DSmiths statement again it is hyperbole meant to demonize the owners and galvanize the players. I don't see how that leads to a resolution any time soon.

This goes to what JR was saying, D Smith truly wants to dazzle people with grandiose (BS) statements - worst deal ever, first league to sue to shut doors. Rather then speak in terms which draw sides closer, he uses words to widen the gap, and push the sides apart. Granted the nfl may use words without meaning, but when they talk their words are on point about working together, getting a deal done, trying to make something that is good for players and owners. You don't here those words from D Smith right now.

It's not like Smith and Goodell haven't been talking. They spent quite a few hours together today. And maybe instead of serious I should have said good offers.

I understand that the owners concern is more about the long term fate of the NFL than perhaps the players, but from my vantage point I still have a tough time siding with the owners. Regardless of my opinion of how some reps on the player side are handling things.

I'm confident (famous last words?) a deal will be worked out by the time it truly needs to.

I'm curious about why you'd side with the players honestly. I think you'd agree both sides are being greedy (which is perfectly acceptable in this case to me.) Given only that I'd be hard pressed to take any side at all. But add in that the players have consistently positioned themselves to pursue litigation and have now pursued said litigation by pretty dubious means I can't see how anyone can side with them. The balance of good faith spent lies firmly with the owners in my opinion and that is the only thing that tilts me towards the owners.

Edit: I think it is telling that we have a group of 32 business owners making BILLIONS of dollars a year crying poor and slowly but surely public opinion seems to be shifting firmly to their side. If there was ever a less sympathetic entity than the NFL owners crying poor I cannot think of it. Yet the players are consistently positioning themselves on the wrong side of "right".

I'm sure Smith was prepared all along to go to litigation if he felt it was necessary, but I guess where I differ from you guys is whether he made it necessary. I suppose a lot of people believe, with reason, the only way a deal would be reached was if we got to the breaking point.Well...there was a deadline, and some decision had to be made. And the ultimatum offered to the NFL for another extension was, of course, 10 years of audited financials. In the next 15 minutes. Which, depending on your perspective, was either the very first in a series of moves that could be grouped as nothing more than posturing, or another move in the long line of a series of moves aimed at swaying public opinion. I think only someone who was completely delusional would consider that good faith bargaining.

And I don't think that De Smith is delusional. I think he's quite good at his job. But the thing I want to know is, why did the players take this to the District court in Minnesota if they knew it would just be appealed to the 8th Circut anyway? The only logical reason I can fathom is that it's not going to stop here, but it's headed to the Supreme Court. And THAT was the plan since decertification.But this negotiation will be nothing compared to the NBAAmen.

It's not like Smith and Goodell haven't been talking. They spent quite a few hours together today.

...


Just out of curiosity SS, are you referring to the boylan mediation or that the 2 met separate and apart from that?