|
Skinzman 02-26-2013, 10:56 AM Lets look at worst case scenarios....
1- All the owners end up hating Snyder. Not voting for his ideas later.
2- Department of Labor or Justice get involved.
3- The NFL not being exempt from labor laws.
I honestly can't fathom anything else, but I'm sure the owners are happy to be exempt from some of the labor laws and being able to do business as they please. I figure the worst that can happen is the NFL would lose that freedom and would have to do business like all other businesses and unions. That alone would go a long way in keeping both sides more honest.
So for me to weight if its worth it to go nuclear and possibly get our CAP space back.... I'd have to say yes it's worth it. Personally I think there needs to be someone keeping an eye on both sides that has no interest, someone who is not swayed to lean towards the owners in judgement (Dotty), and someone to make sure a fair punishment is delt as well as punishing everyone involved. In this case, yeah maybe the Skins do deserve a punishment although I don't agree with it, but certainly the other owners deserve to be punished for unfair practices against the NFLPA.
You forget about Scenario 2A... The Justice department getting involved, and getting a collusion charge to be done through the Govt. The NFL loses said collusion case and has to pay 2-3 bil to the players, that is instantly tripled. The owners also want nothing to happen to the EXTREMELY owner friendly CBA.
Doubt it would ever happen, but being found guilty of collusion is no easy sentence that the other owners are laughing over. If those are truly the worst case scenarios, then Snyder would have already sued, and the NFL would have already counter sued. Court options are a last resort scenario here for a reason.
P.S. there is a reason the players choose to go to Doty and the owners choose other courts. And it has nothing to do with Doty being pro-owners.
SBXVII 02-26-2013, 11:00 AM Well getting an injunction is quite different than running this thing all the way to a trial.
Correct. The injuction is just to stop FA. Maybe even to have it put on hold until after a trial if the Redskins are actually filing. But the Skins can file and threaten to go through with a long trial with out an injuction or holding up FA.
The NFL does not want to hold up anything, FA, draft, etc. etc. Although the other owners probably are not scared.... I bet they also dont' want to have the FA period held up either. I'd file the injuction and file the law suit. As it gets closer to FA time I'd play chicken and see if the NFL caves. If they do good for the Skins, if they don't then you still have all the way up until court date of your law suit.... which could be set for June or August, or Sept. and even then you can always post pone the court case a couple of times which would further delay FA.
I'm hoping Snyder has his minions all over these boards listening to his fan base basically wanting him to get some balls against the other owners and pull the pin on the hand grenade and go nuclear.
If he does not think he has enough later to win he can always drop the issue and move on, but the thought of all the other owners pissed that he held up FA makes me happy.
Evilgrin 02-26-2013, 11:03 AM I dunno, Snyder's ego gets in the way of smart decision making.
SBXVII 02-26-2013, 11:06 AM You forget about Scenario 2A... The Justice department getting involved, and getting a collusion charge to be done through the Govt. The NFL loses said collusion case and has to pay 2-3 bil to the players, that is instantly tripled. The owners also want nothing to happen to the EXTREMELY owner friendly CBA.
Doubt it would ever happen, but being found guilty of collusion is no easy sentence that the other owners are laughing over. If those are truly the worst case scenarios, then Snyder would have already sued, and the NFL would have already counter sued. Court options are a last resort scenario here for a reason.
P.S. there is a reason the players choose to go to Doty and the owners choose other courts. And it has nothing to do with Doty being pro-owners.
You right and basically what I said about the Justice Department. or atleast what I was trying to say. All the other owners are happy with how the system is now and don't want big government involved with their system. Maybe there would be some new rules governing players and their contracts or owners having to have insurance on each player or retirement I don't know. But that alone should be enough to scare the other owners. Worst case scenario the Skins win and the Justice department decides to step in and the NFL loses it's exemptions. Best case scenario the other owners give the CAP back and Snyder calls off the law suit and injuction and allows the NFL to operate as normal.
JoeRedskin 02-26-2013, 11:06 AM Lets look at worst case scenarios....
1- All the owners end up hating Snyder. Not voting for his ideas later.
2- Department of Labor or Justice get involved.
3- The NFL not being exempt from labor laws.
I honestly can't fathom anything else, but I'm sure the owners are happy to be exempt from some of the labor laws and being able to do business as they please. I figure the worst that can happen is the NFL would lose that freedom and would have to do business like all other businesses and unions. That alone would go a long way in keeping both sides more honest.
So for me to weight if its worth it to go nuclear and possibly get our CAP space back.... I'd have to say yes it's worth it. Personally I think there needs to be someone keeping an eye on both sides that has no interest, someone who is not swayed to lean towards the owners in judgement (Dotty), and someone to make sure a fair punishment is delt as well as punishing everyone involved. In this case, yeah maybe the Skins do deserve a punishment although I don't agree with it, but certainly the other owners deserve to be punished for unfair practices against the NFLPA.
First, you realize that Doty has been a big friend of the NFLPA for years and that, in the latest CBA, the NFL insisted that cases under the new CBA would not be heard by him. He gave the friendliest rulings he could in not dismissing the NFLPA's collusion case outright in light of the waiver clause. Most judges would likely have dismissed the NFLPA's claim without argument.
Second, and as others have mentioned, this case would have nothing to do with the NFLPA and labor laws. That case has been adjudicated and dismissed. Period. Done. Finito. As part of the settlement of all outstanding claims, in reaching the new CBA, the NFLPA gave up all rights to claim they had been treated unfairly during the negotiations.
Finally, to see what legal theories Snyder is relying on, I would want to go back to there original appeal in front of the arbiter. As I recall, they advanced certain theories that the arbiter said "this is the wrong forum for that argument". If I am remembering it correctly, it is those theories that Snyder would be bringing now. I have to believe it comes down to a breach of contract or a tortuous interference with business by his partners. Those are each claims which would be independent of the arbiter and NFLPA claims. It's been a while since I looked at them, and really have no evaluation of their merit, but, clearly, people being paid a lot more than me have found a credible basis to bring a civil suit on this issue.
RedskinsInNYC 02-26-2013, 11:13 AM First, you realize that Doty has been a big friend of the NFLPA for years and that, in the latest CBA, the NFL insisted that cases under the new CBA would not be heard by him. He gave the friendliest rulings he could in not dismissing the NFLPA's collusion case outright in light of the waiver clause. Most judges would likely have dismissed the NFLPA's claim without argument.
Second, and as others have mentioned, this case would have nothing to do with the NFLPA and labor laws. That case has been adjudicated and dismissed. Period. Done. Finito. As part of the settlement of all outstanding claims, in reaching the new CBA, the NFLPA gave up all rights to claim they had been treated unfairly during the negotiations.
Finally, to see what legal theories Snyder is relying on, I would want to go back to there original appeal in front of the arbiter. As I recall, they advanced certain theories that the arbiter said "this is the wrong forum for that argument". If I am remembering it correctly, it is those theories that Snyder would be bringing now. I have to believe it comes down to a breach of contract or a tortuous interference with business by his partners. Those are each claims which would be independent of the arbiter and NFLPA claims. It's been a while since I looked at them, and really have no evaluation of their merit, but, clearly, people being paid a lot more than me have found a credible basis to bring a civil suit on this issue.
I would think he brings federal antitrust claims along with state law tortious interference claims. If I were him/on his legal team, I would want to bring the case in a DMV area court (preferably VA). Never underestimate the impact a fan on the bench can have on a case; see Judge Berrigan (EDLA) in the Vilma v. Goodell litigation...
SBXVII 02-26-2013, 11:13 AM You forget about Scenario 2A... The Justice department getting involved, and getting a collusion charge to be done through the Govt. The NFL loses said collusion case and has to pay 2-3 bil to the players, that is instantly tripled. The owners also want nothing to happen to the EXTREMELY owner friendly CBA.
Doubt it would ever happen, but being found guilty of collusion is no easy sentence that the other owners are laughing over. If those are truly the worst case scenarios, then Snyder would have already sued, and the NFL would have already counter sued. Court options are a last resort scenario here for a reason.
P.S. there is a reason the players choose to go to Doty and the owners choose other courts. And it has nothing to do with Doty being pro-owners.
Also I doubt the NFL would file a counter suit because I'm sure they feel pretty confortable that they have won each time the issue has come to court. Dotty is not pro player he is contract friendly and owner friendly. Which is why the Skins lost their appeal, and why the NFLPA lost their case. God forbid he rule against the owners and what then? would he have to face the fact the owners negotiated in bad faith and the whole CBA is null and void? Then the two sides would have to start over in regards to a new CBA tying him up for long hours and meeting and more negotiations? Heck no it's easier to simply side with the owners and ignore the facts: the owners colluded, negotiated in bad faith, black mailed the NFLPA, and punished two teams for not violating any CBA.
JoeRedskin 02-26-2013, 11:19 AM I am not an anti-trust lawyer and that is one of those arcane areas that requires expertise in areas I just don't have to evaluate. I would agree, of course, getting a home Court judge is a big thing. Hell, not sure of the make-up of the VA Bench, but I wouldn't be surprised to find out that one or two judges appointed by Bruce's brother are still sitting.
Evilgrin 02-26-2013, 11:24 AM Does Goodell's response expose them to anything? I would just think in the interest of seeming to be ethical, they wouldn't give that type of response? Irregardless of any threat of legal action.
Anyone ever watch the "don't talk to the police" videos? You'd think that people like Goodell would practice that kind of discretion all the time.
CrustyRedskin 02-26-2013, 11:24 AM 5um6HM89AlY&
ES member (huly) asking Goodell about capgate. Listen to his explanation. He said the owners AND the NFLPA were told about this "competitive balance". Riiiiiight. SO you are going to tell the NFLPA prior to the lockout that you are indeed going to collude even though there is no salary cap.
Someone should have hurled a Docker.
|