NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

Well I had heard a couple of days ago this might happen and now it has

Redskins-related

Cites Mara

[url]https://www.nflplayers.com/Articles/Press-Releases/NFL-Players-File-Collusion-Complaint-Against-NFL-Owners/[/url]

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

WOW, That brings all of SBXVII's arguments to the forefront. Doubt it helps us at all, but I hope Mara gets his words shoved back down his throat.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

Yup. THIS is the nuclear option that so many were talking about. In light of Mara's comments, I think the NFL is going to have a tough row to hoe on this one. The NFL won't be getting a dismissal before discovery on this one methinks.

The key is that it is a new claim that was not settled by the omnibus settlement that was a precondition of the new CBA.

Danny and Jerry gotta be thinking "That's what you get assholes". For those who thought a bag of flaming dog poop on Mara's step was appropriate -- the NFLPA just delivered it for you.

At the same time, I'm with CRed - I don't think it ends up helping us at all.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

Does this mean we are going to get our money back?

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[URL]http://www.realredskins.com/files/nflpa-suit.pdf[/URL]

Here is the actual filing. Provided by Rich Tandler.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

Also - and so long as it doesn't stop me from seeing RGIII light up the field - I hope the court hands the NFL owners their ass.

Just so you know, the suit doesn't exempt the Skins, Cowboys, Saints and Raiders from the collusion, it just asserts that those teams "did not [B]fully abide [/B]by secret NFL rules to suppress player salaries in 2010."

[url]https://images.nflplayers.com/mediaResources/files/pdf.pdf[/url] at Paragraph 2 (emphasis added).

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=mbedner3420;918282]Does this mean we are going to get our money back?[/quote]

No it means this list of lawyers will get a butt full of $$$$$$$$.

The players and the NFLPA will be represented in these proceedings by Jeffrey Kessler, David Feher and David Greenspan of Winston & Strawn, LLP; James Quinn of Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP; David Barrett, James Barrett, Daniel Schecter, Thomas Heiden and Michael Nelson of Latham & Watkins, LLP; Barbara Berens of Berens & Miller, P.A.; Mark Jacobson of Lindquist & Vennum, PLLP and DeMaurice Smith, Executive Director of the NFLPA.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

My favorite part:

[FONT=Times-Roman][SIZE=4][FONT=Times-Roman][SIZE=4][LEFT]27. As to the other four Clubs – the Redskins, Cowboys, Raiders, and Saints – it
recently has come to light that they refused, at least to some extent, to abide by their
collusive conspiracy with the NFL and the other Owners, and exceeded the secret,[/LEFT]
collusive $123 million salary cap during the 2010 League Year.
[/SIZE][/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT]

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

And if they win it, it means the next CBA battle will be fought on VERY different terms.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=mbedner3420;918282]Does this mean we are going to get our money back?[/quote]

Not likely. The only specific relief sought by the NFLPA is monetary damages against the NFL and the 32 clubs (If the NFLPA wins, I would expect Snyder to have to pitch in on payment of any penalty).

The Court [I]may[/I] say that the penalty imposed was improper and reverse of its own accord under the generic request that the Court grant "such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper". I find it highly unlikely that a court would do so simply b/c the only benefit would be to teams that participated in some level of collusive behavior (i.e. not telling the players about the secret agreement).

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

:hitfan:

I'm with Joe and CR on this one, as long as it doesn't hurt us I don't care about this lawsuit but at the same time I don't see us gaining anything from this.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

I definitely care about the lawsuit. I take #Mora's response to the penalty personally. And i'm very happy that he is so richly quoted in the filing. What an idiot.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

I have to do a retract of my "certainty" that it won't make it past a motion to dismiss. The omnibus settlement apparently contained a clause indicating that the NFLPA gave up all claims "known and unknown" relating to claims of collusion. I am pretty certain that this is a broadly read clause and it is certainly what the NFL will hang its hat on.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=Monksdown;918298]I definitely care about the lawsuit. I take #Mora's response to the penalty personally. And i'm very happy that he is so richly quoted in the filing. What an idiot.[/quote]

This...

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

@ Smoot - you said you heard about this as a possibility a couple days ago. Do you know if NFLPA only planned to sue IF the lawsuit was dismissed?

Perhaps they intended to do so all along but were waiting for any documents that may have been released if the arbitration claim had gone foward? The NFLPA is basing their suit in part on the arbitration claim the Redskins/Cowboys had; however, i find it odd that the NFLPA waited until the day after that was dismissed.

@ Joe - It sounds like the Redskins, Cowboys, Raiders and Saints are essentially witness for the plaintiff. If the NFLPA is suing the owners (is that who they are suing) is there any reason to think any of those teams will be forced to testify essentially against themselves. Is this civil court? Don’t you have to testify in civil court if youre a witness, even if youre the defendant? Any chance any of these 4 teams would want to join as plaintiffs? Is that even possible?

So if this is the “nuclear option” it makes you think the Redskins/Cowboys knew this would happen based off of their arguments in arbitration. It kind of sounds like we did go nuclear, right?

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

I think it's going to get interesting. Not only do the owners (to include the Skins) now have to worry about this claim but I'd imagine their possibly losing their exemption as well.


I wonder if Hoop has any incite he'd like to add to this new developement?

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

It's pretty funny to watch this all blow up in Goodell's face, they had to look beyond the penalties that they gave to 4 teams, and they didn't.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

The problem is I think the NFL thinks it's bigger then it really is. It thinks all the owners will when faced with a penalty or punishment will take said punishment and forget about it.... kinda like how the Mafia works. Instead in this new day and age the new young owners of today simply don't take this crap laying down.


What I really wonder is how much of this was the NFLPA waiting to see how our appeal played out before they filed and how much the Redskins and Cowboys are assisting in the process? Could there have been a behind the scene's agreement between the two teams and the NFLPA to admit there was collusion for their assistance? Technically the 4 teams who didn't participate should not be punished even though they are a part of the group.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=SBXVII;918311]The problem is I think the NFL thinks it's bigger then it really is. It thinks all the owners will when faced with a penalty or punishment will take said punishment and forget about it.... kinda like how the Mafia works. Instead in this new day and age the new young owners of today simply don't take this crap laying down.


What I really wonder is how much of this was the NFLPA waiting to see how our appeal played out before they filed and how much the Redskins and Cowboys are assisting in the process? Could there have been a behind the scene's agreement between the two teams and the NFLPA to admit there was collusion for their assistance? Technically the 4 teams who didn't participate should not be punished even though they are a part of the group.[/quote]

Technically, but pretty sure they can't avoid damages because they are part of the NFL?

I think there is no coincidence they waited for the hearing to be dismissed, and then filed, it's probably another piece of evidence.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=SBXVII;918311]The problem is I think the NFL thinks it's bigger then it really is. It thinks all the owners will when faced with a penalty or punishment will take said punishment and forget about it.... kinda like how the Mafia works. Instead in this new day and age the new young owners of today simply don't take this crap laying down.


What I really wonder is how much of this was the NFLPA waiting to see how our appeal played out before they filed and how much the Redskins and Cowboys are assisting in the process? Could there have been a behind the scene's agreement between the two teams and the NFLPA to admit there was collusion for their assistance? Technically the 4 teams who didn't participate should not be punished even though they are a part of the group.[/quote]

I dont think the Skins/Cowboys likely were in talks with the PA, as they are still the enemy really. I think it's probably more closely tied to the PA being prepared to file this the moment the arbitrator rendered judgement. You hold off in filing to possibly gather more ammunition for the filing. The arbitrators decision decided that they would have to run with what they had already. Basically public statements.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=mlmpetert;918305]@ Joe - It sounds like the Redskins, Cowboys, Raiders and Saints are essentially witness for the plaintiff. If the NFLPA is suing the owners (is that who they are suing) is there any reason to think any of those teams will be forced to testify essentially against themselves. Is this civil court? Don’t you have to testify in civil court if youre a witness, even if youre the defendant? Any chance any of these 4 teams would want to join as plaintiffs? Is that even possible?[/quote]

- It is a civil action - more correctly, it is the continuation of an already settled civil action. The NFLPA has requested that the Federal District Court reopen the 1993 Settlement Agreement between the NFLPA that resolved the lawsuit which, eventually, initiated the unrestricted free agent era. All CBA's since then have been approved by the Federal Court as amendments to the original 1993 Settlement agreement.

- If you're called as a witness, yes, you must testify. Of course, if your memory goes bad on the stand ... well, that's just the way it goes ...
Q: Mr. Snyder do you remember Mr. Mara telling you about an agreement to keep players salaries down during the uncapped year?
A: I have no recollection of any such conversation.
Q: What about this e-mail in which you reference just such a conversation, does that refresh your recollection at all??
A: Nope, I don't remember anything about it. etc., etc., etc.

- Each of the 32 clubs and the NFL as an entity are defendants in the original action. [I]Any[/I] defendant is allowed to make cross-claims against the other defendants seeking indemnity and/or other relief. So, yes, the Skins could file a cross-claim and assert that they did not partake in the collusive agreement and, in fact, were subsequently punished for doing so. They could then seek damages in their own right and/or ask that they be indemnified against any damages awarded to the players. The problem, of course, is that, by failing to make the secret agreeement public, the Skins did partake in collusive behavior - just not to the extent that the rest of the league did.

[quote=mlmpetert;918305]So if this is the “nuclear option” it makes you think the Redskins/Cowboys knew this would happen based off of their arguments in arbitration. It kind of sounds like we did go nuclear, right?[/quote]

I wouldn't speculate as to what the Skins "knew" would happen. I think (and I am pretty sure I said so early in the prior thread) that, once Mara made his comments, he opened the league up to this kind of action regardless of the Redskins filing a complaint. If anything, I think the Skins & Cowboys tried hard to contain the fight by pursuing it through their weakest legal avenue. Again, as far as the collusion goes, Snyder's and Jerry's hands are not exactly pristine. To a certain extent, they were playing both ends against the middle and it now has the potential to spiral wayyyy beyond their initial manipulations.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;918316]- It is a civil action - more correctly, it is the continuation of an already settled civil action. The NFLPA has requested that the Federal District Court reopen the 1993 Settlement Agreement between the NFLPA that resolved the lawsuit which, eventually, initiated the unrestricted free agent era. All CBA's since then have been approved by the Federal Court as amendments to the original 1993 Settlement agreement.

- If you're called as a witness, yes, you must testify. Of course, if your memory goes bad on the stand ... well, that's just the way it goes ...
Q: Mr. Snyder do you remember Mr. Mara telling you about an agreement to keep players salaries down during the uncapped year?
A: I have no recollection of any such conversation.
Q: What about this e-mail in which you reference just such a conversation, does that refresh your recollection at all??
A: Nope, I don't remember anything about it. etc., etc., etc.

- Each of the 32 clubs and the NFL as an entity are defendants in the original action. [I]Any[/I] defendant is allowed to make cross-claims against the other defendants seeking indemnity and/or other relief. So, yes, the Skins could file a cross-claim and assert that they did not partake in the collusive agreement and, in fact, were subsequently punished for doing so. They could then seek damages in their own right and/or ask that they be indemnified against any damages awarded to the players. The problem, of course, is that, by failing to make the secret agreeement public, the Skins did partake in collusive behavior - just not to the extent that the rest of the league did.



I wouldn't speculate as to what the Skins "knew" would happen. I think (and I am pretty sure I said so early in the prior thread) that, once Mara made his comments, he opened the league up to this kind of action regardless of the Redskins filing a complaint. If anything, I think the Skins & Cowboys tried hard to contain the fight by pursuing it through their weakest legal avenue. Again, as far as the collusion goes, Snyder's and Jerry's hands are not exactly pristine. To a certain extent, they were playing both ends against the middle and it now has the potential to spiral wayyyy beyond their initial manipulations.[/quote]

So what are the chances this thing continues, can the original decision not be reopened?

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=Evilgrin;918318]So what are the chances this thing continues, can the original decision not be reopened?[/quote]

Don't they stand alone? That decision is not relavent to the collusion in question?

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=Monksdown;918313]I dont think the Skins/Cowboys likely were in talks with the PA, as they are still the enemy really. I think it's probably more closely tied to the PA being prepared to file this the moment the arbitrator rendered judgement. [B]You hold off in filing to possibly gather more ammunition for the filing. The arbitrators decision decided that they would have to run with what they had already. Basically public statements.[/B][/quote]

This. Part of the arbitration decision indicated that the Cowboys and Skins were seeking document discovery concerning the alleged collusion. I am sure the NFLPA was also interested in those types of documents and wanted to see what would come out in the arbitration.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=mlmpetert;918305]@ Smoot - you said you heard about this as a possibility a couple days ago. Do you know if NFLPA only planned to sue IF the lawsuit was dismissed?

Perhaps they intended to do so all along but were waiting for any documents that may have been released if the arbitration claim had gone foward? The NFLPA is basing their suit in part on the arbitration claim the Redskins/Cowboys had; however, i find it odd that the NFLPA waited until the day after that was dismissed.

@ Joe - It sounds like the Redskins, Cowboys, Raiders and Saints are essentially witness for the plaintiff. If the NFLPA is suing the owners (is that who they are suing) is there any reason to think any of those teams will be forced to testify essentially against themselves. Is this civil court? Don’t you have to testify in civil court if youre a witness, even if youre the defendant? Any chance any of these 4 teams would want to join as plaintiffs? Is that even possible?

So if this is the “nuclear option” it makes you think the Redskins/Cowboys knew this would happen based off of their arguments in arbitration. It kind of sounds like we did go nuclear, right?[/quote]

I don't know. All I was told was a potential lawsuit by the NFLPA alleging collusion could be coming this week

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

Uggg...what a bunch of donkey idiots the owners are. Unless they get off on the language of the CBA waiving rights on these claims they're likely going to get their ass handed to them.

Jones and Snyder then are going to have to pay on both ends...for not colluding...and for their ass-hat partners actually colluding. Ain't that rich!

How in the world these guys thought they could do this, strike that...

How in the world these guys thought they could publicly punish two teams for this and that it wasn't openly admitting collusion is seriously baffling. I have to think their lawyers must not have been seriously consulted. I can't even think that Goodell thought this was a good idea. It justs reeks of a couple owners, dumb ones at that, deciding to seek revenge against other owners and openly poking the NFPLA in the eye with a stick in doing so. Epic stupidity.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;918287]And if they win it, it means the next CBA battle will be fought on VERY different terms.[/quote]

regardless i think it will be fought on very different terms. The NFLPA has been distrustful of the NFL for a while (remember all the concerns regarding the NFLs refusal to open its books?). Now there are additional points to cause distrust:

1. The League knew the salary cap would go DOWN this year; yet negotations were based on the understanding that it would go UP every year
2. When the NFLPA realized the Cap would go down in 2012, the NFL strong-armed them into agreeing to penalize the redskins and cowboys in exchange for deferring future cap money to 2012
3. During the discussions regarding the penalty, the NLFPA became aware that some collusion occured.
4. the NFLPA subsequently discovered that the NFL lied about the extent of hte collusion

Any goodwill the NFL built with the NFLPA in the recent discussions is completely gone. GONE. No doubt, the discovery process of this lawsuit will only uncover more of Goddell and the league's lies.

In the last CBA discussions, the NFL had all the leverage. I fully expect that to change in the new discussions, regardless of the outcome of this suit.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=Monksdown;918319]Don't they stand alone? That decision is not relavent to the collusion in question?[/quote]

Talking about the '93 reggie white vs nfl decision.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;918330]In the last CBA discussions, the NFL had all the leverage. I fully expect that to change in the new discussions, regardless of the outcome of this suit.[/quote]

The outcome is very important. While I do believe the next set of negotiations will be different and the NFLPA may have more leverage, if the league somehow loses this then the NFLPA has ALL the leverage in the next CBA. They'll have dinged the league for a massive amount of money that could stock up a "work stoppage" fund to help players financially and public sentiment will largely if not entirely rest on their side.

I SMH at the NFL big time for totally screwing the pooch on this. They basically made it so the NFLPA had to do this. The were so overly public about it. The NFLPA could have just looked the other way behind the scenes but once all the players kwen this had happened they were forced to respond in some manner.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

what really pisses me off about the NFLs position in this is that they had no reason at all to impose the penalties on the skins and cowboys, other than revenge. the NFL got what it wanted in the CBA talks - an deal that heavily favored the league. The skins and cowboys got what they wanted by getting their books clean. IMO Mara's thirst for blood created a complete mess for the league. Mara's public comments only made things worse. the league looks really bad right now, and deservedly so.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;918316]
I wouldn't speculate as to what the Skins "knew" would happen. I think (and I am pretty sure I said so early in the prior thread) that, once Mara made his comments, he opened the league up to this kind of action regardless of the Redskins filing a complaint. If anything, I think the Skins & Cowboys tried hard to contain the fight by pursuing it through their weakest legal avenue. Again, as far as the collusion goes, Snyder's and Jerry's hands are not exactly pristine. To a certain extent, they were playing both ends against the middle and it now has the potential to spiral wayyyy beyond their initial manipulations.[/quote]


[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Wow, so basicially Mara is one of the biggest idiots of all time?[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Still i think its reasonable to speculate the Redskins and Cowboys knew that this was a likely outcome partly based off of their own actions. Like you said the NFLPA was waiting on the possibility of documents released through discovery that the Redskins/Cowboys were requesting. You don’t request that in arbitration knowing the consequences if youre bluffing right? I think this thing passed being just a pissing match a while back. [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Whats interesting to me is that even though there is no apparent reason (right now) to think that well get our salary cap space back it feels like were winning in the form of good PR. It seems like almost everyone is on the Redskins/Cowboys side when it comes to this whole thing, and has been since the start. But that may have changed if the Redskins/Cowboys sued the NFL in a very public format. Letting the NFLPA do that may be better for positive PR, and ultimately the revenues, for 2 of the most popular teams. [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]
I feel like the first rule of defending yourself civilly is to countersue so perhaps making a “cross claim” is true too in this regard. And if the Redskins/Cowboys had already formed a relationship with the NFLPA maybe they could help in forging a potential settlement, which could make things a lot less ugly for everyone. The NFLPA can only sue for more money to go to its players in the form of salary cap, right? Im sure 2 of the biggest and most profitable teams wouldnt mind having a bigger salary cap.[/FONT][/COLOR]

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

Okay - I think it comes down to a balancing of two legal concepts: (1) settlements are settlements; versus (2) bad faith can't triumph.

[I][U]The procedural background:[/U][/I] In the early 90's Reggie White and the NFLPA sue the NFL and the 32 clubs (the "Defendants") in order to become a free agent. Long story short, in 1993, the Defendants settle the suit and, as part of that settlement agreement, agrees to institute a free agency system through negotiations with the NFLPA. As a result, each CBA agreement is incorporated into the terms of the 1993 Settlement [I]and[/I] is considered an amendment of that Settlement.

[I][U]Each Sides Arguments:[/U][/I] The NFLPA is now asserting that the owners actions in 2010 were collusive and constituted a breach of the 1993 Settlement as it was amended by the 2006 CBA. As such, they are asking the Court that presided over the 1993 settlement to reopen the case for the specific purpose of determining awarding damages for the alleged breach.

Based on the NFL's attorney's statements, the NFL will counter that the 1993 Settlement was amended [I]again[/I] in 2011 and, as part of that amendment and as a precondition for it, the NFLPA specifically waived any claims for collusion - [I]whether known or unknown to the NFLPA[/I]. As such, even if collusion occurred in breach of the 2006 Amendment, the NFLPA waived their rights to sue for such breaches in the 2011 Amendment.

[I][U]My Off The Cuff, Free Of Charge To Fellow Warpathers Analysis:[/U][/I] As I said at the beginning, two legal concepts appear to be in conflict. On one hand you have the principle that "settlement are meant to settle" versus the age old "liars never prosper".

The phrase "forego all claims known or unknown" is common in settlements and is meant to prohibit folks from coming back and nitpicking a settlement. People enter into settlements in order to resolve their differences and finally put an end to matters. One of the benefits of a settlement is that it is just what its name implies - a settlement so that parties can move on and not worry about old issues being constantly trotted out over and over again. Accordingly, courts tend to put the burden on those trying to reopen settlements and, usually, saying "gosh jeepers, I didnt realize all of the results" is not justification for reopening an agreed upon settlement. If you didn't do your due diligence or didn't fully realize the ramifications of your actions, well, too bad, so sad for you - should've thunk of that before signing your John Hancock.

ON THE OTHER HAND - and believe it or not - the law does not like liars. Operating in bad faith and working to deprive a party of facts and knowledge generally has ramifications. Settlements are contract negotions and, implicit in all such negotions, is the duty of good faith. Contracts entered into in bad faith will not be enforceable by the party exercising bad faith.

IN THIS CASE - the question to me seems to be, when settling collusion claims shouldn't you expect that the alleged collusion involved secrecy and, as such, by giving up your rights to allege collusion aren't you giving up your right to assert that the collusive parties acted secretly? [I]Or[/I] is the underlying lie in this case beyond the pale of reasonable expectations and, as such, something the NFLPA could not be deemed to reasonably have waived.

I really don't know how the court will read the waiver - it is dependent on the governing law and the specific facts. I have no doubt that is where the lawyers who make the big bucks will be generating their fees.

Disclaimer: All of the above is stream of conscience written analysis based on reading the complaint, no legal research, working only from memory, about 10 minutes of analytical thought and minimalist editing.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;918320]This. Part of the arbitration decision indicated that the Cowboys and Skins were seeking document discovery concerning the alleged collusion. I am sure the NFLPA was also interested in those types of documents and wanted to see what would come out in the arbitration.[/quote]

So just throwing it out there: the Arbitrator either dismissed because he agreed with the NFL/Goodell/Mara in that it was not his venue to hear the appeal.... or he dismissed based off the idea that both the NFL and NFLPA have an agreement and the two teams are crap out of luck in their appeal.

Now that the NFLPA has filed a suit does it not now show they did not agree to everything the NFL is saying was agreed to and could not the Arbitrator now say "his ruling was based off the idea both the NFL and NFLPA were in agreement" and reopen the case? Perhaps not though rulings are usually final, but this is interesting.

Now I wonder how much flack DSmith got from the players when they learned he supposedly agreed with the NFL. Again probably reading too much into it cause they could have voted him out right after he made the agreement and they didn't.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

Joe,

You think the NFLPA would say they were blackmailed or forced to take the deal? Now that they have positive proof through Mara's own statements that now they believe there was collusion and this is why the filing?

More then likely the NFLPA waited to see what new info would get produced but I still wonder if the Skins and or Boys will be the major witness in the case and if the two owners possibly agreed to be the witnesses.... but make it seem like they are hostile witnesses so the rest of the league believes they are being run through the mud also.

I'm telling you DS/JJ gave up too easily. Yesterday I was pissed and only figured they would be pissed also. They were too relaxed and calm with their "we are going to take are punishement" statement. They must have knew something like this was about to be sprung.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

The arbitrator very clearly said that the case was dismissed b/c the NFL and NFLPA agreed to the reallocation of salary cap. To reopen the arbitration case, I would imagine the NFLPA would have to repudate their ratification of the March Modification. Even if that is possible, I don't see them taking that step - mainly b/c the NFL would then set each team's cap lower (except the skins and cowboys) and a lot of players would be cut or have to renegotiate.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

I just read an article that said they(nflpa) may claim they agreed to it, because ultimately it proved collusion occurred.

On a sidenote, I think the players are really thinking they didn't get such a good deal now.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=Evilgrin;918352]I just read an article that said they(nflpa) may claim they agreed to it, because ultimately it proved collusion occurred.

On a sidenote, I think the players are really thinking they didn't get such a good deal now.[/quote]

Well if the NFLPA reprsents the players then I don't see how they could claim collusion if they knew about the agreed cap.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=SBXVII;918350]Joe, You think the NFLPA would say they were blackmailed or forced to take the deal? Now that they have positive proof through Mara's own statements that now they believe there was collusion and this is why the filing?[/quote]

That is exactly what they are saying:

[quote]28. Shortly before March 12, 2012, the NFL forced the NFLPA to agree (i) to material, NFL-determined reductions in the Redskins’ and Cowboys’ salary cap room for the 2012-2013 seasons, and (ii) to spread the corresponding amounts among all other Clubs, except for the Raiders and the Saints, as the take-it-or-leave-it “price” for the NFL agreeing to the NFLPA’s request to defer certain player benefit costs to later years when there would be increased television revenues to cover those costs. At the time, on March 11, 2012, the NFLPA and the players had no information or knowledge that the NFL was seeking this redistribution of salary cap room as a means of (i) penalizing the Redskins and Cowboys, and to a lesser degree the Raiders and Saints (via denied redistribution), for not fully abiding by the Collusive Agreement in 2010 and (ii) rewarding the other 28 conspiring Clubs for adhering to the Collusive Agreement in 2010. It was only after the NFL forced the NFLPA into this March 11, 2012 agreement that the NFL’s and the Owners’ collusive acts regarding the secret salary cap during 2010 finally came to light.[/quote]

[url]http://www.realredskins.com/files/nflpa-suit.pdf[/url]

Read the complaint folks. Lots of good stuff in it.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=SBXVII;918307]I think it's going to get interesting. Not only do the owners (to include the Skins) now have to worry about this claim but I'd imagine their possibly losing their exemption as well.


I wonder if Hoop has any incite he'd like to add to this new developement?[/quote]
I'll try not to incite any riots.

I read the claim, and it seems pretty silly to me. They're quoting Mike Florio and Dan Graziano as proof that the NFL colluded, for goodness' sake. That's worth discussion on a message board, but to sue for $1B with that as your proof? Really?

Would be more interesting if they provided some proof, or even hinted as to what the proof might be that the "secret number" was $123m.

Also think it's laughable that they're arguing that they agreed to the salary cap redistribution on March 11, but were SHOCKED to learn on March 12 that it was designed to punish 4 teams for not sticking to the secret agreement.

They signed off on the penalties on March 11, without knowing what the penalties were for? Really?

Then they only realised what was going on when they read ESPN.com and Profootballtalk.com on March 12? Really?

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that the chief value in this complaint is PR. I'm guessing DeMaurice Smith is tired of hearing about how he gave in to the League by agreeing to the Skins / Cowboys cap re-allocations, and he's tired of the League making him look silly in the bounty penalty discussion, and is trying to show his constituency that he's standing up for them.

Unless they have some proof not laid out in the complaint, I don't see how this has any chance of winning. I'm guessing it's a big hurdle just to show they have the ability to sue here.

Re: NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners
 

[quote=Monksdown;918313]I dont think the Skins/Cowboys likely were in talks with the PA, as they are still the enemy really. I think it's probably more closely tied to the PA being prepared to file this the moment the arbitrator rendered judgement. You hold off in filing to possibly gather more ammunition for the filing. The arbitrators decision decided that they would have to run with what they had already. Basically public statements.[/quote]

I think this is on the money. I think the NFLPA decide they were going to sue, and were waiting to see if they got any juicy evidence out of the arbitration hearing. One of the key elements of the arbitration was that the Skins and Cowboys were seeking discovery on certain documents - that the NFLPA would then be able to receive.

I believe the Skins and Cowboys were using that potential discovery as a threat to get the League to settle on reduced penalties - if the arbitration claim wasn't dismissed.

The NFLPA was hoping to get new information, and waited to file this suit until it was clear they weren't getting anything new.