Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopheadVII
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.
|
#1- any good lawyer knows you don't give up all your evidence up front.
#2- anyone reviewing this case can see the NFLPA really didn't have a choice. In other words the choice was not made with out duress. The NFLPA was going to get screwed either way.
#3- I think almost all of us could guess the NFL was colluding but it was not admitted to by the NFL until after the meeting with the NFLPA and the two teams were punished.
I think now that the NFLPA has evidence of collusion and the fact they were forced to agree to what the NFL wanted to do should entitle them to have it brought before a judge to be heard. Honestly I think the NFLPA might win this. Possibly to the detriment to all the owners but again I doubt it gets that far. I foresee some form of settlement between the NFL and NFLPA. But I have been wrong before. Would it make the whole 2011 CBA null and void forcing both sides to start over again? This would give the NFLPA a huge advantage in negotiations.