NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners

[SBXVII]

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.

[SBXVII]

I love this....

The agreement reads that the "parties stipulate to the dismissal with prejudice of all claims, known and unknown, whether pending or not" including "asserted collusion with respect to the 2010 league year," and was signed by Kessler. Kessler said on the NFLPA's conference call on Wednesday that a Minnesota court rejected the stipulation.

On Aug. 11, 2011, Judge David Doty "ordered that all claims pending regarding the stipulation and settlement agreement are dismissed. All other outstanding motions are dismissed," according to a court order. Kessler said Doty's specification on "pending" cases left the door open for cases that were not pending, such as the current collusion case

Who knows the judge might have helped them in this case. lol.

[JoeRedskin]

@ Dirtbag - The NFLPA is not alleging that the collusion is criminal or prohibited by some statute (at least not in their complaint) and, thus, illegal. Rather they are saying the collusion violated the terms of the Settlement Agreement between the NFL and the NFLPA and the implied covenant of good faith. I don't know if there is a statutory prohibition but, since it's a very, very strong legal position, I would have expected to see it in the complaint if it existed.

While the collusion may have been in violation of the 2006 Agreement, I don't see anything to indicate it was in violation of a statute.

@SBXVII - The quote you cite seems to be pretty strong indication that Judge Doty did not accept a stipulation about "unknown claims". If so, he may have been recognizing the principle that courts won't sanction through adoption a party's bad faith dealings. Do you have a cite to the article from which you got it? In addition to the stipulation, however, there is supposedly a separate waiver by the NFLPA. I suspect, however, if the judge doesn't recognize one waiver, he won't recognize another.

[Giantone]

Just a question for Joe or Hoop,I thought the NFLPA waived their right to sue in the recent CBA?

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

@ Dirtbag - The NFLPA is not alleging that the collusion is criminal or prohibited by some statute (at least not in their complaint) and, thus, illegal. Rather they are saying the collusion violated the terms of the Settlement Agreement between the NFL and the NFLPA and the implied covenant of good faith. I don't know if there is a statutory prohibition but, since it's a very, very strong legal position, I would have expected to see it in the complaint if it existed.

While the collusion may have been in violation of the 2006 Agreement, I don't see anything to indicate it was in violation of a statute.

@SBXVII - The quote you cite seems to be pretty strong indication that Judge Doty did not accept a stipulation about "unknown claims". If so, he may have been recognizing the principle that courts won't sanction through adoptio
n a party's bad faith dealings. Do you have a cite to the article from which you got it? In addition to the stipulation, however, there is supposedly a separate waiver by the NFLPA. I suspect, however, if the judge doesn't recognize one waiver, he won't recognize another.

Basically I went to the NFL.com's site and found it finally there. I can't post the link right now it can later.

[SBXVII]

I can see the case now.....

NFLPA: "We would like to call our first witness, the Redskins."
Skins: "What do we recall about any agreed CAP limit?"
NFL: "We'd like to take a recess your honor".

NFL to Skins: "ok, we'll give you all your CAP back."

Skins: "your honor, we really don't recall any set limit mentioned".


LOL.

[SmootSmack]

NFL - Many layers to NFLPA collusion case - ESPN

[FRPLG]

The mere notion that either the Skins or Cowboys will rat in open court about this is silly. The NFLPA is suing for 1 BILLION dollars and asking for treble damages which could mean 3 BILLION dollars. That's money that will come straight out of JJ's and DS's pockets. Aint gonna happen.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Just a question for Joe or Hoop,I thought the NFLPA waived their right to sue in the recent CBA?

Well, that is the crux of the issue - did they or didn't they. See my earlier post or read the article cited by SS which <ahem> says essentially what my earlier post does.

[HoopheadVII]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Well, that is the crux of the issue - did they or didn't they. See my earlier post or read the article cited by SS which <ahem> says essentially what my earlier post does.

I'll defer to JoeRedskin on this one. His input is clearly more valuable than any guesses I could offer here.

[skinsfan69]

All these lawsuits are getting annoying.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

All these lawsuits are getting annoying.

?

What other law suits are you talking about. The whole mess is getting annoying ...yes. I agree. But I think its funny. This is like understanding all the behind the scene's going ons with WWE. lol. One big soap opera.

But in reality there has only been one law suit. The NFLPA vs. NFL. Ours was just an appeal to the punishment, and it really wasn't the punishment but rather the process/proceedure that led to the punishment.

[SBXVII]

Who knows what will happen. More then likely Judge Dotty will dismiss this case citing the signed agreement to drop all standing in regards to collusion. Maybe all this law suit business is just a front to make it seem like DSmith was not in cahoots with the NFL to the public and all this is just a big waist of time and will get dismissed but it will make some fans sit back and say... oh, maybe the NFL was not taking sides with the NFL and got bamboozled also.

or.... Judge Dotty could say the NFLPA has an arguement here and will want to hear the case. If it gets to this stage I think that Goodell and Mara as well as the other owners should be scared.

On a side note could all this be some sort of way to get Goodell out of office? and push Mara out of his position on the CEC? could it happen through this scenario?

[Coff]

Perhaps most interesting about all of this is that the NFL and the owners had clearly crossed their legal Ts and doted their legal Is, and seem to be in prime legal position to fight off any challenges from the Skins or Cowboys or from the union. As we have seen, the Skins and Cowboys lost their appeal, and the NFL has a strong position against collusion charges in that (to put it simply, and probably incorrectly) part of the new CBA agreement was that no grievances under the old agreement could be filed. It’s hard not to feel that the NFL has been planning this for years.

But regardless of how secure they feel, it was nonetheless an absolutely asinine move for the owners to pull off. What do they get out of this? Egg on the face of two of the owners they don’t like, and a million and a half extra dollars on their respective teams' cap next year. And what will it cost them? An absolutely acrimonious relationship with the players, the effects of which are going to carry over to the next CBA negotiations and threaten the labor peace the NFL has enjoyed for decades.

Smooth move owners.

[JoeRedskin]

Another good article laying out the issues: NFL Players Association lawsuit against NFL could be decided by Judge Doty - Michael McCann - SI.com