Updated Title: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Reinstated

[hooskins]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

You'd be really jealous of what I'm doing tomorrow...

Anyhow, teams will be notified in the morning of how to proceed. I suspect it will be "don't do anything for now"

If you're kicking the futbol with Ochocinco or speed skating with Apolo Anton Ohno, I'm gonna be super jealous.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by mbedner3420

Was that intended to sound as gay as it does? Lol

Well I'm not gay and happily married, but.... if thats your bag? ....Don't ask.... don't tell...

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Your semi-informed law knowledge is better than my semi-educated guesses. You're probably right, that adds a whole other layer of confusion.

I am guessing that as this confusion begins to get cleared up, the NFL is going to look like a bunch of assholes. Business is going to have to resume at some point, and the league will not be prepared in the least.

Free agency will start at an awkward time, or there will be no salary cap, or teams will be in the dark. OR... the NFL will cave in its negotiations with the players and accept a deal just to keep some rules in place and maintain competitive balance.

The players have all the leverage at this point. What a mess.

Yeah, but they will look that way b/c the Judge has created a no-win situation for them. No matter what they do, they are at serious risk of being found either in contempt or colluding. Do nothing - contemp. Agree to adopt the old CBA rules - collusion (do they adopt last year's rules which a lot of player's hated or those of some prior year? No matter which they adopt, aren't they colluding to prohibit certain players who are out of contract from moving (what about the undrafted original free agent who would normally be an Exclusive Restrictied Free agent?). The old CBA rules (regardless of year) had multiple areas where, under collective bargaining, the players union could agree on behalf of all players - even it made some players unhappy. Now, with no collective bargaining entity, any agreement by teams to impose across the board restrictions (we will treat all 2nd year players as EFA's) is blatant collusion.

I haven't read the original opinion of J. Nelson, but the more I think about it, the more I am convinced it is probably poorly written and a bad case of result oriented (as opposed to law based) judging.

[mbedner3420]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Well I'm not gay and happily married, but.... if thats your bag? ....Don't ask.... don't tell...

Nope not gay FYI

[SBXVII]

By the way I love this commercial..

YouTube - Coors Light Home Draft Commercial: (You're not on the list)

I told my wife she was not on the list either.... lol.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by mbedner3420

Nope not gay FYI

I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express on night....

I hope that doesn't count?

[SmootSmack]

Schneed just threw his laptop across his room...so let's get back on track here

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Lotus

I think you meant "owners," not "players," and I agree with you and BHA. I think Nelson knows what she is doing. She's trying to get owners to get a CBA done now before they might face anti-trust music.

Yes. I meant owners.

IMHO Nelson should have stayed the lawsuit until the NLRB made a decision as to the players decision to decertify. IF the decertification was illegal, THEN the owners have no "anti-trust music" to face. Instead, in a case of judicial activism, Nelson injects herself into parralel proceedings writes the score, hires the musicians and rents the hall so that she can eventually force the owners to listen to her "Anti-trust Symphony In Green".

As I said, result oriented judiciating as opposed to law based judginess.

It's just not very scientifical.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by hooskins

Your last sentences sum it up the best. Truely a mess. I honestly felt the owners had a huge advantage over the players until some of the recent rulings.

Simply speaking, the owners have the bankroll and they can afford to deal with short term losses. Players, on the other hand, relatively need money more than owners in the short run and they have finite careers. Not sure how long the average NFL career is, but not more than 6 to 8 years I suspect. They have to play now to get paid and if some of these recent rulings didn't occur the owners would be fine to keep things as is, since they can afford to do so.

Not too many industries have built-in safeguards to ensure profits.

[GTripp0012]

It would seem like the NFL could get around this problem by setting a specific time to begin the new league year sometime in the immediate future. It's not exactly an extension lockout to say that the league year shall begin at 11:59 pm on Sunday night. Just treat draft weekend like the time between the super bowl and the March 4th start of the league year.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Yes. I meant owners.

IMHO Nelson should have stayed the lawsuit until the NLRB made a decision as to the players decision to decertify. IF the decertification was illegal, THEN the owners have no "anti-trust music" to face. Instead, in a case of judicial activism, Nelson injects herself into parralel proceedings writes the score, hires the musicians and rents the hall so that she can eventually force the owners to listen to her "Anti-trust Symphony In Green".

As I said, result oriented judiciating as opposed to law based judginess.

It's just not very scientifical.

I'm kinda with you on this. I think the owners had a good claim in regards to the players admitting they were decertifying in order to have some leverage against the owners. Which is illegal. I think it was also proven because the players chose to decertify several hours prior to the time limit. Clearly the players were not interested in trying to work anything out until the last minute. The reason the players won in the 80's was because they decertified after the time limit showing they were in good faith trying to work out an agreement.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Schneed just threw his laptop across his room...so let's get back on track here

he saved it, thought that it was traveling too fast down the hallway so he jumped in front of it

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

he saved it, thought that it was traveling too fast down the hallway so he jumped in front of it

He might want to try out for the Caps... lol. If he can stop a laptop he can stop a puck.

[SmootSmack]

NFL Lockout: Questions and answers | NJ.com

[Dirtbag59]

Speaking of Free Agency. NFL Network is running a top 10 of the worst free agent signings in history....wonder if any of our signings will make it. Pretty tough. They're up to 6 with David Boston. $47 million contract, $12 signing bonus released after one year. Drug use, PED's, sleeping in meetings, didn't get along with the media.

10. Emmit Smith - Cards
9. Scott Mitchell - Lions
8. Ahman Green - Houston
7. Jeff Garcia - Browns
6. David Boston - Chargers
5. Neil O'Donnel - Jets
4. Andre Rison - Browns
3. Larry Brown/Desmond Howard - Raiders
2. Alvin Harper - Bucs