WaterMan Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=nfp-...players_lawsuit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Good Bye Week 1 Seriously? A twitter link with no relationship to your subject whatsoever? I should have known better than to bypass my ignore on you... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lennykravitz2004 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 (edited) Here's the link to the full story from the original link from WaterMan. MINNEAPOLIS (AP)—As the labor battle between NFL owners and players moved from the bargaining table to the courtroom, judges at each stop have urged both sides to reach an agreement before they have to issue significant rulings. The latest nudge in that direction came on Monday from U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson, who scheduled a hearing on the owners’ motion to dismiss an antitrust lawsuit from a group of players for Sept. 12. Coincidentally or not, Sept. 12 is four days after the regular season is set to open in Green Bay, and one day after the first Sunday of games for the 2011 season. Shortly after the owners filed their motion to dismiss on Monday, Nelson announced when she would hear arguments on the motion. The timing is significant, given that the Packers are scheduled to host the New Orleans Saints on Sept. 8, and the NFL has big plans for the first Sunday of action to commemorate the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks. Both sides hope that hearing never has to happen. The NFL and its players held settlement discussions in Chicago last week, but there is no sign a new collective bargaining agreement is imminent. A group of players including superstar quarterbacks Tom Brady(notes), Peyton Manning(notes) and Drew Brees(notes) filed the antitrust lawsuit against the owners, alleging their lockout of the players is illegal. Nelson initially ruled in favor of the players in April, requiring the league to lift the lockout and let the players get back to work. That ruling has been appealed to the 8th Circuit in St. Louis, where a three-judge panel heard arguments on Friday and is considering the matter. The 8th Circuit put Nelson’s ruling on hold while it considers the appeal, though it is unclear when they will issue a ruling. In the meantime, the judges urged both sides to get back to the bargaining table and hammer out a deal. Judge Kermit Bye told attorneys on Friday that if no deal is done before the panel comes to a conclusion, they will likely offer up a decision that will be “probably something both sides aren’t going to like.” The owners argue, among other things, that Nelson did not have the jurisdiction to lift the lockout while the National Labor Relations Board is considering an unfair labor charge brought by the league against the players. The NLRB’s regional office in New York forwarded a preliminary report to the national board in Washington, but a spokeswoman said Monday it “doesn’t mean a decision is around the corner.” The two sides are engaged in a sometimes bitter dispute over how to divide $9 billion in revenue, a fight that has already caused some minicamps and offseason programs to be lost, free agency and trades to be delayed and resulted in hundreds of employees for teams across the league having their paychecks cut. The start of training camp is less than two months away, and teams are already making contingency plans if the lockout drags on. The Minnesota Vikings plan to have a date set this week that, if the lockout continued to that point, would force them to cancel training camp in Mankato. The owners are required to file a full brief supporting their motion by Aug. 1. ETA article Edited June 7, 2011 by lennykravitz2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 I wonder if she set Sept 12 as the date simply to concentrate the minds of both these sets of buffoons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 (edited) Actually, if it weren't settled by that date, then we wouldn't have football until at least week 4-5, up to as late as week 7... Take note of the bolded in the article below: NFL preps for possible 8-game season Despite recent developments in the labor battle that are seen as positive by some, the NFL is planning for a regular season as short as eight games, the Sports Business Journal reported Monday. The reported plan essentially means that in order to have a 2011 season a new collective bargaining agreement would need to be reached no later than early November. Under the reported plan, the eight-game season would start in late November and culminate with the Super Bowl in Indianapolis Feb. 12. The NFL has previously cleared the way for the Super Bowl to be played as late as Feb. 12. The league is looking to give teams five weeks before the season to sign free agents, hold training camps, and possibly play preseason games. According to NBC Sports' ProFootballTalk, the NFL has said it needs at minimum three weeks between a deal and the start of the season, making early November the latest possible date for a labor agreement. Lawyers for the NFL owners and players appeared before a federal appeals court Friday to argue the league's appeal of a ruling that invalidated the lockout. The court urged the sides to find a solution to the labor dispute, with one judge saying neither side will like the eventual ruling. The court is expected to take weeks to decide the appeal. The hearing followed three days of talks in Chicago that the two sides set up on their own without lawyers present. Time hasn't been much of a factor yet, but it will become one quickly, with the bare minimum of 3-5 weeks needed to even minimally prepare for an NFL season. Edited June 7, 2011 by delusions of granduer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Actually, if it weren't settled by that date, then we wouldn't have football until at least week 4-5, up to as late as week 7... Take note of the bolded in the article below: Time hasn't been much of a factor yet, but it will become one quickly. very quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peepinmofo Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 If there are any regular season games missed, I will boycott the NFL for at LEAST this year. So there might be some open teams in all my leagues as I will not be playing this year if that is the case. Extreme? Maybe. But Im sick of the BS with this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chargerz Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 If there are any regular season games missed, I will boycott the NFL for at LEAST this year. So there might be some open teams in all my leagues as I will not be playing this year if that is the case. Extreme? Maybe. But Im sick of the BS with this. I hear you. Whether or not the labor dispute gets resolved this year I've emotionally already checked out. I just don't give a damn anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peepinmofo Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 I hear you. Whether or not the labor dispute gets resolved this year I've emotionally already checked out. I just don't give a damn anymore. Im so close to just saying F it. Hopefully a lot of people are. Because if everyone continues as they did lasdt year (watching games, going to them, buying merch, etc.), then none of this mattered to them. It does to me. In this day and age, there are FAR more important things to worry about than football IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delfamdelfam Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 I'm only been hearing good news but I don't know. It seems between now and the time of the court decision(July?) there could be a deal done, it seems like the best time for both sides to get it done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearBroncos Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Im so close to just saying F it. Hopefully a lot of people are. Because if everyone continues as they did lasdt year (watching games, going to them, buying merch, etc.), then none of this mattered to them. It does to me. In this day and age, there are FAR more important things to worry about than football IMO. To be candid, I wish there was (BTW, I'm so anti union that I cringe and even the thought of me typing this) fan based union that orginized to the point it put these cats back in place.... Okay, OKAY.... nevermind..... I can't do it..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 (edited) To be candid, I wish there was (BTW, I'm so anti union that I cringe and even the thought of me typing this) fan based union that orginized to the point it put these cats back in place.... Okay, OKAY.... nevermind..... I can't do it..... Ummm, that would be called a boycott... You don't have to have a union to stand up for consumer rights. (ETA: BTW, I will be doing much the same if there's no football played. If they aren't willing to find a comprimise for my hard-earned cash, they can fight for whatever scraps we're willing to give them like the MLB.) Edited June 7, 2011 by delusions of granduer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lennykravitz2004 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 I must admit, I'm kind of glad to hear some of these sentiments, as I thought I was the only one. "Hope" can be a dangerous thing, IMHO. I've been "hoping" things get done soon, and each day that passes, with more and more asinine stories coming out, part of me wishes the NFL has the same outcome as the NHL when they shut it down years ago. My 100% apathy about hockey has improved to about 90% apathetic these days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearBroncos Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Ummm, that would be called a boycott... You don't have to have a union to stand up for consumer rights. (ETA: BTW, I will be doing much the same if there's no football played. If they aren't willing to find a comprimise for my hard-earned cash, they can fight for whatever scraps we're willing to give them like the MLB.) A boycott is one thing, I was however referring to a organized group but I'm against that in principle. They are great until they become corrupt which is inevitable! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 A boycott is one thing, I was however referring to a organized group but I'm against that in principle. They are great until they become corrupt which is inevitable! What you are talking about is the business of unions... Yes, any group can become corrupt and power-hungy when they're taking in money (i.e. dues), but organizing a movement to not give money to an inferior or corrupt product or group is exactly the opposite of that... It's combatting those money/power-hungy folks by denying them the income that allows for that corruption. A boycott in itself cannot become corrupt unless it is used to make money for the people taking part in it. In this case of a consumer-driven boycott, it absolutely would not become corrupt, and is very much a tool against that. BTW, I understand why people have beefs with unions, which in many cases I agree about how they can be just as bad or worse than the owners they seek to combat, but let's not forget that unions were formed in the first place in response to massive exploitations of labor by management. In other words, in many cases it's damned if you do, or work for peanuts in terrible conditions if you don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearBroncos Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 What you are talking about is the business of unions... Yes, any group can become corrupt and power-hungy when they're taking in money (i.e. dues), but organizing a movement to not give money to an inferior or corrupt product or group is exactly the opposite of that... It's combatting those money/power-hungy folks by denying them the income that allows for that corruption. A boycott in itself cannot become corrupt unless it is used to make money for the people taking part in it. In this case of a consumer-driven boycott, it absolutely would not become corrupt, and is very much a tool against that. BTW, I understand why people have beefs with unions, which in many cases I agree about how they can be just as bad or worse than the owners they seek to combat, but let's not forget that unions were formed in the first place in response to massive exploitations of labor by management. In other words, in many cases it's damned if you do, or work for peanuts in terrible conditions if you don't. Just to be clear, I'm in total agreement with the bolded statement. Owners at one time took advantage of the lack of laws and protectionisms. The Unions were vital to the success of this country however, they lost sight of what their purpose was and instead of fulfilling their purposes to protect the average working, they continued to demand more, inflating cost to not only the consumer, but the union members. The dues continued to go up and so did wages. I need only look at GM as a fine example of how cost surpassed quality and efficiency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearBroncos Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Or another beautiful example, the USPS! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuke'em ttg Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 I hear you. Whether or not the labor dispute gets resolved this year I've emotionally already checked out. I just don't give a damn anymore. plus we can't lose any tacos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Im so close to just saying F it. Hopefully a lot of people are. Because if everyone continues as they did lasdt year (watching games, going to them, buying merch, etc.), then none of this mattered to them. It does to me. In this day and age, there are FAR more important things to worry about than football IMO. It's a nine billion dollar business. We just happen to love said business... But it's still a business, and this is something that can happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 (edited) I will not come back as a fan unless a cheerleader from the Cowboys, Broncos, Raiders or Eagles debases herself with me. My affections are not easily won back. Oh who am I kidding. I've already ordered a fresh saddle so I can ride Aaron Rodgers dick for whatever amount of games they deem I should be exposed to. Edited June 8, 2011 by Ditkaless Wonders Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delfamdelfam Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 well according to reports Goodell, Smith, the players and owner, and Boylan had another secret meeting today. I guess that is a good sign. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolverines Fan Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 (edited) Per profootballtalk.com Lawyers remain on the bench during negotiations Posted by Mike Florio on June 7, 2011, 8:11 PM EDT ReutersThe good news is that the NFL and the players resumed their not-so-secret negotiations on Tuesday. The better news is that the lawyers were told to stay away. Adam Schefter of ESPN and Jason LaCanfora of NFL Network each have supplied attendee information that makes clear the absence of the men whom both sides perceive to be an impediment to the process. LaCanfora reports that the same cast of characters as last week attended this week’s session. For the owners, that was Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, Patriots owner Robert Kraft, Panthers owner Jerry Richardson, Steelers owner Art Rooney, Giants co-owner John Mara, and Commissioner Roger Goodell. For the NFLPA*, the persons present consisted of executive director DeMaurice Smith, Chiefs linebacker Mike Vrabel, Broncos safety Brian Dawkins, Jets fullback Tony Richardson, Colts center Jeff Saturday, and NFLPA president Kevin Mawae. Also attending was U.S. Magistrate Judge Arthur Boylan. Per Schefter, the meeting occurred at a hotel in New York City. By all appearances, the talks will continue Wednesday. As long as the parties can keep the lawyers out, there is cause for real optimism. Kraft said earlier this year that, if the lawyers were pushed away from the table, a deal could be reached in a week. With three days of talks last week and one this week, maybe we’ll have some unexpected good news in time for the weekend. Edited June 8, 2011 by Wolverines Fan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunning Runt Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Per profootballtalk.com Lawyers remain on the bench during negotiations Posted by Mike Florio on June 7, 2011, 8:11 PM EDT ReutersThe good news is that the NFL and the players resumed their not-so-secret negotiations on Tuesday. The better news is that the lawyers were told to stay away. Adam Schefter of ESPN and Jason LaCanfora of NFL Network each have supplied attendee information that makes clear the absence of the men whom both sides perceive to be an impediment to the process. LaCanfora reports that the same cast of characters as last week attended this week’s session. For the owners, that was Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, Patriots owner Robert Kraft, Panthers owner Jerry Richardson, Steelers owner Art Rooney, Giants co-owner John Mara, and Commissioner Roger Goodell. For the NFLPA*, the persons present consisted of executive director DeMaurice Smith, Chiefs linebacker Mike Vrabel, Broncos safety Brian Dawkins, Jets fullback Tony Richardson, Colts center Jeff Saturday, and NFLPA president Kevin Mawae. Also attending was U.S. Magistrate Judge Arthur Boylan. Per Schefter, the meeting occurred at a hotel in New York City. By all appearances, the talks will continue Wednesday. As long as the parties can keep the lawyers out, there is cause for real optimism. Kraft said earlier this year that, if the lawyers were pushed away from the table, a deal could be reached in a week. With three days of talks last week and one this week, maybe we’ll have some unexpected good news in time for the weekend. The problem is that for the players, DeMaurice Smith IS in fact a lawyer for the plaintiffs (the players who have sued the NFL). So while the NFL is not represented by a lawyer in these discussions, the players are - and to make matters worse, by one who originally played the decertification card to begin with and has shown he has no interest in real negotiation, but rather prefers litigation. I don't see these talks going anywhere as long as Smith is involved. Hope I'm wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted June 8, 2011 Author Share Posted June 8, 2011 (edited) Seriously? A twitter link with no relationship to your subject whatsoever? I should have known better than to bypass my ignore on you... How much football will be played in Week 1 if the pending lawsuit won't be argued until Sept. 12th? Edited June 8, 2011 by WaterMan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delfamdelfam Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 you guys should read Albert Breer's tweets, there very encouraging and he has insider access: http://twitter.com/#!/albertbreer some recent tweets today: What I'm hearing on the NFL/NFLPA summit ... "Very serious talks" on all levels -- the timing, the format and the parties that are there. One PA source said they're in a "30-day window"; League source: 4-6 weeks needed from hard negotiating to drafting deal Also in the story, league sources say cancellation of preseason = $1 billion in lost revenue. Could wreck talks. and then here's the story he wrote about it: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8203...get-a-deal-done Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.