Monday Morning Quarterback: Part 2

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Tue May 17, 2011 4:35 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
Okay Tom, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals granted the permanent stay yesterday and basically shot down Judge Susan Nelson's ruling from the district court. What's worse is that they also let the players know that the two judges will likely rule the same way on June 3rd, so if they want to wait until July to find out that the lockout isn't going away that's their prerogative. But if you're the NFLPA and its lawyers, what do you think of yesterday's decision and what do you do next? I think the players are done. I Tweeted last night that I don't see any way they can win this thing now. I see no reason to believe the court will rule differently in June than it ruled last night. What possible new information could be presented between now and then that will lead them to issue a different ruling?

I think it's over for the players. They have two choices in my opinion:

1. Make serious concessions to the owners and get a deal done.

2. Wait it out and hope there is a division in the owners' ranks.

I see no reason to believe No. 2 will occur. The owners have plotted this lockout for two years. If there was going to be a division in the ranks it would've occurred by now. The only option I see for the players now is to get a deal done as soon as possible.

Considering there hasn't been a shred of common sense applied to this situation since it began I do not believe that will occur. I think we'll sit here until the June ruling when the players will lose again.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue May 17, 2011 4:37 am

You'd think that this would create some urgency from the players, but as ESPN's Sal Paolantonio reported this morning, only Mike Vrabel was there among the players. No Jeff Saturday, no one other than Vrabel, who had missed yesterday's session because of travel delays. That's not a very good sign that the players are ready to sit down today and get closer to a deal, is it? I actually heard positive reports yesterday that the owners made a new proposal and that Carl Eller thought things were moving in the right direction, but today's lack of participation isn't a good sign, is it?

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Tue May 17, 2011 4:38 am

No it's not and there are conflicting reports about whether the new proposal would push things in a positive direction. I think the owners hold the upper hand now and will continue to hold it and it's up to the players to give in and get a deal done.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue May 17, 2011 4:40 am

Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
Okay Tom, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals granted the permanent stay yesterday and basically shot down Judge Susan Nelson's ruling from the district court. What's worse is that they also let the players know that the two judges will likely rule the same way on June 3rd, so if they want to wait until July to find out that the lockout isn't going away that's their prerogative. But if you're the NFLPA and its lawyers, what do you think of yesterday's decision and what do you do next? I think the players are done. I Tweeted last night that I don't see any way they can win this thing now. I see no reason to believe the court will rule differently in June than it ruled last night. What possible new information could be presented between now and then that will lead them to issue a different ruling?

I think it's over for the players. They have two choices in my opinion:

1. Make serious concessions to the owners and get a deal done.

2. Wait it out and hope there is a division in the owners' ranks.

I see no reason to believe No. 2 will occur. The owners have plotted this lockout for two years. If there was going to be a division in the ranks it would've occurred by now. The only option I see for the players now is to get a deal done as soon as possible.

Considering there hasn't been a shred of common sense applied to this situation since it began I do not believe that will occur. I think we'll sit here until the June ruling when the players will lose again. [/QUOTE]I agree with you, but I also think the players will:

1. Wait to see what the ruling is on the TV contract. Judge Doty seems like he's going to spank the owners there and the players are seeking $707 million in compensation that I believe can be tripled in damages. If the owners get a big spanking there, it could bring the two sides closer to a compromise figure on the rest of the contract.

2. DeMaurice Smith, the head of the NFL Players Association, could continue to act smug and play this out through the courts. I think that would be a big mistake because the owners are not going to give in and at the end of the day the players are going to have to compromise at some point. Hopefully the players and their agents will put pressure on Smith to return to the negotiating table shortly and find a middle ground before training camps open.

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Tue May 17, 2011 4:42 am

The problem I see with the TV ruling is the owners will just appeal it. So there will no finality there either. We saw with the Judge Nelson ruling how that had no impact whatsoever due to an appeal. I just have little faith at this time that the courts will put an end to this. I thought if the players won this round it would but now that the players lost I think all hope for the courts doing what both sides appear unwilling to do is over.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue May 17, 2011 4:43 am

There are all kinds of reports of players taking out loans at 15% and as high as 30% to get through the off-season. Many of them counted on their workout bonuses to get by and you know there are a lot of players who are hurting financially. When do we start to see the cracks in the solidarity there and when do they start putting pressure on Smith and the union to get a deal done? Does nothing happen until July and then both sides get serious?? Or can something get done before we reach that critical juncture?

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Tue May 17, 2011 4:47 am

The problem here is that until there is a threat of missing games there will be no pressure on either side to get a deal done. The players don't mind sitting out training camp and mini-camps etc. They'll take the time off. It's when there's a threat of losing paychecks that they would start feeling the pressure.

I think the best-case scenario at this point is a mid-to-late July ending for this assuming neither side makes a major concession to try and get a deal done earlier.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue May 17, 2011 4:50 am

So help me here: The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that there is no irreparable harm done to the players in this lockout. Yet we have hundreds of free agents who can't play football because the NFL has a monopoly and we have hundreds of undrafted rookies who can't sign a contract or play professional football because the NFL has a monopoly. And the NFL has an anti-trust exemption. Am I missing something here or is there the potential for irreparable harm with a permanent stay to the lockout?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue May 17, 2011 4:51 am

More on that subject above from the court's own opinion:

"Both sides raise valid points, and this is a case in which one party or the other likely will suffer some degree of irreparable harm no matter how this court resolves the motion for a stay pending appeal," the majority wrote. "We do not agree, however, with the district court's apparent view that the balance of the equities tilts heavily in favor of the Players. The district court gave little or no weight to the harm caused to the League by an injunction issued in the midst of an ongoing dispute over terms and conditions of employment."

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Tue May 17, 2011 4:53 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
So help me here: The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that there is no irreparable harm done to the players in this lockout. Yet we have hundreds of free agents who can't play football because the NFL has a monopoly and we have hundreds of undrafted rookies who can't sign a contract or play professional football because the NFL has a monopoly. And the NFL has an anti-trust exemption. Am I missing something here or is there the potential for irreparable harm with a permanent stay to the lockout? Their ruling makes no sense to me in that regard. There is clearly a tremendous amount of harm being done to all of the players, but especially to unsigned free agents. They are being denied an opportunity to gain employment. If that doesn't constitute irreparable harm I don't know what does.

The court sure treated Judge Nelson like the ugly stepchild last night. They tore her ruling to shreds.