NFL Owners in court: Expect Lockout to be at least a year.

[LoyaltyisaCurse]

...“I think six months, as was in the contractual agreement here, all that suggests is the absolute bare minimum. Both sides agreed in that very different context to assume the labor agreement would run its course. Upon expiration, no suit could be brought for at least six months. By my way of reckoning, that’s not the outer limit. That’s the absolute minimum because even the union was willing to agree to that time period. I would think if you’re looking for a time period, the least that you would have is one business cycle. In the context of this league, that would be at least a year,” Clement said.

Ultimately, Clement is not only saying that the league can continue to lock out the players beyond the six-month period, but the league is also protected from significant antitrust damages...

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_y...ckout_picture_painted_at_appeals_court_060311

 

[Cardinals.Ken]

 

[Red Dawn]

Losing a year is going to be hard to swallow. I wonder if the owners can or will trot out replacement teams again. If they do, i'll be thinking about cancelling my Sunday ticket. I really don't want to pay for that quality of football, but who knows, we may win a Super Bowl with a bunch of scrubs, and the record book will have an asterisk like the Pottsville championship. College football is looking better all the time and i'm sure I can find something else to do on Sundays.

 

[LoyaltyisaCurse]

What happens if they do lose the entire season? Do teams still retain the rights to players drafted in 2011 if they never sign? What will be the draft order for 2012 and will it be a total redraft with 2011 and 2012 players...

 

[TigToad]

I don't think they can have replacement players this time. It is a lockout, not a strike.

Losing a year is going to be hard to swallow. I wonder if the owners can or will trot out replacement teams again. If they do, i'll be thinking about cancelling my Sunday ticket. I really don't want to pay for that quality of football, but who knows, we may win a Super Bowl with a bunch of scrubs, and the record book will have an asterisk like the Pottsville championship. College football is looking better all the time and i'm sure I can find something else to do on Sundays.

 

[AsUdUdE]

If no season, the only logical way to determine draft order would be to have the same order as 2011...

The BIGGER question would be what happens to the 2011 picks if they are not techincally under contract...

Here is the deal though...

I don't believe there would be a 2012 draft if the NFL is still in a lockout. So assuming they miss the season, but strike a deal, then the 2011 picks would be signed, F.A. would commence, and then they would use the 2011 draft order for 2012...

But since no one actually knows, its just a guess...

 

[Arizona's Finest]

Most of the news via Twitter and the reports of the past few days has been optimistic that a resolution is near.

Bottom line is players or at least the majority, can't afford to sit out a year. It will get done before then, just in the owners favor IMO.

 

[TheHopToad]

So assuming they miss the season, but strike a deal, then the 2011 picks would be signed, F.A. would commence, and then they would use the 2011 draft order for 2012...

Great.....Carolina can then have Cam Newton AND Andrew Luck.

 

[ARodg]

If this is true than the owners won, pack it up and go home Smith.

 

[seesred]

I hope this is hog wash. I don't think the players or owners want to lose a cash rich season of football. I believe we will have a short camp and then a couple of pres-season games. The season will start on time. When it comes to crunch time both sides will crunch enough to sign a deal.

GBR
40

 

[CardsFan88]

Too bad the networks couldn't sue the owners, as the owners get paid either way it plays out.

The whole owner's position is only tenable because they get paid no matter what. If the networks could somehow find language on reneging payments to the owners, they'd probably fold quicker than someone at a poker table with a 2,5,6,8,10 of different suits (after draw).

It's just a farce that the owners could get billions of dollars free from the networks for a season that might not happen. As if that is not the real reason the owners are locking them out....because they can! It takes big cojones by the owners to lockout the players who won't receive a check, while the owners will. Legal bs strikes again.

But that's our society, completely screwed up. Big boys hold the leverage, and will get what they want. Until they don't. But that's still a ways away. Getting paid for nothing, that's where 99 percent of money goes.

 

[Lefty]

There is no way the lockout will last the entire season. If no agreement by Labor Day, many of the players will cave in and there will be too much pressure on Smith. In the meantime, enjoy watching the CFL.

 

[desertdawg]

I think the price on Kolb goes down as the lockout goes on. It's going to be harder for any team willing to trade a QB IMO. Might also help out the contract if you think about it.

Were the Cardinals best suited to go into 2011-12 with who we had, when the season was supposed to start? Yes we could have benefited already if we was going to land someone (QB) and we haven't had a chance to.

Pretty simple in business terms..."Yeah we would have loved to give you the original deal for Kolb...but he doesn't even know our offense and the season starts in...

I guess the same can be said for any QB we are trying to score, which makes it good for us in the market no matter how anybody spins it (a far as what we have to trade or pay). The worst that can happen is we go Skelton, which isn't that bad to me.

Again I think Whiz is planning a new start, and planting some new seeds. Sounds like he has confidence in our O-line getting it together, but the rumors are we will get a little help in free agency. I don't expect much as far as O-line pick ups but that would be cool. I think the new full back will be used in more than special teams, Whiz can't go shotgun draw play no more.

My new expectations... we will run the ball more. Yeah I said it and I believe it. I think Whiz had a problem with our run game last year and he didn't blame it on the O-line. I think we get the ball to Fitz (no matter who's throwing it) more because of it.

Defense will not be the last in the league this year, so don't get your hopes up for the #1 pick. We went and got someone who understands what we are running, a DC that would be better off without the lockout but can easily make some strides. Our last DC...no heart until he was backed up. Horton will go after them, and I'm looking forward to it.

Gotta walk and get another beer.

 

[WarnerHOF]

So do they do a lottery for the draft next year if there's no football?

 

[Billy Bob]

So do they do a lottery for the draft next year if there's no football?

that's what i thought

 

[Duckjake]

If they lose a year they lose the sport because the fans of the weaker teams will simply give up. It will take almost a decade to get things back to where they were.

They might as well dump half the teams and start over with 16.

I don't think the Cardinals would ever recover. Well they could get back to the days of 24,000 watching them play Atlanta.

 

[Buckybird]

Well they could get back to the days of 24,000 watching them play Atlanta.

Duck, we might be back at that point anyway, after last years debacle...a 2-6 start & peeps will stay away in droves.

 

[cardpa]

What I still don't understand is how could the players union be dissolved and still be a union?

 

[HoodieBets]

What I still don't understand is how could the players union be dissolved and still be a union?

They aren't a union although they will recertify after the lockout.

 

[Stout]

They aren't a union although they will recertify after the lockout.

They're a union, but they pretend that they aren't. How else is the union organizing its own rookie symposium? This is part of the NFL's stance in all of this courtroom drama, that the union decertified to take advantage of the situation, but is still acting as a union. Players have talked about the current union, giving away completely and utterly that this is the case. It is bogus and they need to be blasted for it.

 

[john h]

If this is true than the owners won, pack it up and go home Smith.

He Dog you might add this to your championship list: Have a football season.

 

[john h]

I hope this is hog wash. I don't think the players or owners want to lose a cash rich season of football. I believe we will have a short camp and then a couple of pres-season games. The season will start on time. When it comes to crunch time both sides will crunch enough to sign a deal.

GBR
40

I think that in the end there will be to many players who will be willing to play that the Union/or whatever will collapse. These guys could form their own Union and come to an agreement with the owners. If those who do not want to play then so be it. Sit out. There are to many who cannot afford to sit out a year.

It is not like the current players are going to lose any money. Under a new CBA the owners want a larger share of the revenue. Likely both players and owners will have more money as revenues are going up not declining. The players want more and the owners say they must have more to sustain their business model.

I think if you polled all in the players today they would vote for settlement with the best offer they cab get from the owners. The poll would have to be secret of course.

 

[john h]

Too bad the networks couldn't sue the owners, as the owners get paid either way it plays out.

The whole owner's position is only tenable because they get paid no matter what. If the networks could somehow find language on reneging payments to the owners, they'd probably fold quicker than someone at a poker table with a 2,5,6,8,10 of different suits (after draw).

It's just a farce that the owners could get billions of dollars free from the networks for a season that might not happen. As if that is not the real reason the owners are locking them out....because they can! It takes big cojones by the owners to lockout the players who won't receive a check, while the owners will. Legal bs strikes again.

But that's our society, completely screwed up. Big boys hold the leverage, and will get what they want. Until they don't. But that's still a ways away. Getting paid for nothing, that's where 99 percent of money goes.

It is certainly not beyond belief that some of the owners are losing money or barely making any money. It is happening in the NBA. Stern notes that over 20 franchises are losing money. There are some baseball franchises that survive only because the rich teams have to subsidize them, When some players are making $20 mil a year it would not at all be a surprise. Perhaps the league needs to be downsized one way or the other. No business man in his right mind is going to continue to support a business that cannot make money. This may not all be about greed on the owners part but about survival. I suspect the value of the franchises has dropped significantly as a result of this strike. If a bad CBA comes out of this for the owners the value of the franchise will drop even further. It is possible that some teams may actually be better off if football is not played at all this year. They might lose less money.

The news reports that Albert Pujols is looking for a 10 year contract at $30 mil a year. Is any players worth that much? The Cards are not going to give him a deal like that. Maybe the Yankees or Bosox can afford that kind of money.

 

[cardpa]

They're a union, but they pretend that they aren't. How else is the union organizing its own rookie symposium? This is part of the NFL's stance in all of this courtroom drama, that the union decertified to take advantage of the situation, but is still acting as a union. Players have talked about the current union, giving away completely and utterly that this is the case. It is bogus and they need to be blasted for it.

See that's what I thought, If you de-certify then you are no longer a union so how can they even bargain?

Maybe I am over simplifying this but if the union no longer exists then all the former union members should now be free agents to do as they please.

As a owner I would not even consider bargaining with anyone since there is no longer a union to bargain with.

I would think a judge would simply say no union done deal. Every player without a contract is a free agent and those with a contract must stick to it or if de-certifying the union voids those contracts then every player in the NFL is a free agent who can play anywhere he can sign on to.

This would be no different than anyone who signs a contract with a contractor. You come to an agreement for work to be performed with certain expectations and that's it. The contractor is responsible for his medical coverage and any other coverage or retirement he wants to include in the price of the contract.

Period.

If the players want a union they should now need to create a union again and get players to sign on to be a union member. Then they can negotiate a contract. Till then its every player for themselves.

 

[Lloydian]

They are a trade association. They can negotiate, but they have no power to commit to any terms unless they first recertify. In the mean time, they are to the players what the AARP is to retired people.