Wow, this could be bad. We were so close, hopefully it was the players side that was holding out not the owners... If the owners were the ones holding out, then this will only empower them and push us farther away. If it was the players holding out this might encourage them to agree before certain onry owners get empowered by this judgement...

I know the NFLPA attorneys are happy, believe it or not..

Now we also could get the NFLPA to want to wait for the Judge Doty TV ruling, to try and give them so more leverage before it probably gets overturned by the 8th... THis could be a disaster of epic proportions, if we get back into a legal leverage game...I hope not...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/08/2011 05:48AM by Crowder52.

Berk- how does this affect the Brady antitrust case and others?

I don't think this really affects anything. both sides are close and have smart people advising them---it was pretty obvious after the first 8th Cir decision that this was coming and the lockout would ultimately be upheld. Actually I think it is better for a deal that the lockout was upheld rather than struck down, since this just keeps the status quo but the opposite would have completely upset the apple cart.

one interesting aspect is that the court ruled differently with respect to players not under contract (rookies, FA)---it remanded the district court to reconsider an injunction with respect to them. This won't matter though---we will have a deal by next week I am sure.

it shouldn't affect the substance of the Brady case I don't think, since the issue was jurisdiction to issue and injunction. Doesn't foreclose making an antitrust claim.