Dolphaholic-
I think that reporter is a fool, needs to learn something called critical thinking, because he missed the boat...lol...I dont think it is a remotely plausible argument that because these owners are independently wealthy, that they should give the players whatever they want. It is actual foolish on the authors part, dont you think. All of what he said is irrelevant to the business at hand. That is an odd argument that makes zero sense in my book. Hey if I can have some wealthy guy to buy my company and convince him to over pay me and take no profits from our business because he already makes so much money esle where or already has so much money that I deserve the bulk. where do I sign up for that

Also, it looks like you were right about some sort of off-season pay.

"The NFL's owners expect the players to buckle once they start missing their $1,000 per week stipend for offseason training, and the game checks get threatened once the season approaches."

My Dog in the fight is the Dolphins, nothing else. I think Ross is a smuck, and the players make ridiculous money. I think the stars salaries and 1st rd rookies pays scales need to be fixed. As a fan I would like to see more games that count and less that dont.
Other then that I hope Ross straightens the ship financially or sells the team. I could really care less about any of the rest of it.

dolphaholic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Also, it looks like you were right about some sort
> of off-season pay.
>
> "The NFL's owners expect the players to buckle
> once they start missing their $1,000 per week
> stipend for offseason training, and the game
> checks get threatened once the season approaches."


I here alot of the wives and family man players are not so happy that their health insurance will be gone as well. That is tough

I also think some of those offseason workout bonuses are way more then a grand a week. The grand a week is probably the minimum if you dont have an amount specified.

It just got extended another 7 days. Sounds like the big hang up is the 18 game schedule.

Dolphaholic0
Good news on another extension, What is the money deal they agreed on 50/50 and 500 million extra plus the original billion?

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dolphaholic0
> Good news on another extension, What is the money
> deal they agreed on 50/50 and 500 million extra
> plus the original billion?


Not sure, i've only heard bits and pieces on the radio, nothing in print. The one thing I did read on twitter, this is the last extension, next Fri by 5:00pm we'll either have a new CBA, lockout or de-cert.

Mike & Mike, ESPN Radio, did a very good job of explaining that the NFLPA decertifying will allow the players to file a lawsuit to prevent a lockout. This I understand.
What I don't understand is this: let's assume that the players are successful in their lawsuit against the owners and a lockout out is prevented.
What happens next?
The judge can't order the owners to pay the players without a CBA.
The judge can't mandate the owners to collectively bargain.
Once decertified, the NLRB can't help the NFLPA in collective bargaining. I do not see how this will help the players.

I keep reading that if the NFLPA decertifies, then there will not be work stoppage and this I do not understand.

Can someone, anyone, preferrably an attorney out there please explain this to me?

my understanding (I am not a labor lawyer) is that if the union decertifies then the NFL could not lock out the players. Without a union a lockout could violate anti-trust laws. So the players could sue the NFL in court, probably before Judge Doty who they always win in front of. This happened back in the late 1990s, and led to free agency as we know it, in a lawsuit brought by Reggie White and others.

I am a prosecutor but maybe Berkeley223, a civil attorney, can help more.

You ask some good questions. But you ask "I keep reading that if the NFLPA decertifies, then there will not be work stoppage and this I do not understand."

Of course if there is no bargaining agreement, nothing would prevent individual bargaining between the players and the owners.

It would be smartest for both sides to rely on their last contracts or renew them.

If owners decided to not pay the same and reduce the pay from the last contract, that would kill the goose that lays the golden eggs, and if any player decided to ask for more than what was given in the expired individual contract that would kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

Both sides would likely go with the last status quo in order to at least make the money that was made last year.

Maybe, berk has more knowledge but I would say that would be the only thing I can figure.

I see while I was typing, berk was responding.

So, in essence, a lock-out will be averted but it will be a stalemate.
With no coaches, trainers, equipment, etc. The players basically get to run around the practice field and free use of the weight room & hot tub without getting paid???

If they de-certify it will get tied up in court. They just extended the deadline another 7 days so hopefully it wont come to that. Sounds like the 18 game schedule is the main sticking point.

my prediction
the owners want 1 billion more money
the players split the difference, give back 500mm, no 18 game season (I think this was just a bargaining move by the owners anyway), some form of rookie wage scale, and they probably split the remaining lesser points. The extensions of time I think are very promising---hopefully this all gets done soon

If the union decertifies then there is no union and the players are not represented by a union. In that case, couldn't the owners simply deal with players directly and not lock them out? If the owners don't follow through with a lockout after decertification then how can there be an antitrust case?
At that time the owners could simply tell the players that they can continue to work under their present contracts until new contracts can be negociated individually.
Maybe this is far fetched as I am not a laywer, but when I was a union shop stewart the last thing we wanted is for the union to decertify. That would mean the union was defeated and we would either go back to work or loss our jobs.

I think this is where the owners don't trust themselves. Without a union there would be no cap. I think the owners don't want to break the union they just want to break their spirit.

Maybe I'm not exactly clear on what averting a "lock-out" entails.

If a lock-out is prevented by court order, does this mean that the owners MUST continue day to day operations of the organization including following the agreement previously set forth?

BUT....

If the CBA expires, how can a judge order an injunction against the owners forcing them to follow the previous agreement?

What good is it to have an expiration if you can be sued to prevent it?


Soooo many questions - aye, yay, yay................

Anyways, thanks for your help!

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> my prediction
> the owners want 1 billion more money
> the players split the difference, give back 500mm,
> no 18 game season (I think this was just a
> bargaining move by the owners anyway), some form
> of rookie wage scale, and they probably split the
> remaining lesser points.

I think the money will be more then 500 million.. And if it is 500 million then they will split the rest 55 to 45 or 50/50 not the current deal where the players get 60 percent. Rookies pay scale will be addressed but not like we think, smaller adjustments to the pay scale then we think. The agents have alot of power and that is the yearly golden goose for the agents they are fighting that alot. Even though in reality most veteran players and owners want a drastic change to the 1st rd rookie deals.

Keep in mind, i've only heard bits and peices of that being the case on Sirius NFL radio, I have not read that on twitter or anywhere else. It could be purely speculation on the radio guys part. Yesterday the afternoon guys said that the union agreed to 50% instead of 59% and the owners rejected it, again I haven't been able to find that anywhere else in print so who knows? I will say this, since the mediator told both sides not to leak stuff to the press, they've listened.

I just read that when they de-certified in 89, they didn't re-form a union again for like 3 yrs (I was surprised it was that long) does anyone recall what it was like from the buisness end those few years? I know the current FA system we have now was born from that, so maybe it was hardly noticeable to the average fan. I was already a big Dolphins fan by then but I don't think I paid as much attention to the rest of the stuff.