Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

What do the players hope to win in court?


Highlandfire

Recommended Posts

Ok they decertify tonight, nothing happens till the owners decide to try and have free agency etc. At which time they will file an anti trust/ collusion suit.

Ok some folks on another board says the courts will fast track the lawsuits. I say bull poo. Any lawyer worth his salt can drag these out for a year.

But lets say the courts rule collusion then what? Nothing. Ok you win. I guess the guys under contract can play but those as free agents can't. By winning collusion you block free agency essentially screwing your fellow players in the NFL. BTW those that are franchise players, well they can't sign contracts either since there is no CBA so...

Those who are hoping franchise tags are dropped so they can become free agents, well how can you with teams not having the ability to?

As for as the courts, they can't force the NFL to pay anyone a certain amount so that is moot.

Bottom line they need to cut the bull poo, and sit down and negotiate out how big a pay cut they are going to take (and they are going to take one) and get it over with

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are right. D Smith has political aspirations and that is all there is to it. He never wanted to negotiate, he wants to crush the NFL and make a name for himself. All he is doing is hurting the players. I feel the NFL can hands down prove the NFLPA esp. Smith never tried to negotiate in good faith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are right. D Smith has political aspirations and that is all there is to it. He never wanted to negotiate, he wants to crush the NFL and make a name for himself. All he is doing is hurting the players. I feel the NFL can hands down prove the NFLPA esp. Smith never tried to negotiate in good faith.

Totally agree.

Unfortunately, I fear the courts are Smith's battleground. He's an established Federal lawyer, with ties to some really powerful people. I believe the NFL could produce a video of him saying directly that he'll never agree to a contract, but it would get thrown out on a technicality or even just simply ignored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally agree.

Unfortunately, I fear the courts are Smith's battleground. He's an established Federal lawyer, with ties to some really powerful people. I believe the NFL could produce a video of him saying directly that he'll never agree to a contract, but it would get thrown out on a technicality or even just simply ignored.

Dude. Richardson announced to on March 2010 to all the NFL owners, that they were going to take back the NFL from the players and lock them out if they would not agree to the owners terms. The NFL worked for two years to secure a TV contract war chest of $4 billion dollars and they held back $300 million in a savings pool by not offering full medical benefits.

Who exactly is guilty of collusion here and bad faith bargaining?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What they hope to gain is for the Judge to rule against the TV war chest which strips away the money the owners would receive. The players have won the monopoly argument before and the whole antitrust issue would be in play. What the players want is for the judge to pressure the sides to work something out rather than tie it up in court for a year or two which he will threaten. Last time it went to the courts, the players won free agency and pensions. Dody will be fair to all which frankly means the players will come out on the winning side. The owners will do better to keep this out of court and they know it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude. Richardson announced to on March 2010 to all the NFL owners, that they were going to take back the NFL from the players and lock them out if they would not agree to the owners terms. The NFL worked for two years to secure a TV contract war chest of $4 billion dollars and they held back $300 million in a savings pool by not offering full medical benefits.

Who exactly is guilty of collusion here and bad faith bargaining?

How is it collusion exactly, for stakeholders in a league, to determine they want to run a more profitable business?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collusion

Collusion is an agreement between two or more persons, sometimes illegal and therefore secretive, to limit open competition by deceiving, misleading, or defrauding others of their legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law typically by defrauding or gaining an unfair advantage.

There's nothing "illegal" about anything Richardson has said. Stupid sounding maybe, but not illegal. And if it were "secretive" then you damn sure wouldn't have his words to quote.

It would be like saying "OMG, the Board of Directors for a major company are colluding to reduce the pay of their employees because they are making a very low profit!"

And as far as bad faith bargaining goes, Smith and NFLPA didn't even come to the table until a couple weeks ago. They had YEARS to start formal negotiations. Instead, we got tweets and reporter interviews stating that the NFLPA was going to sue. Which they did. Which is bad-faith bargaining on their part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What they hope to gain is for the Judge to rule against the TV war chest which strips away the money the owners would receive. The players have won the monopoly argument before and the whole antitrust issue would be in play. What the players want is for the judge to pressure the sides to work something out rather than tie it up in court for a year or two which he will threaten. Last time it went to the courts, the players won free agency and pensions. Dody will be fair to all which frankly means the players will come out on the winning side. The owners will do better to keep this out of court and they know it.

So they want to destroy a major source of income for the owners of the teams? Never mind that could cripple the league? Nevermind that could force some of the less profitable clubs into bankruptcy?

The circumstances of the monopoly argument were different before. There was no existing CBA. There was no legal option out of it for the owners to decide on.

The owners aren't going to be bullied here. Worst case scenario... the NFL as a whole may close shop and re-open as a new league, with predetermined rules on player compensation to give the players the middle finger and establish what they will pay and won't pay.

How would you like that? No more NFL. No more "Super Bowl". No more AFC/NFC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So they want to destroy a major source of income for the owners of the teams? Never mind that could cripple the league? Nevermind that could force some of the less profitable clubs into bankruptcy?

The circumstances of the monopoly argument were different before. There was no existing CBA. There was no legal option out of it for the owners to decide on.

The owners aren't going to be bullied here. Worst case scenario... the NFL as a whole may close shop and re-open as a new league, with predetermined rules on player compensation to give the players the middle finger and establish what they will pay and won't pay.

How would you like that? No more NFL. No more "Super Bowl". No more AFC/NFC.

No you are missing the point. The owners get paid by the broadcaster if there is a season or not. The players are trying to get some of that. So the collusion is between the league and the networks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No you are missing the point. The owners get paid by the broadcaster if there is a season or not. The players are trying to get some of that. So the collusion is between the league and the networks.

That wasn't clear in his post.

Judge to rule against the TV war chest which strips away the money the owners would receive.

This sounded like an attempt to block the funds to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is it collusion exactly, for stakeholders in a league, to determine they want to run a more profitable business?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collusion.

In a decision that could surpass the collusion rulings against Major League Baseball in terms of its importance to professional sports, and have a significant impact on the NFL’s ongoing labor dispute, U.S. District Judge David Doty has ruled in favor of football’s player’s union, the NFLPA, regarding claims that the league negotiated television contract extensions that were designed as “lockout insurance” as opposed to growing total revenues – revenues that determine the salary cap for the league (read the entire filing by the NFLPA).

http://blogs.forbes.com/sportsmoney/...l-labor-talks/

There are literally hundreds of pages with articles that detail the collusion charges....but.....I really didn't think linking you to them all was necessary...although if you quote wiki again, I may just quote every collusion article on the internet that shows the owners committed this act against the players union.

UGH!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a decision that could surpass the collusion rulings against Major League Baseball in terms of its importance to professional sports, and have a significant impact on the NFL’s ongoing labor dispute, U.S. District Judge David Doty has ruled in favor of football’s player’s union, the NFLPA, regarding claims that the league negotiated television contract extensions that were designed as “lockout insurance” as opposed to growing total revenues – revenues that determine the salary cap for the league (read the entire filing by the NFLPA).

http://blogs.forbes.com/sportsmoney/...l-labor-talks/

There are literally hundreds of pages with articles that detail the collusion charges....but.....I really didn't think linking you to them all was necessary...although if you quote wiki again, I may just quote every collusion article on the internet that shows the owners committed this act against the players union.

UGH!

I'm not really interested in a legal debate. Suffice to say, if the owners know the NFLPA is hostile, and not willing to negotiate in good faith, I don't see how it's a problem that they are preparing to modify their contracts in the event of a lockout/strike. That's just good business sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Exactly what I was going to say. Brady seems to be taking a page out of Olsen's playbook, which is probably a good thing. They'll probably get around to giving Brady an Emmy one day, and he should thank Olsen for giving him the blueprint for success.
    • In before: "XL sucks, there is no hope." "As long as we have Bryce, none of this matters." My response: "It's X, not XL...we're not discussing apparel sizes, or we'd have to consider XS."  
    • Alain Pierre provides some food for thought on Last Word On Sports regarding Xavier Legette, and his article, though specifically on X, kind of puts me in the mind of QBs being overdrafted and put into situations that they're not prepared for, some ultimately failing due to drafting missteps by front offices who don't necessarily view prospective players within the contextual importance that situations demand.  At this point, Legette looks like a failure in reference to expectations, of not only what a consistently productive NFL receiver looks like, but a first round pick (which he obviously should never have been). But the story on X isn't necessarily completely over. Damn. I seem to be experiencing deja vu...It wasn't X's fault that he was overdrafted, that was a choice by an FO that obviously downplayed actual realized skill vs outstanding measurables and upside. Sure, the FO was impressed by X's one-year feats during his senior season at South Carolina, but it was the NFL god, RAS (a.k.a. Raw Athletic Score), that had Dave Canales's and Dan Morgan's jaws dropping in amazement at the sight of X running around in underwear at the Combine...   "At 6-foot-3 and over 220 pounds, Legette brought rare athletic upside to the position. His breakout season at South Carolina showed flashes of dominance that NFL teams dream of. Projecting forward, many scouts compared his physical profile to D.K. Metcalf, and the Panthers clearly believed they could develop him into a true wide receiver 1 over time. The issue was never his talent. The issue was the timeline. Just a few picks later, the Chargers selected Ladd McConkey, a receiver who may have lacked Xavier Legette’s physical ceiling but entered the league far more technically refined. McConkey immediately showed advanced route discipline, leverage awareness, good pacing, and separation ability.  Bryce Young’s game has always depended on timing and anticipation. His best football at Alabama came with receivers capable of winning through precision rather than pure athleticism. Jameson Williams and John Metchie III were excellent route runners and were able to get drafted in 2022. McConkey naturally fit that style of play. Legette, meanwhile, needed significant development in the exact areas where Bryce Young needed help. The Panthers drafted traits when Bryce Young needed reliability."   Yes, the FO was guilty. The good thing is that the execs appear to be improving. Some of that may be attributed to the hiring of Eric Eager (who was hired right after the Xavier Legette draft). Eager seems to have helped the Panthers FO fine-tune their analytical progress, and, at least on paper, they acquired players with a lot of value during the last draft in regards to actually (what I'll refer to as) "underdrafting" talent relative to their position with value already built in.  Look at Chris Brazzell: He may be more of the quintessential project receiver who was arguably more or less just as raw as Legette was when he was drafted, and with a relatively high RAS as well. The notable difference is value, as Brazzell was a round three pick and Legette was a first rounder.    "Unlike the Xavier Legette situation, Carolina’s environment for Brazzell is completely different. "The Panthers are not asking a raw receiver prospect to stabilize this offense for Bryce Young. "Brazzell enters a much healthier developmental situation with far less pressure. With Tetairoa McMillan established as the primary target and Jalen Coker continuing to settle as the number 2 option...Xavier Legette, Metchie III, and Jimmy Horn Jr. are also still in this rotation, fighting for reps. "It gives Carolina something they failed to give Legette when they drafted him: A developmental runway. "Xavier Legette entered the league with expectations attached to a first-round pick and an offense desperate for answers. Brazzell enters a room where he can spend a year working on his route running, learning the playbook, and earning snaps gradually rather than being asked to become part of Bryce Young’s solution immediately. "And truthfully, Brazzell needs that time coming out of college. Despite his elite physical tools, many evaluators have several concerns about his overall polish as a receiver. "His route tree at Tennessee was viewed as fairly limited due to the type of offense that they run. The receivers are expected to run a lot of choice routes, which are dictated by the placement of the defenders. It doesn’t require technical route-running and an understanding of the playbook needed at the NFL level...   "Context changes significantly when expectations change. "The Panthers are not depending on Brazzell to save the offense. They can allow him to develop slowly, expand his route tree, improve his technical refinement, and learn behind a much more stable receiver room... "Traits become much easier to bet on when patience is built into the plan."   It's all about understanding your situation. I don't agree that it's an inherently difficult choice like the author is suggesting in the following excerpt. At the very least, I think that it should be easier as long as all parties involved stay levelheaded and true to their process.    "That is what makes these draft decisions so difficult. "Every front office believes it can find the next Metcalf, Owens, or Marshall. Sometimes they do. More often, they are betting on a development path that may take years to complete. "The challenge is understanding what your offense needs right now. "If a team has patience, stability, and a quarterback capable of carrying the offense while a receiver develops, betting on traits can make sense. But if a young quarterback needs immediate help, there is a strong argument for prioritizing the receiver who already knows how to separate, create throwing , and earn trust from day one. "That’s why the Xavier Legette-Ladd McConkey debate remains so fascinating. "It was never really a discussion about talent. It was a discussion about timing."   For me, Ladd McConkey was talented enough in his own right, that the gap--the upside--was never as big as people are suggesting between not only McConkey and Legette, but McConkey and other receivers drafted in the first round during that draft. The technique divide between Ladd and X was pretty stark though, as was the roughly 35 pounds, but the speed was identical, the maybe 1½ height difference isn't huge (6' and 6'1"), and it may surprise some that Ladd's RAS (9.34) was also enough to put him in the top 10 percent of receivers since 1987. There is an argument that he would've been a better pick for Bryce and the Panthers, regardless of timeline and talent. But, I still appreciate the thesis (if you will) of the article, as it still provides some hope--perhaps a glimmer at this point, that X's RAS may finally translate to the NFL given more time, but, perhaps more importantly, it explains how Dan Morgan and company are showing improvement, even if it appears somewhat understated. My hope is that continued improvement is palpable by this time next year. https://lastwordonsports.com/nfl/2026/05/30/xavier-legette-draft-lessons/#google_vignette        
×
×
  • Create New...