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!

     

Decertification


riddel

Recommended Posts

I don't know of a court ruling anywhere, including the Supreme Court that would order a privately owned company to show their books to anyone. There may be some legal machinations that indirectly deal with the owners refusing to bargain openly because they didn't open their books, but to specifically order a privately owned company to make public their financial dealings is a precedent no judge in their right mind would set.

I didn't want to do this...but I'm gonna break out the law books on ya now....

Cost of Labor Contracts Section clearly states under item

2. Increased financial disclosure. The employer will have to make a claim of inability to pay or financial hardship. although the company's financial information normally need not be disclosed in collective bargaining, when the employer puts profitability or financial condition in contention, the financial data MUST BE provided to substantiate the position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still don't understand, what is going to happen now? what plans can be made for the NFL to exist next season?

Right now all thats happened is that there is no longer a Players Union. Come midnight there will no longer be a CBA (there's not really one now since the union it was made with no longer exists).

After that the NFL is a business with no employees (well the ones that play football) and the players are unemployed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right now all thats happened is that there is no longer a Players Union. Come midnight there will no longer be a CBA (there's not really one now since the union it was made with no longer exists).

After that the NFL is a business with no workers under contract and the players are unemployed.

since there is no longer a union couldnt the NFL owners take advantage and sign the players they want, like say a company hires workers for there busines, couldn't the NFL do the same with the rules they want?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

since there is no longer a union couldnt the NFL owners take advantage and sign the players they want, like say a company hires workers for there busines, couldn't the NFL do the same with the rules they want?

That is my interpretation. Now, doing this (as its been mentioned) will cause a much larger disparity in player contracts. I would think the league would want to set up some kind of "owners" agreement to keep the game competitive.

The players could band together and not sign any new contracts (in essence a strike). However, that would be dumb because there are thousands of semi-pro and UFL players who would take their spots in a heartbeat for far less pay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

since there is no longer a union couldnt the NFL owners take advantage and sign the players they want, like say a company hires workers for there busines, couldn't the NFL do the same with the rules they want?

Yes, but here's the problem. Owners may not be able to, as a group, have internal rules regarding contracts, drafts, camp schedules, etc without potentially violating anti-trust laws.

So unless it is just open season with unlimited free agency, spending, etc. they run the risk of paying court damages in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but here's the problem. Owners may not be able to, as a group, have internal rules regarding contracts, drafts, camp schedules, etc without potentially violating anti-trust laws.

So unless it is just open season with unlimited free agency, spending, etc. they run the risk of paying court damages in the future.

What are anti trust laws regarding the NFL? I think the Owners wouldn't have any problems agreeing with each other, its the players that are the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I originally hated the Miller deal but with the cap projected to rise nearly $10M next season the Canes struck some pretty good deals between Miller and Ehlers. Most of the team is locked in for the next few years. Nikishin will need an extension probably in the $6M AAV range. And Blake will need one if we don’t move him. Personally I’d move Blake, picks, and any prospect not named Nikishin/Nadeau/Artamonov for McTavish as I don’t see any any of the big time players moving teams next year. Realistically the Hurricanes should just target Gustavsson next year to fix the goal tending issue. But I’m all for moving Blake, picks, and prospects for McTavish this year. Ehlers - Aho - Jarvis Svechnikov - McTavish - Stankoven Martinook - Staal - Carrier Hall - Kotkaniemi - Robinson Jost - Jankowski Slavin - Miller Nikishin - Chatfield Gostisbehere - Walker Reilly Andersen Kochetkov I’d do Blake, Felix-Unger-Sorum, and 27 2nd for McTavish.
    • Very true on the length but stuff like this is never where we shine. We aren’t a good team at drafting.
    • Homerism aside, the more I see from Dan, the more impressed I am.  His player evaluation instincts. Last year his 2 premier FA signings, Hunt and Lewis COMPLETELY changed the line and I have a feeling his success in choosing blue chip guys will continue.  Look at the panthers’s rep for FA signings in the past. By and large, it’s been guys 1 year past their prime who had an injury and suckered our GM in to a crippling contract. We never get nice things. When was the last time this team signed 2 young blue chip studs  in the same offseason to contracts worthy of their impact? Ever?  Im telling y’all, players respect and trust Morgan. 
×
×
  • Create New...