PDA

View Full Version : Judge Rules no TV Contract Money to Owners in Lockout



UnderArmour
03-01-2011, 07:27 PM
Looks like a lockout appears less and less likely.


BREAKING NEWS: Doty reverses special master Burbank. "Holds that the NFL breached the SSA as to those (TV) contracts."
http://twitter.com/SI_JimTrotter/statuses/42728572980445184

:salute: Great timing Judge Doty, you may have just saved the 2011 NFL season. Looks like we can get football this year after all. A lockout will not happen if the owners cannot collect TV revenue. The players want to play; there is absolutely no question about that. I expect the owners to lessen their demands after Doty tore them a new one. A deal by mid March seems plausible now.

NightTerror218
03-01-2011, 07:29 PM
Looks like a lockout appears less and less likely.


http://twitter.com/SI_JimTrotter/statuses/42728572980445184

:salute: Great timing Judge Doty, you may have just saved the 2011 NFL season. Looks like we can get football this year after all. A lockout will not happen if the owners cannot collect TV revenue. The players want to play; there is absolutely no question about that. I expect the owners to lessen their demands after Doty tore them a new one. A deal by mid March seems plausible now.

Well very interesting, the union was also talking about breaking up so that the NFL can not lock the players out also.

TXBRONC
03-01-2011, 07:31 PM
Looks like a lockout appears less and less likely.


http://twitter.com/SI_JimTrotter/statuses/42728572980445184

:salute: Great timing Judge Doty, you may have just saved the 2011 NFL season. Looks like we can get football this year after all. A lockout will not happen if the owners cannot collect TV revenue. The players want to play; there is absolutely no question about that. I expect the owners to lessen their demands after Doty tore them a new one. A deal by mid March seems plausible now.

Well that just put the owners collective nuts in a vice.

UnderArmour
03-01-2011, 07:42 PM
Well very interesting, the union was also talking about breaking up so that the NFL can not lock the players out also.

If the union does follow through with decertification and transitions to becoming a trade organization, I don't see the owners winning 2 court battles especially with DirecTV, CBS, NBC, ESPN, and FOX who will help the NFLPA fight the owners getting their money out of the contracts(Unless I'm misunderstanding and they just have to split the money?).

TXBRONC
03-01-2011, 07:45 PM
If the union does follow through with decertification and transitions to becoming a trade organization, I don't see the owners winning 2 court battles especially with DirecTV, CBS, NBC, ESPN, and FOX who will help the NFLPA fight the owners getting their money out of the contracts(Unless I'm misunderstanding and they just have to split the money?).

They wont want to spend that kind of money on court costs.

Denver Native (Carol)
03-01-2011, 07:48 PM
A federal judge in Minneapolis has sided with the NFL Players Association in a dispute with the league over television revenue.

U.S. District Judge David Doty ruled Tuesday that the league violated its agreement with the union in carving out $4 billion for itself in additional television revenue. The union had argued that the league was effectively stockpiling money to prepare for a lockout.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81e8ec2b/article/judge-rules-nfl-violated-agreement-with-union-in-tv-deals?module=HP_headlines

NightTerror218
03-01-2011, 07:58 PM
If the union does follow through with decertification and transitions to becoming a trade organization, I don't see the owners winning 2 court battles especially with DirecTV, CBS, NBC, ESPN, and FOX who will help the NFLPA fight the owners getting their money out of the contracts(Unless I'm misunderstanding and they just have to split the money?).


If they do that, then each player can file a suite against the NFL also. All those TV station support the players union?

UnderArmour
03-01-2011, 08:03 PM
If they do that, then each player can file a suite against the NFL also. All those TV station support the players union?

After reading into it more, it appears that the TV stations are still going to pay the money out but it cannot be used by the owners; instead it has to be collectively bargained in a share with the NFLPA just as the previous ones were. It's just going to sit in limbo until the NFL and NFLPA work out a labor agreement so the TV stations won't have anymore incentive to press for the players association than they did before(because shelling out $4 billion and not getting a service in exchange is bad no matter who is getting the money).

underrated29
03-01-2011, 08:24 PM
That judge must be one of 2 things.

a- Packers fan, and wants to see his team try to back to back

b- Fantasy football fan




Either way, this Judge Rocks my face off.

Denver Native (Carol)
03-01-2011, 09:21 PM
# Best analysis of today yet. RT @adbrandt: Wrath of Doty persists: reaction and analysis of today's ruling against NFL: http://bit.ly/etACQ3 17 minutes ago via ÜberSocial

# NFL: RT @gregaiello: "Today's ruling will have no effect on our efforts to negotiate a new, balanced labor agreement." End of statement. 26 minutes ago via ÜberSocial

# NFLPA: "This ruling means there is irrefutable evidence owners had a premeditated plan to lockout players and fans for more than two years." 33 minutes ago via ÜberSocial

# RT @SBJLizMullen: NFLPA attorney Jeffrey Kessler told SBJ this year if union won TV case "lockout by the NFL less likely.” about 1 hour ago via ÜberSocial

# RT @mortreport: Owners anticipated Doty's ruling; have their appeal ready...naturally. about 2 hours ago via ÜberSocial

# Some believe the TV money was going to keep NFL owners afloat and if they don't have it, they will need the games to be played. We'll see. about 2 hours ago via ÜberSocial

# Doty ruled for Players in TV Case. Overturned Burbank's Decision. All TV Contracts violate CBA. Separate earing to come on the damages.

http://twitter.com/adamschefter

HORSEPOWER 56
03-01-2011, 09:29 PM
Oh Snap! Way to go, judge! I want football! :werd:

TXBRONC
03-01-2011, 09:46 PM
After reading into it more, it appears that the TV stations are still going to pay the money out but it cannot be used by the owners; instead it has to be collectively bargained in a share with the NFLPA just as the previous ones were. It's just going to sit in limbo until the NFL and NFLPA work out a labor agreement so the TV stations won't have anymore incentive to press for the players association than they did before(because shelling out $4 billion and not getting a service in exchange is bad no matter who is getting the money).

I thought it said that the money had to be put in escrow until the labor dispute is settled or least what the players were requesting.

MadMax
03-01-2011, 11:44 PM
From what I've read on PFT. Prior to this ruling if there is a lockout the NFL would still collect their $4 billion in revenue from the TV contracts, however it wouldn't become "free" money, they would have to pay back all the money with interest that there was no Football televised for(at some later or date or something, essentially the tv revenue would just be a loan to float them through the lockout).

The ruling today did not say how this arrangement would be changed to be fair to the players, instead he scheduled a hearing for next week to decide that.

PAINTERDAVE
03-02-2011, 12:01 AM
One of the 3 best things I have heard all day.

Got a large bid/job accepted...

Got a date with a beautiful woman lined up for Thursday...

and now this Judge tells the greedy owners to pound sand.


This has been the best day of March! :elefant:

Lonestar
03-02-2011, 01:22 AM
Not sure buy il bet that the NFL wil appeal this if it has not already.

Because of the bias of individual judges there are appeals courts to overturn this ruling.

Until it gets to the supreme court and they uphold, it is not over.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
03-02-2011, 01:41 AM
Let's me add that NFLpa shopped for this uber pro union judge. Mtgs NFL
Knew h
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
03-02-2011, 01:45 AM
Let me add that the NFLpa shopped around for
The most pro union judge they could find.

I suspect that they were not totally shocked in the out come.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

bcbronc
03-02-2011, 04:03 AM
f'n activist judges. :tsk:

amirite?

Denver Native (Carol)
03-02-2011, 06:39 PM
Some guy "in the know", did not catch his name, is on with D-Mac & Alfred now, and he stated that the owners appealed the judge's decision, and it will now be heard by a judge in Denver. This guy did say that he does think the players will win this.

rcsodak
03-02-2011, 06:48 PM
Looks like a lockout appears less and less likely.


http://twitter.com/SI_JimTrotter/statuses/42728572980445184

:salute: Great timing Judge Doty, you may have just saved the 2011 NFL season. Looks like we can get football this year after all. A lockout will not happen if the owners cannot collect TV revenue. The players want to play; there is absolutely no question about that. I expect the owners to lessen their demands after Doty tore them a new one. A deal by mid March seems plausible now.

NFL had always expected this ruling, though.

I think this whole thing will end up in court. Let's just hope they can play during that tim/e.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

GEM
03-02-2011, 06:50 PM
Funny, they get this ruling and all the reports out now are saying that today's mediation session was the best the sides have had.

HORSEPOWER 56
03-02-2011, 07:06 PM
Some guy "in the know", did not catch his game, is on with D-Mac & Alfred now, and he stated that the owners appealed the judge's decision, and it will now be heard by a judge in Denver. This guy did say that he does think the players will win this.

Thanks Carol. Normally, I'm pretty conservative minded when it comes to unions, but I really do think the owners attempted a huge power play to break the union with this TV contract thing. It's obvious they've been planning for this and it really makes them look more like conniving a-holes who will do anything to screw the players out of the original deal that they agreed to.

Frankly, I don't really give a damn who's wrong or right, I just want football.

GEM
03-02-2011, 07:14 PM
Thanks Carol. Normally, I'm pretty conservative minded when it comes to unions, but I really do think the owners attempted a huge power play to break the union with this TV contract thing. It's obvious they've been planning for this and it really makes them look more like conniving a-holes who will do anything to screw the players out of the original deal that they agreed to.

Frankly, I don't really give a damn who's wrong or right, I just want football.

I think that with that ruling, the owners now see that if this goes to court, the NFLPA can and will draw a timeline that shows that this was calculated and planned.

Lonestar
03-02-2011, 07:36 PM
Thanks Carol. Normally, I'm pretty conservative minded when it comes to unions, but I really do think the owners attempted a huge power play to break the union with this TV contract thing. It's obvious they've been planning for this and it really makes them look more like conniving a-holes who will do anything to screw the players out of the original deal that they agreed to.

Frankly, I don't really give a damn who's wrong or right, I just want football.

I have yet to see a modern DAY union do anything but be a blood sucker..
They have the basic rules in place and every Player (there are a few guys without them) has an agent or lawyer that negotiates their contracts..

Just exactly is the union doing for the guys.. Besides costing them dues and keeping a hand full of guys on the NFLpa payroll.

IF the union every agree to pay scales that are based on position and skill level then they may be worth a crap or a basic contract level by position, but other than that waste of money.


IMHO

Bullgator
03-02-2011, 08:14 PM
This should be the final nail in the coffin. The hardliner owners got their chance to play H.R. Shove-n-stuff but now the game is deadly for both sides. Look for the rest of the owners to pull back thier support and get a deal done.

FanInAZ
03-02-2011, 08:31 PM
The lawyers on both sides could reap a windfall before this is over. You just know that both sides have enough money to keep appealing every judges' ruling all the way to the US Supreme Court. The only real hope for a 2011 season is the arbitrator working out a solution that both sides are willing to live with.

HORSEPOWER 56
03-02-2011, 08:34 PM
This should be the final nail in the coffin. The hardliner owners got their chance to play H.R. Shove-n-stuff but now the game is deadly for both sides. Look for the rest of the owners to pull back thier support and get a deal done.

Well, there are still more appeals to come and I'm sure the owners can find a sympathetic judge somewhere. That's the drawback, justice really isn't blind and even "impartial" judges rarely are.

The thing is, the money will still be paid by the TV Networks and held in escrow pending the final decision for the new CBA. The alternative is that if the owners decide to share the $4 billion with the players, they can proceed with the lockout, but obviously that wasn't the point of having those contracts on standby just in case.

I really hope it forces the owner's hands to negotiate until a solution is reached vice just taking a hardline and proceeding with the lockout. :crossesfingers:

HORSEPOWER 56
03-02-2011, 08:54 PM
I have yet to see a modern DAY union do anything but be a blood sucker..
They have the basic rules in place and every Player (there are a few guys without them) has an agent or lawyer that negotiates their contracts..

Just exactly is the union doing for the guys.. Besides costing them dues and keeping a hand full of guys on the NFLpa payroll.

IF the union every agree to pay scales that are based on position and skill level then they may be worth a crap or a basic contract level by position, but other than that waste of money.


IMHO

I mostly agree with you about unions, but in this case, the union is really there to protect the players' safety. The owners don't give two shits about the players' well-being. They'd allow them to play themselves into permanent disability and even death, then they'd just replace them with the new crop of guys that comes in from college every year. It's not like there is an OSHA of football looking out for the players' safety.

If you look at the way it used to be as an example, back when the owners didn't pay the players jack and most had to have jobs in the offseason just to get by, and you look at what has happened to a lot of those guys now, you know what I'm getting at.

The union is there to help negotiate rules related to players safety and things like free agency. They rarely get too involved in individual player contracts (that's what agents are for) but they do help in setting the minimum salary and player benefits. It's always going to be a thin line between fairness and greed, the owners have their lawyers and commissioner, the players have their union. Both sides are trying to get as much as they can.

Denver Native (Carol)
03-02-2011, 09:20 PM
This is the guy who was on the fan this afternoon:

ESPN Legal Analyst Lester Munson joins The Drive to talk us about the ramifications of the impending NFL lockout..

Here is what he had to say:

http://www.1043thefan.com/channels/audioOnDemand/Story.aspx?ID=1373522

rcsodak
03-02-2011, 11:33 PM
This is the guy who was on the fan this afternoon:

ESPN Legal Analyst Lester Munson joins The Drive to talk us about the ramifications of the impending NFL lockout..

Here is what he had to say:

http://www.1043thefan.com/channels/audioOnDemand/Story.aspx?ID=1373522

Lester Munson? Was he the short uncle or the gigantuan that only moaned?
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
03-03-2011, 02:54 AM
I mostly agree with you about unions, but in this case, the union is really there to protect the players' safety. The owners don't give two shits about the players' well-being. They'd allow them to play themselves into permanent disability and even death, then they'd just replace them with the new crop of guys that comes in from college every year. It's not like there is an OSHA of football looking out for the players' safety.

If you look at the way it used to be as an example, back when the owners didn't pay the players jack and most had to have jobs in the offseason just to get by, and you look at what has happened to a lot of those guys now, you know what I'm getting at.

The union is there to help negotiate rules related to players safety and things like free agency. They rarely get too involved in individual player contracts (that's what agents are for) but they do help in setting the minimum salary and player benefits. It's always going to be a thin line between fairness and greed, the owners have their lawyers and commissioner, the players have their union. Both sides are trying to get as much as they can.

But now that the rules are in place and most have been created by the owners rules committee and even more are being admisintered by the commish. I do not think that the union needed.

Just like most responsible businesses have gotten a lot more employee oriented over the past decade. I see that the owners KNOW they have valuable assets and do not want them damaged. they are paying upfront in a lot of cases and want return for their investments..

I know that Delta Airlines in particular pays all but their Pilots (who are under contract) above the prevailing wages scales. Because it makes for better harmony when unions are not involved they can get rid of folks that are not customer oriented.

In fact they had 4 or 5 workers groups vote the union out in a couple of cases where NW airline was fully unionized, after DL bought out NW over half of those employees that were union voted to kick the union out. about the only ones that did not were the ones that were not producing the same level of service as required.

Frankly as a manager I almost preferred having union employees, as the contracts we had made it easier to dump them when they screwed it was black and white. In my non union days We always had gray areas.. which made it harder to fire them.

Back to NFL the union is doing nothing or should I say will not accomplish anything that the owners do not agree on.

The TV networks are afraid of the NFL and also know where the bread is buttered.

It is late going to bed.

TXBRONC
03-03-2011, 09:48 AM
Let's me add that NFLpa shopped for this uber pro union judge. Mtgs NFL
Knew h
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

No they didn't. Judge Doty has jurisdiction in this case.

TXBRONC
03-03-2011, 09:54 AM
Thanks Carol. Normally, I'm pretty conservative minded when it comes to unions, but I really do think the owners attempted a huge power play to break the union with this TV contract thing. It's obvious they've been planning for this and it really makes them look more like conniving a-holes who will do anything to screw the players out of the original deal that they agreed to.

Frankly, I don't really give a damn who's wrong or right, I just want football.

Same here I'm conservative minded when it comes to unions but this makes the owners look bad.

rcsodak
03-03-2011, 10:02 AM
No they didn't. Judge Doty has jurisdiction in this case.Point is, Tx, WHY? Isn't he in Minn?
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

TXBRONC
03-03-2011, 10:12 AM
Point is, Tx, WHY? Isn't he in Minn?
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I don't now how jurisdiction is determined all I know that a legal expert on NFLN said it was in Judge Doty's jurisdiction.

Lonestar
03-03-2011, 10:30 AM
Point is, Tx, WHY? Isn't he in Minn?
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Actually a judge in any NFL city could be used by the owners or PA to get a bogus ruling like this one.

What happens in appeals is what counts.

Time will play this out.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

TXBRONC
03-03-2011, 10:36 AM
Actually a judge in any NFL city could be used by the owners or PA to get a bogus ruling like this one.

What happens in appeals is what counts.

Time will play this out.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Again a legal expert i.e a lawyer said so I'm sure he knows what he's talking about. Also according something that Carol posted many legal experts feel that the owners will lose their appeal. I think it's important to know exactly what is in the decision before criticizing it as bogus.

rcsodak
03-03-2011, 10:59 AM
Same here I'm conservative minded when it comes to unions but this makes the owners look bad.

Worse than the chicanery of 'we are a union/we are not a union'?
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

rcsodak
03-03-2011, 11:01 AM
Again a legal expert i.e a lawyer said so I'm sure he knows what he's talking about. Also according something that Carol posted many legal experts feel that the owners will lose their appeal. I think it's important to know exactly what is in the decision before criticizing it as bogus.

"Legal experts" also said OJ would be convicted.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Denver Native (Carol)
03-03-2011, 11:06 AM
MINNEAPOLIS — U.S. District Judge David S. Doty enjoys a good cigar and a good argument.

The man in the middle of the epic legal fight between NFL owners and players is an 81-year-old, take-no-bull ex-Marine with a reputation for presiding over a tight but genial courtroom.

For more than two decades, he has been at the forefront of collective bargaining for the nation's biggest and most popular sport, making him arguably as influential as NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, Patriots owner Robert Kraft or Colts quarterback Peyton Manning.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20110303/fbn-nfl-labor-the-judge/

rcsodak
03-03-2011, 11:15 AM
Carol! The Puff? Seriously?? :tsk:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

TXBRONC
03-03-2011, 11:26 AM
Worse than the chicanery of 'we are a union/we are not a union'?
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

It doesn't seem be a matter of not knowing if they are a union or not a union rather it seems to be a defensive move. Chicanery on the part of players? Nope.

TXBRONC
03-03-2011, 11:27 AM
"Legal experts" also said OJ would be convicted.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

So what I never said was written in stone.

rcsodak
03-03-2011, 12:00 PM
It doesn't seem be a matter of not knowing if they are a union or not a union rather it seems to be a defensive move. Chicanery on the part of players? Nope.
Tx, they pulled the same ploy last time. Who's to say the tv deal wasn't a defensive move? Its not like smith gets fired and they clear out there union HQ's or stop their dues. And its not like they wont call themselves a union after all is said/done. Chicanery-deception by artful subterfuge or sophistry(Merriam-Webster)
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

silkamilkamonico
03-03-2011, 12:37 PM
Great article on this. Judge Doty has jurisdiction on this because he was the one assigned in the expiring CBA agreement. He is arguably the one reason why the union is decertifying, to make sure he continues to stay on.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?page=munson/110302

I can see why the players don't trust the owners. Owners are asking them to take less money, along with playing more games and exposing them to increased safety issues.