Football NFLPA To Decertify By March 3rd - Page 3

**Mr. Flopnuts** · 02-26-2011, 04:17 PM

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6161468

Absent a last-minute agreement that no one around football expects, the NFL Players Association plans to decertify by Thursday in an effort to pre-empt an owners-generated lockout, according to multiple league and union sources.

The collective bargaining agreement says the NFLPA in effect must wait six months to decertify if it does it after the collective bargaining agreement expires. It expires at 11:59 p.m. Thursday night.

If the union decertifies, it is no longer a union, and the National Labor Relations Board loses its hold over the NFLPA. The owners are expected to claim the decertification is a sham and challenge it in the NLRB.

But the NFLPA is poised to act this week before it is locked out. It already has obtained unanimous approval from players across the league to decertify, a process it undertook throughout last season and the union's executive committee reaffirmed that vote this past Tuesday to empower NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith to take this action.

The primary reason for decertification would be to file for an injunction that, if granted, would prevent the owners from locking out the players. NFLPA officials and players believe that this could be the only hope to have a full NFL season next year. Furthermore, decertifying as a union prior to the expiration of the CBA would allow NFL players to seek injunctive relief and commence anti-trust action against owners in front of U.S. District Court Judge David Doty, who has had jurisdiction over the current labor agreement since 1993. Owners have attempted unsuccessfully to have Doty removed from jurisdiction and strategically want the CBA to expire to effectively eliminate his authority, a source said.

The NFL and NFLPA are scheduled to meet with federal mediator George Cohen one more time on Tuesday, yet after seven days of meetings last week, Cohen said significant differences still remain.

Commissioner Roger Goodell met Friday morning with the majority of the league's ownership labor committee at the offices of the Indianapolis Colts, a league official has confirmed, briefing the 10-man group on labor negotiations.

Nine of the 10 members of the owners' labor committee were in attendance on Friday: co-chairman Jerry Richardson of the Carolina Panthers; Mike Brown of the Cincinnati Bengals; Clark Hunt of the Kansas City Chiefs; Jerry Jones of the Dallas Cowboys; Robert Kraft of the New England Patriots; Mark Murphy of the Green Bay Packers; John Mara of the New York Giants; Art Rooney II of the Pittsburgh Steelers; and Dean Spanos of the San Diego Chargers.

Co-chairman Pat Bowlen of the Denver Broncos was absent but an official believed he participated via phone conference.

In addition to being updated by Goodell and his negotiating team, the committee was expected to honor Cohen's request to assess their positions on the "important core issues" following the past week of mediated negotiations.

Brock · 02-26-2011, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz

you're insane

if the NFL loses the salary cap completely, for a long period of time, you will see teams from big markets start to take over.

The teams that spend the most don't necessarily win. Whether you have a cap or not, you're going to have teams that spend a lot more than others do, and it should be pretty obvious that you don't have to outspend anybody to win championships.

**Donger** · 02-26-2011, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz

you're insane

if the NFL loses the salary cap completely, for a long period of time, you will see teams from big markets start to take over.

From my reading, the salary cap didn't even start until 1994. Did big market teams "take over" in the years prior to 1994?

**alnorth** · 02-26-2011, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock

The teams that spend the most don't necessarily win. Whether you have a cap or not, you're going to have teams that spend a lot more than others do, and it should be pretty obvious that you don't have to outspend anybody to win championships.

You act as if this is a good thing. This sort of argument is better-suited for MLB. In the NFL, you had perfect parity where if you lose it is literally your fault and no one else's. Now, in a hypothetical without a salary cap, you are basically saying "well gee, we could still win. Sure, its not equal anymore and it will be harder, but we shouldn't suck every year!"

Why even compromise down from perfection?

**CrazyPhuD** · 02-26-2011, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock

The teams that spend the most don't necessarily win. Whether you have a cap or not, you're going to have teams that spend a lot more than others do, and it should be pretty obvious that you don't have to outspend anybody to win championships.

You need to draft well to be consistently competitive. BUT the big key to super bowls are franchise QBs. No franchise QB would be able to stay with a small market team past their initial contract. That would likely substantially limit the ability of any small market team to win a super bowl.

Brock · 02-26-2011, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

Specifically what?

Pension benefits, medical benefits, any benefits gained through CBA. I dont' understand your question.

Brock · 02-26-2011, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyPhuD

You need to draft well to be consistently competitive. BUT the big key to super bowls are franchise QBs. No franchise QB would be able to stay with a small market team post their initial contract. That would likely substantially limit the ability of any small market team to win a super bowl.

How has this ever been shown to be true? The NFL has restricted free agency. They can tie up a player for as long as they want, just franchise them year after year.

**alnorth** · 02-26-2011, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

From my reading, the salary cap didn't even start until 1994. Did big market teams "take over" in the years prior to 1994?

You missed the part where free agency didn't exist. If there's no free agency and the draft is honored (ie, when you are drafted by the chiefs, you are a slave to the chiefs for life, until they decide they dont like you any more), then the large markets are powerless to do anything with their money.

If free agency doesn't exist and the draft is honored, we are pretty much not having this discussion and don't really care as much about the CBA. Have a union, don't have a union, whatever, we still own you if we draft you.

Brock · 02-26-2011, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

You act as if this is a good thing. This sort of argument is better-suited for MLB. In the NFL, you had perfect parity where if you lose it is literally your fault and no one else's. Now, in a hypothetical without a salary cap, you are basically saying "well gee, we could still win. Sure, its not equal anymore and it will be harder, but we shouldn't suck every year!"

Why even compromise down from perfection?

KC didn't sniff a SB with or without a salary cap. Meanwhile, Pittsburgh, with or without a salary cap, wins championships. It isn't the amount of money you spend.

tk13 · 02-26-2011, 06:35 PM

The sports landscape was way different in the 80's and early 90's than it is now. It's the same thing when people say Ewing Kauffman would've kept the Royals payroll at the top of the league if he was still alive. Back then the top baseball payrolls were like $15 million, now it's over $200 million.

The first NFL salary cap was $34 million. The last capped year two years ago, it was $128 million. I don't know if comparing 1990 to today holds water.

**Donger** · 02-26-2011, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

You missed the part where free agency didn't exist. If there's no free agency and the draft is honored (ie, when you are drafted by the chiefs, you are a slave to the chiefs for life, until they decide they dont like you any more), then the large markets are powerless to do anything with their money.

If free agency doesn't exist and the draft is honored, we are pretty much not having this discussion and don't really care as much about the CBA. Have a union, don't have a union, whatever, we still own you if we draft you.

Excellent explanation. Thank you. But, doesn't the "franchise tag" kind of negate free agency?

**CrazyPhuD** · 02-26-2011, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock

How has this ever been shown to be true? The NFL has restricted free agency. They can tie up a player for as long as they want, just franchise them year after year.

Look at the winners of the past 18 or so SB, baring two defensive teams in the early 2000s all of them have been lead by a franchise QB. Considering how much the NFL favors offense and the passing game specifically it is unlikely, without a rule change, for a team to win a SB on defense alone.

As for the franchise tag...assuming it's kept without a salary cap...it's very easy to become irrelevant. It's still the average of the top 5 players at the position. I would not be surprised without a cap to see that number grow 20%+ a season. At that point while a small market COULD use a franchise tag, they simply couldn't afford to do so.

**alnorth** · 02-26-2011, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock

KC didn't sniff a SB with or without a salary cap. Meanwhile, Pittsburgh, with or without a salary cap, wins championships. It isn't the amount of money you spend.

This response is completely silly. KC didn't sniff a SB because they were morons. Without a salary cap, it becomes harder and there's an easy scapegoat if you fail. Right now, if you fail it is 100% your fault, not 95%, but 100% and we want your resignation as GM.

Are you somehow trying to argue that a salary cap hurt KC?

DTLB58 · 02-26-2011, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

Does anyone really think that players in the NFL need to be unionized in the present day?

Umm, Yes! As long as you have greedy owners like Jerry Jones you need to have your rights protected.

**alnorth** · 02-26-2011, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

Excellent explanation. Thank you. But, doesn't the "franchise tag" kind of negate free agency?

maybe if it existed in the NBA. An NFL roster is rather huge, and trapping 1 player doesn't negate free agency.

**CrazyPhuD** · 02-26-2011, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock

KC didn't sniff a SB with or without a salary cap. Meanwhile, Pittsburgh, with or without a salary cap, wins championships. It isn't the amount of money you spend.

And pittsburgh hadn't won a super bowl in 26 years until they drafted a franchise QB. Has KC done that?(you could argue that Montana was but ancient and also probably green), but a franchise QB doesn't guarantee a SB it's just the minimum price of admission.

02-26-2011, 04:17 PM
Mr. Flopnuts FINALLY! The wait is over. Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: The Future Is Now!!! Casino cash: $19947565	NFLPA To Decertify By March 3rd http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6161468 Absent a last-minute agreement that no one around football expects, the NFL Players Association plans to decertify by Thursday in an effort to pre-empt an owners-generated lockout, according to multiple league and union sources. The collective bargaining agreement says the NFLPA in effect must wait six months to decertify if it does it after the collective bargaining agreement expires. It expires at 11:59 p.m. Thursday night. If the union decertifies, it is no longer a union, and the National Labor Relations Board loses its hold over the NFLPA. The owners are expected to claim the decertification is a sham and challenge it in the NLRB. But the NFLPA is poised to act this week before it is locked out. It already has obtained unanimous approval from players across the league to decertify, a process it undertook throughout last season and the union's executive committee reaffirmed that vote this past Tuesday to empower NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith to take this action. The primary reason for decertification would be to file for an injunction that, if granted, would prevent the owners from locking out the players. NFLPA officials and players believe that this could be the only hope to have a full NFL season next year. Furthermore, decertifying as a union prior to the expiration of the CBA would allow NFL players to seek injunctive relief and commence anti-trust action against owners in front of U.S. District Court Judge David Doty, who has had jurisdiction over the current labor agreement since 1993. Owners have attempted unsuccessfully to have Doty removed from jurisdiction and strategically want the CBA to expire to effectively eliminate his authority, a source said. The NFL and NFLPA are scheduled to meet with federal mediator George Cohen one more time on Tuesday, yet after seven days of meetings last week, Cohen said significant differences still remain. Commissioner Roger Goodell met Friday morning with the majority of the league's ownership labor committee at the offices of the Indianapolis Colts, a league official has confirmed, briefing the 10-man group on labor negotiations. Nine of the 10 members of the owners' labor committee were in attendance on Friday: co-chairman Jerry Richardson of the Carolina Panthers; Mike Brown of the Cincinnati Bengals; Clark Hunt of the Kansas City Chiefs; Jerry Jones of the Dallas Cowboys; Robert Kraft of the New England Patriots; Mark Murphy of the Green Bay Packers; John Mara of the New York Giants; Art Rooney II of the Pittsburgh Steelers; and Dean Spanos of the San Diego Chargers. Co-chairman Pat Bowlen of the Denver Broncos was absent but an official believed he participated via phone conference. In addition to being updated by Goodell and his negotiating team, the committee was expected to honor Cohen's request to assess their positions on the "important core issues" following the past week of mediated negotiations.
Posts: 56,649

02-26-2011, 06:35 PM	#39
tk13 ... Join Date: Nov 2001 Casino cash: $-1767500	The sports landscape was way different in the 80's and early 90's than it is now. It's the same thing when people say Ewing Kauffman would've kept the Royals payroll at the top of the league if he was still alive. Back then the top baseball payrolls were like $15 million, now it's over $200 million. The first NFL salary cap was $34 million. The last capped year two years ago, it was $128 million. I don't know if comparing 1990 to today holds water.
Posts: 56,662