Football NFLPA To Decertify By March 3rd - Page 4

**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.

**SAUTO** · 02-26-2011, 06:40 PM

This. Things have changed with the times

Quote:

Originally Posted by tk13

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.

Posted via Mobile Device

Brock · 02-26-2011, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

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?

It didn't make any difference to KC. The salary cap never kept any team from signing any player they wanted to. Everybody thinks the salary cap is what introduced parity to the NFL, and that's false.

Brock · 02-26-2011, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyPhuD

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.

You keep making really obvious points as if it's something I don't already know.

**Donger** · 02-26-2011, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

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

But a team can franchise a team-changing player, right? As mentioned above, having a "franchise QB" seems to be of utmost importance to success.

**CrazyPhuD** · 02-26-2011, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock

It didn't make any difference to KC. The salary cap never kept any team from signing any player they wanted to. Everybody thinks the salary cap is what introduced parity to the NFL, and that's false.

No revenue sharing introduced parity. The salary cap helps reinforce it. You have to remember revenue disparity is significantly more than it used to be because only a limited amount of revenue is shared and there are now a lot more sources that are untouched. It used to be tickets and TV contracts were the lions share of revenue but that is lessening over time.

**alnorth** · 02-26-2011, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock

It didn't make any difference to KC. The salary cap never kept any team from signing any player they wanted to. Everybody thinks the salary cap is what introduced parity to the NFL, and that's false.

This is not the NBA. You could sign one player for a staggering contract a couple million under the salary cap and hand out minimums to arena league players. You might have one awesome player, but you'll go 0-16.

The salary cap prevents you from buying an entire team, it forces you to make sacrifices and be smart with your money in a league where everyone has the same resources. We aren't trying to prevent large markets from getting one player, we're preventing them from putting together half an all-star team.

Without a salary cap, the big markets have a big advantage, player salaries escalate, and it becomes tougher for KC to win.

Again, your "well, it wont be all bad, we shouldnt suck every year, we'll have our windows of opportunity if we are smart!" argument is fine in baseball. It is stupid in the NFL when you are stepping down from perfection.

tk13 · 02-26-2011, 06:45 PM

The one time the Chiefs were really hurt by the cap was at the beginning of Vermeil's term. We had a bunch of dead money left over from bonehead moves like Dan Williams. Tennessee was probably the only team that was really, really hurt by salary cap problems earlier this decade.

Brock · 02-26-2011, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

The salary cap prevents you from buying an entire team, it forces you to make sacrifices and be smart with your money in a league where everyone has the same resources. We aren't trying to prevent large markets from getting one player, we're preventing them from putting together half an all-star team.

That's utter bullcrap. It has never happened. The teams that put together dynasties have never done it by signing every all star free agent out there. At most, you're talking about a couple of players. The teams that did that built their teams through the draft, period.

**alnorth** · 02-26-2011, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

But a team can franchise a team-changing player, right? As mentioned above, having a "franchise QB" seems to be of utmost importance to success.

Well first I dont buy into the "franchise QB is mandatory" theory myself, there have been super bowl teams who won in spite of their QB. A QB is important, but this isn't basketball where Kobe can lift your whole team from the depths. We've got 11 on offense, 11 on defense, a bunch for special teams, and important backups. Being able to keep Peyton Manning will not offset the impact of free agency.

Brock · 02-26-2011, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

Well first I dont buy into the "franchise QB is mandatory" theory myself, there have been super bowl teams who won in spite of their QB. A QB is important, but this isn't basketball where Kobe can lift your whole team from the depths. We've got 11 on offense, 11 on defense, a bunch for special teams, and important backups. Being able to keep Peyton Manning will not offset the impact of free agency.

Well, there you go. "Hey, Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl".

DTLB58 · 02-26-2011, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyPhuD

One more successful union kill!

I think it would be just for the purpose of negotiations to avoid the lockout. After the new deal I would think the players would unionize again. I doubt they would give away their rights for collective bargaining forever.

Oh and btw, Unions Rock!

tk13 · 02-26-2011, 06:53 PM

I think the NFL would probably fare better than MLB because of the way the TV money works... in baseball it's all about the local TV money.

I'm not sure it would translate to winning because Jones and Snyder are stupid with their money sometimes. Teams that draft well can draft well. But I'd have to say it would drive up salaries overall, even if they were stupid contracts. Eventually you get to the point where the St. Louis Cardinals are now. They either have to pay Albert Pujols an unbelievable amount of money because of what the Yankees pay their best players... or let him walk and gut their team.

**alnorth** · 02-26-2011, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock

That's utter bullcrap. It has never happened. The teams that put together dynasties have never done it by signing every all star free agent out there. At most, you're talking about a couple of players. The teams that did that built their teams through the draft, period.

You seem to think that if a team can outspend the chiefs by a factor of 4, they shouldn't have any problem at all problem competing anyway in a world where free agency exists. At no significant recent point in NFL history have we had free agency, a huge gap in revenue by team, and no cap, so you can't point out a lot of good examples where your illogical hair-brained theory is true. Look at baseball before revenue sharing was dramatically increased, and look at freaking english soccer. The impact to small markets is provably devastating.

Your argument (perhaps not you, but your argument) is utterly stupid.

**Donger** · 02-26-2011, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth

You seem to think that if a team can outspend the chiefs by a factor of 4, they shouldn't have any problem at all problem competing anyway in a world where free agency exists. At no significant recent point in NFL history have we had free agency, a huge gap in revenue by team, and no cap, so you can't point out a lot of good examples where your illogical hair-brained theory is true. Look at baseball before revenue sharing was dramatically increased, and look at freaking english soccer. The impact to small markets is provably devastating.

Your argument (perhaps not you, but your argument) is utterly stupid.

Would you argue that an individual player can have less, equal or greater impact on, say, an MLB team than an NFL team?

In other words, is the NFL more of a "team" sport than MLB?

Mr. Laz · 02-26-2011, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tk13

I think the NFL would probably fare better than MLB because of the way the TV money works... in baseball it's all about the local TV money.

I'm not sure it would translate to winning because Jones and Snyder are stupid with their money sometimes. Teams that draft well can draft well. But I'd have to say it would drive up salaries overall, even if they were stupid contracts. Eventually you get to the point where the St. Louis Cardinals are now. They either have to pay Albert Pujols an unbelievable amount of money because of what the Yankees pay their best players... or let him walk and gut their team.

If the salary cap disappears completely in the NFL you can bet that the even distribution of T.V. money will quickly follow.

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, 06:45 PM	#52
tk13 ... Join Date: Nov 2001 Casino cash: $1672500	The one time the Chiefs were really hurt by the cap was at the beginning of Vermeil's term. We had a bunch of dead money left over from bonehead moves like Dan Williams. Tennessee was probably the only team that was really, really hurt by salary cap problems earlier this decade.
Posts: 55,009

02-26-2011, 06:53 PM	#57
tk13 ... Join Date: Nov 2001 Casino cash: $1672500	I think the NFL would probably fare better than MLB because of the way the TV money works... in baseball it's all about the local TV money. I'm not sure it would translate to winning because Jones and Snyder are stupid with their money sometimes. Teams that draft well can draft well. But I'd have to say it would drive up salaries overall, even if they were stupid contracts. Eventually you get to the point where the St. Louis Cardinals are now. They either have to pay Albert Pujols an unbelievable amount of money because of what the Yankees pay their best players... or let him walk and gut their team.
Posts: 55,009