Coaches Join Players In Fighting Lockout

[listopencil]

NFL Coaches Association has filed an amicus brief supporting players written and filed by a Duke law professor, Barak D. Richman. The coaches seem to be strongly supporting the players, and claim that the NFL is ‘avoiding’ the Sherman Act.

The coaches - both head and assistant - go on to say that "New coaches especially need time with players, which is why league rules normally permit new coaching staffs to organize two additional minicamps with players over the summer." It goes on to point out that, "This offseason, NFL teams hired an unusually large number of new head coaches with no previous head coaching experience, each of whom-along with their assistants-face a steep learning curve & desperately need this time to prepare their teams." The coaches then cite irreparable harm, and say that: "Damages would not be an adequate remedy for NFL coaches who suffer from the NFL’s illegal group boycott." The coaches' brief also includes charts that show the uptick in coaches fired after two years, and after three years from 2001 to '10.

While this is hardly a major game-changer in the situation, it does show that the head coaches are willing to challenge the statements of the owners in court. Increasingly, fans are turning against both sides, wondering why they can’t split up $9 billion. The coaches are showing a desire for reason and to be given a chance to be permitted to do their jobs, and I fully support that position, and hope that it brings some small level of order to this increasingly pointless circumstance.

Doc Bear May 25, 2011 8:23 PM
http://www.itsalloverfatman.com/bron...ghting-lockout

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by Okie_Apparition

A rap version of We Are The WOrld is due out next week.

Have you voted in the "Do my Mom?" thread yet?

[JD10367]

Originally Posted by Okie_Apparition

A rap version of We Are The WOrld is due out next week.

Pales in comparison to "He's ****ing Ben Affleck".

[Okie_Apparition]

Originally Posted by listopencil

Have you voted in the "Do my Mom?" thread yet?

Already have was not a poll option/joke that still feels wrong

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by Okie_Apparition

Already have was not a poll option/joke that still feels wrong

There's a "**** my Dad?" poll too.

[Mr. Laz]

Curious ties between NFLCA, NFLPA*

Posted by Mike Florio on June 3, 2011, 11:15 AM EDT

AP

The coaching staffs from 10 teams and counting have publicly said that the brief filed by the NFL Coaches Association in support of the players’ effort to lift the lockout doesn’t speak for them. So on whose behalf is the NFL Coaches Association speaking?

Given the ties between the NFLPA* and the NFLCA, you probably don’t need three guesses.

The “Contact Us” page at the NFLCA website lists Larry Kennan as the group’s executive director. The other staff members listed are all NFLPA* officials, according to the 2009 LM-2 filed by the pre-asterisk NFLPA with the U.S. Department of Labor.

While there’s nothing inherently wrong with the NFLCA being staffed almost exclusively by NFLPA* employees, the “friend of the court” brief submitted by the NFLCA to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit makes no reference to that fairly important connection. Instead, the NFLCA declares at the outset of its brief that “[t]he National Football League Coaches Association (‘NFLCA’) is a nonunion voluntary association that represents the interests of coaches and assistant coaches currently employed by the thirty-two individual National Football League (‘NFL’) teams, as well as many retired coaches formerly employed by those NFL teams.”

This statement strongly implies (at a minimum) that the NFLCA speaks for every coach employed by every team in the NFL. Clearly, it doesn’t.

The absence of any disclosure that the NFLCA is staffed almost exclusively by employees of the very entity that decertified as a precursor to the very legal claims that the NFLCA is supporting gives the brief zero credibility, at best. At worst, the NFLCA arguably has committed a not-so-subtle fraud on the court.

We’ve got no problem with the NFL coaches having a group that speaks on their behalf on any of the many important issues confronting the league’s coaches. By all appearances, however, that group isn’t the NFL Coaches Association.

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by Laz

Curious ties between NFLCA, NFLPA*

Posted by Mike Florio on June 3, 2011, 11:15 AM EDT

AP

The coaching staffs from 10 teams and counting have publicly said that the brief filed by the NFL Coaches Association in support of the players’ effort to lift the lockout doesn’t speak for them. So on whose behalf is the NFL Coaches Association speaking?

Given the ties between the NFLPA* and the NFLCA, you probably don’t need three guesses.

The “Contact Us” page at the NFLCA website lists Larry Kennan as the group’s executive director. The other staff members listed are all NFLPA* officials, according to the 2009 LM-2 filed by the pre-asterisk NFLPA with the U.S. Department of Labor.

While there’s nothing inherently wrong with the NFLCA being staffed almost exclusively by NFLPA* employees, the “friend of the court” brief submitted by the NFLCA to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit makes no reference to that fairly important connection. Instead, the NFLCA declares at the outset of its brief that “[t]he National Football League Coaches Association (‘NFLCA’) is a nonunion voluntary association that represents the interests of coaches and assistant coaches currently employed by the thirty-two individual National Football League (‘NFL’) teams, as well as many retired coaches formerly employed by those NFL teams.”

This statement strongly implies (at a minimum) that the NFLCA speaks for every coach employed by every team in the NFL. Clearly, it doesn’t.

The absence of any disclosure that the NFLCA is staffed almost exclusively by employees of the very entity that decertified as a precursor to the very legal claims that the NFLCA is supporting gives the brief zero credibility, at best. At worst, the NFLCA arguably has committed a not-so-subtle fraud on the court.

We’ve got no problem with the NFL coaches having a group that speaks on their behalf on any of the many important issues confronting the league’s coaches. By all appearances, however, that group isn’t the NFL Coaches Association.

This makes a lot more sense than believing that NFL head coaches would ever publicly speak out against their owners, much less take legal action against them. A cleaner path to career suicide there has never been. Not only would that get a coach fired, he'd have a damn hard time ever working in the league again.

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by vailpass

This makes a lot more sense than believing that NFL head coaches would ever publicly speak out against their owners, much less take legal action against them. A cleaner path to career suicide there has never been. Not only would that get a coach fired, he'd have a damn hard time ever working in the league again.

Yep, the tie between the NFLCA and actual coaches is hard to find. I tried and it is murky at best. The closest I could find was that coaches are expected to pay dues to be part of the NFLCA and one would presume that this implies consent. Still, the article states "ten teams and counting". That's only 30% of staffs around the league. And those staffs did feel the need to clarify because that brief was "a pretty big deal".

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by listopencil

Yep, the tie between the NFLCA and actual coaches is hard to find. I tried and it is murky at best. The closest I could find was that coaches are expected to pay dues to be part of the NFLCA and one would presume that this implies consent. Still, the article states "ten teams and counting". That's only 30% of staffs around the league. And those staffs did feel the need to clarify because that brief was "a pretty big deal".

Good point. I wonder if there are any in the remaining 70% who are sweating balls fight about now?

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by vailpass

Good point. I wonder if there are any in the remaining 70% who are sweating balls right about now?

Yeah, no kidding. When the owners meet there is definitely this sense of politics, like they are leaders of nation-states engaged in diplomacy. You have to wonder how each owner is reacting to the NFLCA activity and who they are blaming for it.

[Mr. Laz]

Vikings, Bills coaches disavow NFLCA brief, too

Posted by Mike Florio on June 3, 2011, 3:48 PM EDT


APAt some point in the not-too-distant future, it could be easier to list the teams whose coaches haven’t disavowed the “friend of the court” brief filed by the NFL Coaches Association in support of the players’ effort to lift the lockout. At some point, that list could consist of no teams.

The roster of coaching staffs expressing disagreement with the NFLCA brief has grown to 12 teams, with the addition of the Bills and the Vikings.

“Our entire staff had no prior knowledge, nor were we consulted that the amicus brief was being filed on behalf of the coaches,” Bills offensive coordinator Curtis Modkins said, per the Buffalo News. “We support Mr. Wilson. Our focus is on our preparation for the 2011 season.”

Ditto for Vikings coach Leslie Frazier. “We weren’t contacted by the coaches association,” Frazier said, per Tom Pelissero of 1500espn.com. “We’re going to always be supportive of our management. We’ve got great management here in Minnesota. The Wilf family has been terrific for our employees.”

By all appearances, NFLCA executive director Larry Kennan decided it would be easier to seek forgiveness than permission. Based on how things have been going in the wake of the filing, Kennan eventually could be seeking unemployment compensation.

[Easy 6]

I certainly wont claim to know what this really means/doesnt mean... but for the love of God, i hope its a sign that the dam is about to break.

I want my football, i dont, in the end, really give a damn who gets the stinky end of the stick.

[listopencil]

The Daily Shoutout

Posted on: June 8, 2011 8:15 am

SUPER, DUPER DOUBLE SECRET MEETING: The NFL owners and trade association members met again on Tuesday night and will attend mediation sessions on Wednesday at an undisclosed, underground bunker otherwise known as a New York City hotel. The not so secret meeting, I'm told, continues along a track I've been reporting for days. A person familiar with the talks said both sides continue to close the gap on significant issues and there remains a slim chance a deal is reached before the 8th circuit rules in July. The feeling I'm getting is that the season is no longer in jeopardy. Clearly, at the very least, the trust has grown between the two sides.

http://mike-freeman.blogs.cbssports....64363/29880415