PDA

View Full Version : Judge Denies NFL


Soul-Bronco
04-27-2011, 09:08 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6439599


MINNEAPOLIS -- The NFL is falling behind in its court fight with the players over the future of the $9 billion business.
The federal judge who lifted the NFL lockout two days ago dealt another blow to the league late Wednesday, denying its request to put her ruling on hold pending appeals and guaranteeing more limbo for the 32 teams, thousands of players and millions of fans.
U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson wrote that the NFL "has not met its burden for a stay pending appeal, expedited or otherwise." She dismissed the NFL's argument that she didn't have jurisdiction and that it is facing irreparable harm because of her decision to end the 45-day lockout.
<!-- begin inline 1 --><!-- INLINE QUOTE-BOX MODULE -->
“ There is no injunction in place preventing the NFL from exercising, under its hoped-for protection of the labor laws, any of its rights to negotiate terms and conditions of employment, such as free agency.
” <CITE>-- Judge Susan Richard Nelson's ruling in response to NFL's fear of implementing rules without lockout</CITE> <!-- END INLINE QUOTE-BOX MODULE --><!-- end inline 1 -->
"In short, the world of 'chaos' the NFL claims it has been thrust into -- essentially the 'free-market' system this nation otherwise willfully operates under -- is not compelled by this court's order," Nelson wrote.
The judge acknowledged that her decision will be appealed to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis and the NFL has promised that step.
The ruling means the league has no rules in place, shelved since the collective bargaining agreement ended on March 11 and the NFL's first work stoppage since 1987 was imposed shortly afterward. But Nelson said that needn't be the case.
"The league may choose to act in accordance with its expressed belief that the players remain a union and that they have reached a state of impasse, or the League may choose to chart a different course, implementing a version of the 2010 player system, or something different altogether," she wrote. "Like any defendant in any lawsuit, defendants themselves must make a decision about how to proceed and accept the consequences of their decision."
Whether that includes free agency or other rules drawn up even as the draft gets under way Thursday was anyone's guess. There was no immediate word from the league after Nelson's decision.
The NFL had argued that Nelson had no jurisdiction and that she shouldn't make a decision while a complaint of bad-faith negotiation against the players was still pending with the National Labor Relations Board. The league also argued that it shouldn't be subject to some of the antitrust claims leveled by the players with the collective bargaining deal barely expired.
The judge shot all of those down.
<!-- begin inline 2 --><!-- INLINE MODULE -->
NFLPA court filings

http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2011/0111/nfl_g_nflpa-logo01_65.jpg The NFLPA filed five items urging federal judge Susan Richard Nelson to deny the NFL's request to essentially restore the lockout. Read them here.
• Letter to Judge Nelson (http://a.espncdn.com/media/pdf/110427/Letter_to_Judge_Nelson.pdf)
• Motion to stay (http://a.espncdn.com/media/pdf/110427/MotiontoStay.pdf) | Exhibits (http://a.espncdn.com/media/pdf/110427/Exhibits.pdf)
• Memorandum (http://a.espncdn.com/media/pdf/110427/Memorandum_re_stay.pdf) | Declaration (http://a.espncdn.com/media/pdf/110427/Berthelsen_declaration.pdf)


<!-- END INLINE MODULE --><!-- end inline 2 -->
The league's plea to Nelson for the stay was also based on a purported fear that an immediate lifting of the lockout would result in a free agency free-for-all that could create a mess that would be difficult to undo should a new collective bargaining agreement lead to different rules.
Nelson called that an "incorrect premise." She insisted that her order was simply an end to the lockout, not a prohibition of the player constraints like franchise and transition tags that help the league maintain competitive balance.
NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, during an earlier predraft event in New York, said he wasn't worried about the state of confusion tarnishing the league's image but stressed his desire to "remove" the uncertainty.
"It's one of the things I don't think is healthy for the players, the clubs and most importantly our fans," he said.
Attorneys for the players had ridiculed the NFL's argument that it risks either violating antitrust laws by coming up with new league rules without a CBA in place or harming its competitive balance by allowing unrestricted free agency.
"If the NFL defendants are faced with a dilemma, they put themselves in that position by repeatedly imposing rules and restrictions that violate the antitrust laws," the attorneys wrote. "Any alleged predicament is of their own making."
The solution, the players argued, is to simply implement a system that does not violate antitrust laws.
Nelson agreed.
"Again, the NFL argues it will suffer irreparable harm because it is now 'forced to choose between the irreparable harm of unrestricted free agency or the irreparable harm of more treble damages lawsuits,' " Nelson wrote. "But no such Scylla-or-Charybdis choice exists here. There is no injunction in place preventing the NFL from exercising, under its hoped-for protection of the labor laws, any of its rights to negotiate terms and conditions of employment, such as free agency."
<!-- begin inline 3 --><!-- INLINE LIST MODULE -->
NFL Nation

http://a.espncdn.com/i/teamlogos/leagues/med/trans/nfl.gif Our eight bloggers help you keep up with all the latest NFL news division by divison. Blog (http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation)


<!-- end sidebar table --><!-- end inline 3 -->
At an April 6 hearing, Nelson -- while pushing both sides to resume negotiating a new agreement -- recognized the urgency of the situation and declared that both sides had a lot "at risk." Nelson's orders have indicated her respect of the public's interest in a settlement to keep the 2011 season on track.
When the league asked to respond to the bond request by the players, she demanded it by the end of the day, one hour before the NFL's own response to the clarification request was due. Then came Nelson's denial of the stay, long after sunset and long after the courthouse normally closes.
The NFL will now place its hopes with the 8th Circuit, viewed as a more friendly venue to businesses like the league than the federal courts in Minnesota.
Goodell said the surest way for the league to operate without running afoul of antitrust laws is to get back to bargaining with the players. The two sides had 16 days of talks with a mediator earlier this year and four more with a federal magistrate. Little progress has been seen, though the two sides are scheduled to meet again May 16.
"That's how we've been successful. That's how other leagues have been successful, and it should continue that way," Goodell said.
Most players again stayed away from team headquarters for a second day Wednesday, working out on their own.
"What we're looking for is a little clarity as far as what the rules are, so we can operate on the same page. So we'll just have to wait and see what those rules are," coach Mike Shanahan said.
<!--columnistprofile is null-->

Anyone else see this ?

BroncoMan4ever
04-27-2011, 09:20 PM
let the season begin?

Inkana7
04-27-2011, 09:28 PM
The NFL will appeal and refuse to start the league year until that is settled. Because they are dicks.

RhymesayersDU
04-27-2011, 09:30 PM
For what it's worth, one of the guys (Schefter maybe?) said that the likely scenario is guys being allowed to go into the facility and work out and such, but that teams won't trade or sign players.

So not ideal, but getting the guys back into playing, meeting with coaches, etc, is probably good, especially for a team like ours.

BroncoInferno
04-27-2011, 09:33 PM
For what it's worth, one of the guys (Schefter maybe?) said that the likely scenario is guys being allowed to go into the facility and work out and such, but that teams won't trade or sign players.

I'm no legal scholar, but doesn't that amount to collusion? If the owners get together and agree not to sign anyone even though it's technically allowed....that sounds illegal to me. Anyone know the legal particulars on this?

BroncoMan4ever
04-27-2011, 09:38 PM
I'm no legal scholar, but doesn't that amount to collusion? If the owners get together and agree not to sign anyone even though it's technically allowed....that sounds illegal to me. Anyone know the legal particulars on this?

it's been collusion the last couple days as well. technically they can start signing players and trading players but no one will make a move.

Dedhed
04-27-2011, 09:46 PM
Please god, let us get a 2nd rounder for Orton. Puh..LEEEEAASSSE!!!!!!!

Soul-Bronco
04-27-2011, 09:49 PM
wont believe it till i see it, but GET IT DONE !!

BroncoInferno
04-27-2011, 09:50 PM
it's been collusion the last couple days as well. technically they can start signing players and trading players but no one will make a move.

Well, I think they had the excuse of the pending appeal the last few days. That's gone now.

RhymesayersDU
04-27-2011, 09:51 PM
I'm no legal scholar, but doesn't that amount to collusion? If the owners get together and agree not to sign anyone even though it's technically allowed....that sounds illegal to me. Anyone know the legal particulars on this?

From what I understand, the teams could argue that they're simply waiting for word from the commissioner's office as to when the year starts, since appeals are still pending.

BroncoMan4ever
04-27-2011, 10:22 PM
Please god, let us get a 2nd rounder for Orton. Puh..LEEEEAASSSE!!!!!!!

a 2nd or at the least a 3rd and 5th

OBF1
04-27-2011, 10:43 PM
Will not trade orton in time for the draft, just takes too long and the way things are now going, forget about it.

BroncoMan4ever
04-27-2011, 11:59 PM
Will not trade orton in time for the draft, just takes too long and the way things are now going, forget about it.

it's not completely impossible to get him traded by friday night.

we have all day tomorrow to hear offers, because there is no way anyone gives a 1st rounder for him.

and considering he isn't coming off a major injury there are no real questions on whether he can play. i say look for teams that are looking at QBs to take a look at guys like McNabb, Kolb and Orton as potentials instead of rookies. especially since all 3 can be had for less than 1st rounders.

listopencil
04-28-2011, 01:01 AM
(Nelson) insisted that her order was simply an end to the lockout, not a prohibition of the player constraints like franchise and transition tags that help the league maintain competitive balance.

There is no injunction in place preventing the NFL from exercising, under its hoped-for protection of the labor laws, any of its rights to negotiate terms and conditions of employment, such as free agency.

"The league may choose to act in accordance with its expressed belief that the players remain a union and that they have reached a state of impasse, or the League may choose to chart a different course, implementing a version of the 2010 player system, or something different altogether," she wrote. "Like any defendant in any lawsuit, defendants themselves must make a decision about how to proceed and accept the consequences of their decision."



As I see it, NFL teams are free to (in good faith) continue to operate as they have been under the CBA. This includes drafting, trading and using the Free Agency system. They are also free to operate under a different set of rules than the CBA allows or under no rules whatsoever. They have been warned that in any case whatever actions they take will be examined and judged upon. The best move I could imagine them making would be to have a meeting of the owners and Goodell to decide how to proceed, then have Goodell announce the results to the media. As time goes by the likelihood increases for situations to crop up that may end badly for individual owners and the league as a whole.

Rabb
04-28-2011, 05:12 AM
Will not trade orton in time for the draft, just takes too long and the way things are now going, forget about it.

you may be right, but this is per 102.3's Facebook page just now...

Breaking News: Cecil Lammey reports their is interest in a possible deal between the Vikings and Broncos for Kyle Orton. Teams currently waiting to see if they'll be able to trade players tonight following Judge Nelson's ruling yesterday

srphoenix
04-28-2011, 05:31 AM
oh please make it happen!!!!

Plus once Ortons gone and teams realize were not taking a QB we can finally start featuring Tebow as our franchise QB

cmhargrove
04-28-2011, 05:36 AM
oh please make it happen!!!!

Plus once Ortons gone and teams realize were not taking a QB we can finally start featuring Tebow as our franchise QB

Or, we would be clearing the way for another QB. There are two ways to look at that move.

oubronco
04-28-2011, 06:05 AM
The way I understand it is the owners aren't going to do anything until the appeal has been heard in St. Louis in a few days