Skip to content

Collusion case not yet filed, but still could be

On October 9, a report emerged that a collusion case based on the lack of player spending in the uncapped year would be filed by the NFL Players Association against the league “potentially . . . within the next month.”

Key word?  Potentially.

It’s now November 17, and no collusion case has been filed.  We’re told that it likely won’t be filed until the NFLPA completes its ongoing series of meetings with players from individual teams, the primary purpose of which has been to obtain advance approval to decertify the union in an effort to block a lockout, and to set the stage for another antitrust lawsuit.

Per a source with knowledge of the situation, the union has met with players from 29 teams.  The remaining three are the 49ers, Raiders, and Seahawks.

Of course, it’s possible that talk of a collusion case is a bluff aimed at forcing the NFL to the bargaining table.  If that’s the case, it hasn’t created the kind of urgency that would lead to getting a deal done in the near future.

Or, given the progress of talks, in the distant future.

Permalink 9 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill, San Francisco 49ers, Seattle Seahawks, Top Stories, Union
9 Responses to “Collusion case not yet filed, but still could be”
  1. ejtowne says: Nov 17, 2010 7:18 AM

    Collusion case? Block a lockout? Antitrust lawsuit? You lost me at the headline.

  2. belicheckyoself says: Nov 17, 2010 7:23 AM

    Rediculous. Not that many worthwhile free agent players were available this year, because most teams structured contracts around this lunacy. The worthwhile players got and took sane contracts (brady, big vince) and some teams took overpriced shots at previously producing FA’s, (farve) but mostly there wasn’t a lot worth paying for because teams were able to anticipate that a new agreement wouldn’t be worked out ahead of time.
    The story in the link seems to be about everybody doing what makes sense for them. I think the players association should focus on helping out disabled players instead of assuring big cash payout for rookies that don’t make the cut.
    I think the collusion case is part of a propaganda strategy to demonize the owners. Demonize Goodell instead. Damn feminist.

  3. chapnastier says: Nov 17, 2010 7:54 AM

    Mr. Florio there are a few things you can never let go. First and foremost the Rooney Rule, which your obsession borders on insanity and if it were a woman, you’d be in jail for stalking. Second is the NFLPA being the victims in this entire thing. Third, this nonsense, that businesses, acting in a safe financial manner knowing that there is a potential that their spoiled cry baby employees might not want to play next season is somehow collusion. Get over it. Maybe I can sue my company for not giving me a raise in today’s economic climate and claim collusion because no one else got one either. Think Mike, Think!

  4. herokravon says: Nov 17, 2010 7:59 AM

    Exhibit A – Carolina Panthers.

  5. laffers says: Nov 17, 2010 8:01 AM

    What a pathetic Union; they can’t even “bluff” convincingly. The owners are keenly aware that the collusion case is weak and “circumstantial” they also know the Union WON’T file it out of fear that ANY negotiations will grind to a halt.
    Once again the Union shows how incompetent they are, top to bottom!

  6. laxer37 says: Nov 17, 2010 8:09 AM

    Suing the NFL and slowing down the process isn’t the best way to get the fans support of the NFLPA’s side.

    Here’s a novel idea: both sides put their demands in writing and then they sit down with an arbitrator and hammer out a compromise.

    Unlike the game of football, there doesn’t need to be a clear winner when this is settled.

  7. j0esixpack says: Nov 17, 2010 9:09 AM

    Either way the owners are covered as they opted for the comprehensive and collusion insurance from Geico

  8. marthisdil says: Nov 17, 2010 12:13 PM

    Collusion case? I think the owners need to form a union…just like the players…to give them the middle finger.

    Funny how the NFLPA has no problem being a union (i.e. a group of collusion), but don’t like it when the owners do it.

    Unions need to go away, across the board, period, in everything in life. All they do is screw stuff up.

  9. worsethingss says: Nov 18, 2010 4:01 PM

    #
    j0esixpack says: Nov 17, 2010 9:09 AM

    Either way the owners are covered as they opted for the comprehensive and collusion insurance from Geico
    ______________________________________

    Now that is funny right there!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!