Skip to content

April 6 hearing date gives NFL, players time to talk

nelson-susan-judge

Earlier today, Judge Susan Nelson issued an order setting an April 6 hearing date in the players’ motion for preliminary injunction, which requests that the lockout be blocked while the lawsuit proceeds.

Here’s what it means, actually or potentially.

1.  Judge Nelson won’t immediately be punting the case.

Unlike the two prior judges to whom the case had been assigned, Judge Nelson didn’t treat the litigation like a proverbial hot potato.  By issuing an order setting a hearing date on the motion for preliminary injunction, Judge Nelson has implied that there is no apparent reason for her to recuse herself from handling the case.

It doesn’t foreclose the players from filing a motion to transfer the case from Judge Nelson to Judge David Doty.  Though neither we nor NFL general counsel Jeff Pash (one of the guests on today’s supersized PFT Live) are currently aware of any precedent that would allow a case to be transferred within the same district based on a given judge’s knowledge of the process, nothing stops the players from trying.

That said, the players don’t seem to be concerned about Judge Nelson’s handling of the case.  “That’s not an issue,” Saints quarterback Drew Brees said during a Monday conference call arranged by the NFLPA*.  “That’s something that the owners seem to be very focused on.  For us it about the facts and the law.”

The fact that Judge Nelson was nominated by President Obama and appointed by a Congress controlled by Democrats is another reason for the players to not be complaining.

2.  It’s possible that the players wanted a later date.

When a case is filed along with a motion for preliminary injunction, the judge to whom the case is assigned promptly attempts to determine the length of the proverbial fuse.  It happens when the judge, or more often one of the judge’s assistants, calls the plaintiffs’ lawyer and asks, “When do you want this to be heard?”  And then the plaintiffs’ lawyer says, “Right away” or “In a few weeks” or whatever the plaintiffs’ lawyer says.  The ultimate decision regarding the date of the hearing is based on the plaintiffs’ urgency, the availability of the lawyers, and the docket of the judge.

For a case of this magnitude, a judge would be more likely to move quickly, if the plaintiffs want to move quickly.  It’s possible that the players (and this meshes with some things we’ve heard and senses elsewhere) wanted a three-to-four-week window before the ruling, so that negotiations could continue during the dead period between the end of mediation and the hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction.

The players possibly would want to buy time due to fears that the players would lose the motion for preliminary injunction, allowing the lockout to continue until the litigation ends successfully for the players.  Such an outcome would give the league ample leverage going forward; the possibility that the lockout will be lifted as soon as April 6 gives the players leverage.

That leverage can be converted into a deal.  After April 6, the leverage could get stronger — or it could evaporate.

3.  Negotiations may continue.

Even though the NFLPA* has decertified and no longer has the ability to negotiate on behalf of the players, talks may continue within the confines of the antitrust case filed in Minnesota.  And those talks would be handled by the lawyers who are handling the case.

Indeed, NFLPA* spokesman George Atallah said during the Monday conference call with the media that “any negotiations are up to the class counsel.”

The problem?  Someone has to make the first move.  And lawyers routinely obsess over the perception of weakness that comes from being the first one to place the call.

Here’s our advice.  Judge Nelson should refer the case to mediation.  Now.

Though it remains an inherently voluntary process, the parties would be more inclined to obey the mediator and behave reasonably if the mediator has teeth, if the mediator was picked by the judge presiding over the case.  For mediation conducted within the confines of litigation, where the mediator has the ability to call the judge and express concern about the question of whether one side or the other misbehaved, the chances of broken vows of silence and perceptions of intransigence would diminish.

So to the extent that our audience in the Twin Cities (or, as Paul Allen of KFAN describes it, the cornfields) includes Judge Nelson, a member of her staff, or someone who knows her, tell her that the hacks at PFT think she should immediately send the two sides to mediation.

Likewise, Judge Doty could order mediation, given that he still has jurisdiction over the “lockout insurance” case and the collusion claim filed under the now-expired settlement agreement in the Reggie White antitrust litigation.

If either Judge Nelson or Judge Doty were to order mediation, a deal most likely would be done by April 6.  If both were to do it simultaneously, the chances of a deal would be even greater.

Permalink 34 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Top Stories, Union
34 Responses to “April 6 hearing date gives NFL, players time to talk”
  1. kev86 says: Mar 14, 2011 3:41 PM

    Think of how much annoying crap you’ll have to do on Sundays if there is no season. THANKS A LOT NFL!!!

  2. hobartbaker says: Mar 14, 2011 3:41 PM

    Somehow you knew it would come down to Susan talking sense into the Brady Bunch.

  3. skoobyfl says: Mar 14, 2011 3:41 PM

    This is going to get dragged out with every inch being a new headline of breaking news, instead of simply a lump sum story.

    Folks, the NFL is out of business because the employees want more money. Bleed for them not as they do not know what to do.

  4. radrntn says: Mar 14, 2011 3:45 PM

    thats good, I am sure that most of the nfl players are familiar with “hearings” and going to court.

  5. sfgiantsworldchamps says: Mar 14, 2011 3:50 PM

    WHO CARES

  6. mdpickles says: Mar 14, 2011 3:56 PM

    PFT should be locked out too until a deal gets done.

  7. brdnc says: Mar 14, 2011 3:57 PM

    I clerked for a federal judge in the US District Court for the Eastern District of NY. There is precedent for moving a case to another judge within a district if the judge is handling/has handled a “related case.” So, the players conceivably could ask for that to happen, though it doesn’t sound like they’re on that path. I also have to admit that my clerkship days are waaaaaaay behind me, and I don’t remember if that’s something typically raised initially with the judge to whom the case is assigned or if it’s something that is raised with the clerk’s office when the case is first filed, before it’s assigned.

  8. jerseydevil856 says: Mar 14, 2011 4:01 PM

    To The NFLPA and the Players:

    I am your average football fan, and I pay your salary. Yes, the paycheck that you cash may have the name of the team that you play for written on it, as well as the signature of the team owner or president…but make no mistake about it, without me you would not have a livelihood.

    The level of greed that I have seen from all of you is the reason that most people cannot stand, or identify with, today’s athlete. You have been bestowed with a natural talent – a gift – that the majority of the population would give anything to own. This gift provides you with celebrity status. It offers you our adoration and our support every week. It enables you to play a game that we all grew up loving, and be rewarded financially for it. Do you have any idea of how many of us would love that opportunity – to be cheered while having a career doing something that we actually loved? And yet, you want more.

    Do you know that the overwhelming majority of you will make more in your playing career than most of us will ever make in our entire lifetime? Yes, some of you will have short careers – but the amount of time that you play football professionally will give you the finances needed to invest, start a business or do any number of things that will allow you to live comfortably the rest of your lives. And yet, you want more.

    Both you and the owners have stated that the fans are the most important part of the NFL, and yet neither of you can relate to us at all. Most of us can’t afford to take our families to a game anymore because of the outrageous ticket and concession prices, let alone the PSL’s that enable us the opportunity to just to purchase a ticket. And yet, you want more.

    Frankly, we are tired of it.

    If you truly value the fans, then show them. I propose the following 10 point settlement to your dispute, which I feel is more than fair to the players, the owners, and the fans:

    1) Each NFL player will earn $250,000 for every year of service. This means that every rookie will earn $250,000 a year; every second year player will earn $500,000 a year; a 5th year player will earn $1.25 million a year; etc. The longer you play, the more you earn every year…which is equivalent to how most of our jobs are. If we are with the same organization longer, we earn a raise and make more. And you will do so happily, with the understanding that you are being paid more than you would ever receive with most any other type of employment.

    2) You will have the ability to earn bonuses based on team performance. If your team makes the playoffs, every member of the team will receive a $50,000 bonus. If your team wins the Super Bowl, every team member will receive an additional $100,000 bonus.

    3) Every player’s rookie contract will be for 2 years, which will be sufficient time for the team to evaluate the player, and for the player to evaluate the team. At the completion of that period, each new contract will be for 4 years.

    4) Your contract will become guaranteed for the year providing that you are on a team’s 53 man roster. Therefore, if you get injured, you will still be paid for the year.

    5) As a professional football player, you will acknowledge that you are (like it or not) a role model for younger people. As such, you are expected to conduct yourselves accordingly while you represent your team, your city and your region. Failure to do so will lead to disciplinary action, up to and including suspension and termination from the league. Playing in the NFL is a privilege, not a right.

    6) As your contracts are fairly easy, there will be no need to pay agents a 10% fee, unless you choose to use them for any type of endorsement deals.

    7) Every NFL team will offer full, lifetime benefits to you and your family, free of charge. Again, this is better than what most of us ever receive, and you will receive it for free.

    8) Every NFL team will provide you with a access to a financial advisor, free of charge. They will show you how to maximize your earnings and prepare for life after the game of football.

    9) The owners will immediately institute a 65% across-the-board reduction of ticket prices and concession fees. This will afford the average family the ability to actually attend NFL games, especially in our current economic climate.

    10) The NFL will immediately lift its blackout policy. You are enabling more fans the opportunity to attend each event, so you should not need to worry about selling out each event. For those that can attend a game, it will be easier to do so. For the fans who are not able to because of work commitments or financial problems, you will still be providing goodwill towards them.

    This may not seem like much in light of what you may currently be earning. If you’re not happy with it, then by all means, you are welcome to find other gainful employment at the company of your choice. I’m fairly certain that there is someone that will be more than willing – and capable – of taking your place on a team’s roster. And I will cheer for them.

    Sincerely,

    The Fans

  9. vadog says: Mar 14, 2011 4:09 PM

    I am, herewith, putting the NFL and the NFLPA* on notice that they have until 28 March 2011 to come to a full agreement on a new CBA. If after that date there is not a new CBA, I as a present fan of the National Football League, will begin the process of extricating myself from all fan like dealings with the National Football League, it’s teams, players, etc… I will begin to refer to myself as a “former fan” on 28 March. Everyday following that date there is no CBA, it will be harder for the NFL to re-enter into a relationship with me.

    The consequences to the NFL of losing me as a fan are:
    1. I will not attend games in person.
    2. I will not watch games on tv and I will boycott the advertisers who have a relationship with the NFL.
    3. I will not purchase or display any NFL merchandise. Providing neither the NFL or my favorite team or players with free advertising.
    4. I will encourage other “former fans” to join me in this endeavor.

    I don’t believe for a moment that the NFL will miss me or my money! But, I felt it was my duty to provide this written warning. Thank you for the platform.

  10. hobartbaker says: Mar 14, 2011 4:09 PM

    Mrs. Nelson thinks that men spend far too much time watching football on Sundays in any case. There is work to be done in the yard and it would be nice to go over to visit the in laws for a few hours. Goodness knows it wouldn’t hurt us to attend church a little more often. So, perhaps it might be better for everyone if they just stopped playing for year or two and had more family time. To bond.

  11. romosrevenge says: Mar 14, 2011 4:18 PM

    So conselor, in Vegas parlance, what are the odds that your suggestion of a request for mediation will be followed?

  12. 3octaveFart says: Mar 14, 2011 4:21 PM

    jerseydevil856, while I do admire your passion, I’m just not sure some of your points are realistic or even feasible.
    There is one indisputable truth in what you say though, the fans possess more power here than they realize.
    Many posters over the last few weeks, regardless of which side you’re on, have lamented the fact that we the fans, have no voice. Truth is, we have a more powerful voice than both sides combined.

    That money they’re squabbling over? Where do they think it comes from? It’s OUR money, every cent of it, until we decide to give it to them.

    If fans could somehow come together and organize a moratorium on NFL purchases of every kind for say, one month, that would scare the living sh*t out of both sides.

  13. steelybills says: Mar 14, 2011 4:28 PM

    jerseydevil856, I was with you till the “10 point settlement”…

  14. bahamallama says: Mar 14, 2011 4:28 PM

    Just a few comments,
    if your proposal is all players make the same money but it changes based on the number of years in the league, then why would they need contracts? They will make the same if they play for the Patriots or the Browns, teams will get stacked and the bad teams will get worse. Money and big contracts allow small market or bad teams to draw talent.
    An alternative to that is no contract. you’re drafted, you are on that team until you retire (officially, not like Brett Favre) or they release you. That would reward teams for drafting well.

    Second, after 14 years of paying for Sunday Ticket, I’m done this year. I was thinking about canceling anyways, this just seals it.

    NFL get your garbage straightened out in a year or two maybe we’ll talk, but if the players are taking a pay cut, there’s no way in heck I’m paying more to watch them on my TV every single year. That makes no sense. I’m voting with my money, and my money says no to the NFL!

  15. jakek2 says: Mar 14, 2011 4:29 PM

    If business owners treated their employees fairly, there would be no need for unions and nothing for you tea-bagging, Scott Walker loving, minimum wage accepting republi-crites to harp on.

    Kudos to the NFLPA for not backing down to the man! The harder you fight, the more respect you get from this fan!

    Fight on!

  16. marjones45 says: Mar 14, 2011 4:31 PM

    skoobyfl says:
    Mar 14, 2011 3:41 PM
    This is going to get dragged out with every inch being a new headline of breaking news, instead of simply a lump sum story.

    Folks, the NFL is out of business because the employees want more money. Bleed for them not as they do not know what to do.

    _____________________________
    Wow Skoobyfl. You are remarkably uninformed. The players have not asked for one dime more than their contract calls for. Tiz the owners who opted out and want a larger share.

  17. elrushbo2 says: Mar 14, 2011 4:40 PM

    “The fact that Judge Nelson was nominated by President Obama and appointed by a Congress controlled by Democrats is another reason for the players to not be complaining”

    Well folks there you have it, the reason the case was punted to her. The outcome is fixed in favor of the players…..what a surprise. Everything about Obama and his administration is corrupt and now their hands are all over the NFL. 2012 can’t come soon enough.

  18. jerseydevil856 says: Mar 14, 2011 4:47 PM

    3octaveFart says: Mar 14, 2011 4:21 PM

    jerseydevil856, while I do admire your passion, I’m just not sure some of your points are realistic or even feasible.

    *************************************

    What exactly is not feasible? Both the players and the owners are simply scaling back the revenues to assist the fans…who pay BOTH their wages. Without us fans, there is no NFL. Period. End of story.

  19. fergie22 says: Mar 14, 2011 4:49 PM

    why is this all taking place in minnesota of all places is it because the judges there favor the players ie star caps? why is this high profile case being held on a goat farmby a bunch of olafs ya hey

  20. chatham10 says: Mar 14, 2011 4:58 PM

    The fans now know that this whole deal is in the hands of lawyers for both sides. God, do I feel good about that.

  21. jerseydevil856 says: Mar 14, 2011 5:05 PM

    bahamallama says: Mar 14, 2011 4:28 PM

    Just a few comments, if your proposal is all players make the same money but it changes based on the number of years in the league, then why would they need contracts? They will make the same if they play for the Patriots or the Browns, teams will get stacked and the bad teams will get worse. Money and big contracts allow small market or bad teams to draw talent. An alternative to that is no contract. you’re drafted, you are on that team until you retire (officially, not like Brett Favre) or they release you. That would reward teams for drafting well.

    ***************************************
    Sorry, Bahama but I respectfully disagree.

    Every player would want – and need – a contract because it’s their “employment agreement” that entitles them to the points outlined above.

    And yes…players would make the same whether they played for the Patriots or the Browns. So how exactly would teams get stacked? Players would be offered the same compensation regardless of where they played, so why would they want to move? Three reasons: 1) bigger market = better endorsements; 2) better run team = better chance to win a Super Bowl or 3) player’s boyhood dream to play for Team X.

    But let’s face it…the Washington, New York and Dallas rosters only have 53 spots. Having a job that pays you damn well in a small market isn’t necessarily a kiss of death for your career. In fact, I’d argue that if Brett Favre hadn’t screwed the Packers faithful over by heading to other teams, he would have been revered in GB until the day he died. What’s the worth of that? Not to mention…do ya think that 90% of the Cowboys, Redskins and Giants players wish to god that they played for the small-market Packers this year?

    Yes, money and big contracts have allowed small market teams to draw talent. Money and big contracts have also allowed players to feel like they are always entitled to more. I’m sick of hearing that Player A makes $5mil more and I think I’m better so pay me to show me respect. It’s destroying the game.

    I say take it back. Owners cut ticket prices to assist fans, this shrinks the revenue pool, and players still earn a substantial salary playing a game. Everyone wins, especially the fans.

  22. sfgiantsworldchamps says: Mar 14, 2011 5:14 PM

    Everything good or bad comes to an end, maybe this is the end for the NFL so to speak. So much $ that can not be agreed upon could be a stalemate for years to come (not months) meanwhile life goes on with or without it. Im sure the people in Japan are “all broke up ” over some poor sap that cant manage his 1$ salary to last through the horrific lock out. It is a shame however, that something that became popular (professional football) during an era that many Americans had next to nothing (The Great Depression) . These people looked to the Sunday games as a little break from the harsh reality of unemployment and bleak outlooks. Now, we face similar challenges, but our sunday heros cant get it together. Maybe we should all look to something different on sunday. Surely football will be back at some point, but maybe our focus could be on saving our own communities high school and junior college programs that face illimination due to the ravages of scary school budget cuts. Now, that would be tragic. Meanwhile, there’s BASEBALL!

  23. Deb says: Mar 14, 2011 5:25 PM

    Why is this response being censored? The NFL is not out of business because the employees want more money and he’s making allusions to Christ’s crucifixion. You don’t find that offensive, but you find my review of the FACTS offensive? That is ridiculous!

    skoobyfl says:

    Folks, the NFL is out of business because the employees want more money.
    ————————————————–

    Just making up the facts as you go, skoob?

    The players didn’t ask for any more money. In fact, the players offered a deal that would have them taking a smaller cut than they have in any year since 2002. The owners rejected the proposal and blew off negotiations until the ninth hour when the cameras were watching. Then they made what seemed to be a generous offer that ignored the central issue: They have demanded one billion dollars be peeled off the top before dividing up revenues into the agreed-upon percentages. And since they haven’t gotten their way, the owners have shut down the league. The players are going to court trying to force them back into business.

    You may hate elite athletes. But that doesn’t grant you leave to rewrite the story.

  24. Deb says: Mar 14, 2011 5:26 PM

    skoobyfl says:

    Folks, the NFL is out of business because the employees want more money.
    ————————————————–

    Just making up the facts as you go, skoob?

    The players didn’t ask for any more money. In fact, the players offered a deal that would have them taking a smaller cut than they have in any year since 2002. The owners rejected the proposal and blew off negotiations until the ninth hour when the cameras were watching. Then they made what seemed to be a generous offer that ignored the central issue: They have demanded one billion dollars be peeled off the top before dividing up revenues into the agreed-upon percentages. And since they haven’t gotten their way, the owners have shut down the league. The players are going to court trying to force them back into business.

    You may hate elite athletes. But that doesn’t grant you leave to rewrite the story.

  25. dbellina says: Mar 14, 2011 5:29 PM

    I hope the next Judge they get is either named Judy or Mathis.

  26. jakek2 says: Mar 14, 2011 5:32 PM

    Everything about Obama and his administration is corrupt
    —-
    elrush – and Bush shaking hands with oil sheiks during wartime is not?

    jerseydevil – your “plan” presupposes that Owners will take their windfall and give it back to the fans in the form of cheaper seats / merchandise. You must live in fairy tale land with the rest of the republi-crites. That extra money is going right back in their pockets which will give them more ability to figure out ways to screw YOU the fan. Quit being a lemming.

  27. jerseydevil856 says: Mar 14, 2011 6:14 PM

    jakek2 says: Mar 14, 2011 5:32 PM

    jerseydevil – your “plan” presupposes that Owners will take their windfall and give it back to the fans in the form of cheaper seats / merchandise. You must live in fairy tale land with the rest of the republi-crites. That extra money is going right back in their pockets which will give them more ability to figure out ways to screw YOU the fan. Quit being a lemming.

    **********************************

    jakek2, although my neighborhood is decent, I wouldn’t call it “fairy-tale land”. It’s the type of place where most people work hard and try to get ahead as best they can…and some who can’t find jobs at all, and would give anything to have one to ward off foreclosure, creditor calls and little things like paying the bills and putting food on the table for their families. It’s called the REAL WORLD; you should go there sometime.

    As for being a lemming, I would rather put my trust in an agreement where both parties will realize that their golden egg is teetering precariously in an economy that has more bleak times ahead than sunshine…and one where they will both take dramatic steps to right the ship both now and in the future. Otherwise we’re going to be right back here again in 6 or 7 years with players complaining that a $400 million contract is “just not enough to live on”.

  28. jerseydevil856 says: Mar 14, 2011 6:28 PM

    Deb says: Mar 14, 2011 5:26 PM

    They have demanded one billion dollars be peeled off the top before dividing up revenues into the agreed-upon percentages. And since they haven’t gotten their way, the owners have shut down the league. The players are going to court trying to force them back into business.

    **************************************

    Hey Deb…I’m going to clue you in on a little secret…businesses are in business to MAKE MONEY FOR THE OWNER, NOT THE EMPLOYEES.

    I love how all the owner-bashers throw out the fact that the owners want a billion dollars off the top. This amounts to $31.2 million per team…not so much when you break it down per club, and compare it to the contract amounts the players/employees are making, is it??

    Oh, and let’s not forget that out of the owners shares, they have to pay health insurance, taxes, staff fees and all of those other incidental things that come with running an NFL team. The players do NOT share in these expenses.

  29. penguininbondage says: Mar 14, 2011 6:55 PM

    I hope she gives the “Ralphie treatment” to the players.

  30. 3octaveFart says: Mar 14, 2011 7:00 PM

    jerseydevil856 says: Mar 14, 2011 4:47 PM

    “Without us fans, there is no NFL. Period. End of story.”

    I know that, but we need to remind the owners and players of that – it seems they’ve forgotten.

  31. jakek2 says: Mar 14, 2011 7:00 PM

    jerseydevil – why should the players live in your miserable definition of “REAL WORLD” when they can pool their power, organize, and get what’s fair? This action should not be condemned but instead heralded! The harder people work, logically, the better they should perform their jobs creating a better and more valuable product. This value should be recognized by their employers in the form of better salaries, benefits, etc. but is not because business owners will not pay more than they have to. Since non-union employees in this position are rather powerless, it is their fault that they do not grow a pair, assemble, and leverage their collective talents as a UNION to get what is fair. The NFLPA is doing just that. I, for one, will not begrudge them just because it is on a much larger scale.

  32. jerseydevil856 says: Mar 14, 2011 8:00 PM

    jakek2 says: Mar 14, 2011 7:00 PM

    jerseydevil – why should the players live in your miserable definition of “REAL WORLD” when they can pool their power, organize, and get what’s fair? This action should not be condemned but instead heralded! The harder people work, logically, the better they should perform their jobs creating a better and more valuable product. This value should be recognized by their employers in the form of better salaries, benefits, etc. but is not because business owners will not pay more than they have to. Since non-union employees in this position are rather powerless, it is their fault that they do not grow a pair, assemble, and leverage their collective talents as a UNION to get what is fair. The NFLPA is doing just that. I, for one, will not begrudge them just because it is on a much larger scale.

    ************************************

    Wow, jakek2…let me guess…you whistle “look for the union label” while you’re out buying your tidy-whities??

    My definition of the “real world” is not miserable, it’s fact. The economy sucks, and it’s not getting better anytime soon. Unemployment has been over 10% for years. Homes are being foreclosed on left and right. Most people are just getting by. But under your union-inspired wisdom, the fact that NFL players want more and more money and have a union should be…what was the word you used…heralded? Bullcrap. It’s greed.

    Let me clue you in on something, friend. The NFL (and every other major sports league, for that matter) has been going down a dangerous road for years. Salaries keep going up, and where exactly do you think the revenue is coming to support these increases?? The fans, that’s where.

    The fans…you, me, everyone on here and everyone who goes to games…has to bear the burden for the exorbitant player salaries. And I’m not absolving the owners for writing the contracts in this mess; they’re just as much at fault. But you can’t keep increasing player salaries millions and millions of dollars each year, especially since the fans – many who have been hit hard in this economy – are the ones footing the bill. It doesn’t matter how “valuable your product” is…there is going to come a point where the growth stops. Every business peaks; it’s Economics 101. The NFL, the owners and the players are pricing the middle-class out of their market, and they’re all too stupid to see it.

    Unions served their purpose back in the day, when they were formed for the purpose of getting better working conditions or pay for employees. I don’t think this applies to spoiled multi-millionaire athletes.

  33. jakek2 says: Mar 14, 2011 8:46 PM

    jerseydevil – The players haven’t asked for one more DIME! The owners want to take money BACK. If there was no union, the owners would succeed. In that regard, the union’s purpose is being served here in the modern day. Take off your dopey Palin goggles for a second and you’d see that.

    As far as pricing the middle-class out, that’s a different ball of wax altogether. The solution is…Don’t go! If you don’t go, prices and salaries come down together.

    As far as my tighty-whities go, I’ll gladly pay a few dollars more to support my fellow American middle-class working man. You keep buying your chinese-made, anti-itch cream from Walmart (where prices are only marginally better than Costco despite Walmart compensating their employees in a way that would make a pre-union 1930′s rail worker vomit).

  34. Deb says: Mar 14, 2011 10:45 PM

    @jerseydevil856 …

    This is no different than producers paying actors big bucks. The market has determined what these men are worth, and something tells me you love the free market. Producers cover the production costs and actors give the performance. That’s the way it works–except in that case, actors also sometimes get a piece of the profits!

    The owners have no business without the players–unless you want to watch Richardson chase Jones down the field while that squirt Snyder tries to block. And the owners aren’t paying player health care out of their share because it comes out of that 59+ percent along with pension funds for retired players that didn’t get anything when they played.

    By the way, the owners already skim a billion off the top before they divvy up the agreed-upon percentages. Now they want to skim another billion. And the players made an offer a few weeks ago that would have taken them back to pre-2002 earning levels but the owners turned it down because they were preparing for this lockout. That was the master plan from the get-go.

    You go right ahead sending all that love up to Big Business, Big Banking, and Wall Street and just keep waiting for them to trickle it back to you. I’m a small business owner and don’t intend to double as anyone’s urinal.

Leave a Reply

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