Skip to content

All eyes on the 8th Circuit

seal 8th circuit

The United States system of federal courts are divided into circuits.  In all, there are 11 circuits (twelve if you include the fact that the District of Columbia has its own circuit).

The Eighth Circuit, headquartered in St. Louis, consists of seven states — including Minnesota.  And the Eighth Circuit is the new focal point of the Tom Brady antitrust lawsuit.

The league announced last night that documents seeking an immediate stay of the lifting of the lockout would be filed.  Adam Schefter of ESPN points out that the front page of the Eighth Circuit’s website already has been reconfigured to embrace its brand-new case.

“The court has docketed the National Football League’s appeal from Judge Susan Richard Nelson’s April 25, 2011 order enjoining the lockout,” the website states.

“A briefing schedule will be set shortly. Information about the schedule and the date and location of oral argument will be posted here as soon as it becomes available.”

It’s unclear how quickly, or slowly, the Eighth Circuit will move.  Until it does, we remain convinced that Judge Nelson has lifted the lockout and required the NFL to commence business as usual, and that failure to do so will be grounds for a finding of contempt of court — an outcome that entails potential civil and criminal penalties.

Permalink 47 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories, Union
47 Responses to “All eyes on the 8th Circuit”
  1. chapnastier says: Apr 28, 2011 7:31 AM

    Hopefully they will move sometime today understanding the financial implications of this left field ruling. I am still hopeful that some deal on a CBA can be reached before the draft so we can see some real interesting trading tonight.

  2. jpmelon says: Apr 28, 2011 7:33 AM

    The league needs to win this….the players don’t care if the league exists after they retire. The owners are the only party with a true interest in perpetuating the NFL as we know it.

    If they lose the draft, salary cap, minimum salary, etc. a lot of clubs will lose their ability to compete and the game will be tarnished forever.

  3. dryzzt23 says: Apr 28, 2011 7:49 AM

    Yet again a court sides with a union, let the inmates run the asylum, I guess that is what Doty & Nelson are saying, business be damned.

    I hope that the owners collude and decide to low ball every player b/c now the owners have to fear for their franchises due to PLAYER greed.

    The players have zero liability here whatsoever, if they workout at the teams facility, and get hurt, the team is liable, yet when the teams try to protect themselves from this the court forces them to allow the workouts and still demands that they be liable.

    When will the media call out the PLAYERS for being greedy?

    I for one will be ultra pissed and will lose all respect for the courts, the players, and every union in the U.S. if the NFLPA is allowed to re-certify and operate as a union yet again. It makes a mockery of the entire process and the owners have no recourse whatsoever.

    If the players struck, would the courts force them back to work due to “irreparable harm” to the owners? hell no they wouoldn’t b/c the courts always side with the unions

  4. airraid77 says: Apr 28, 2011 7:49 AM

    if that ruling is left untouched? professional sports is dead in the us. you might have 12 competitive team in the 4 major sports combined.

  5. airraid77 says: Apr 28, 2011 7:55 AM

    I am going to laugh like he ll when the 8th grants the injunctions, decides it wont hear the appeal until july…..and then turns nelsons decisions into swiss….with their being more holes than cheese.

  6. airraid77 says: Apr 28, 2011 7:59 AM

    dryzzt23,
    the media never calls out the true culprits in these cases….there is a reason m-flo and co. are hosted by who they are hosted…..

  7. lostsok says: Apr 28, 2011 8:07 AM

    Wow. People are really buying into Goodell’s nonsense. The draft will be fine. The league will be fine. There will be a salary cap.

    You people are getting your polka dot covered panties in a bunch over a scare tactic. Grow a set!

  8. east96st says: Apr 28, 2011 8:11 AM

    “Yet again a court sides with a union, let the inmates run the asylum, I guess that is what Doty & Nelson are saying, business be damned.”

    When are you dittoheads going to get it through your tiny little brains that the SUPREME COURT ruled against the owners 9-0!! THE SUPREME COURT!!! You can’t find two judges more pro-business on the PLANET that Scalia and Thomas. They have been shown more than willing to IGNORE the law to side with business. Yet, the owners STILL could NOT get EITHER one of them to side with the League. It has NOTHING to do with the judges, you dolt, it has to do with the LAW!!! I have owned dogs that learn quicker than you assclowns do.

  9. packfannchitown says: Apr 28, 2011 8:14 AM

    So the NFL can’t lock out the players, kinda sounds like they may need to actually sit their butts down and work out a deal without the convenient threat of a lockout… Imagine that.

  10. airraid77 says: Apr 28, 2011 8:15 AM

    you didnt have to wait for goodell to say it, to know its true…………
    BTW, when is al gore going to be held reponsible for knowing what he knew and when he knew the sunami that hit japan?
    I mean he is the one claiming man is reponsible…….HAGUE! Hague…

  11. kom2k10 says: Apr 28, 2011 8:15 AM

    I think all the player support is funny. You guys are just like the players and have NO IDEA of what the long term implications are of these lawsuits. The PA hired a LAWYER to represent them. That lawyer has now hired even more money hungry lawyers to sue every aspect of the NFL as we know it.

    Newsflash: THESE LAWYERS DO NOT CARE WHAT HAPPENS TO THE LEAGUE!!!!

    They are doing exactly what lawyers do… they sue anything and everything they think they have a chance at winning!

    The owners are not evil or greedy. The whole purpose of having a union and a CBA is so that they can negotiate through this process. Lockouts AND Strikes are a part of that process. Instead of the union honoring that system, they go and “decertify” and sue for everything under the sun.

  12. burgandyandgold says: Apr 28, 2011 8:15 AM

    Are Republicans so hateful of any other ideology that they side with NFL owners and would rather see no football if the leagal system does not agree with their personal opinions of the way things should be? I used to be pretty moderate and had lots of Republican friends but something sinister has taken over the soul of the Republican party over the last 20 years and has turned it into a self-destructive, loathing, racist, intolerant and hateful group of people who, like “capnastier” above would rather burn the house down instead of logical compromise. Good Lord, it is football, it is supposed to be a diversion from the nonsense of political theater.

  13. quirtevans says: Apr 28, 2011 8:17 AM

    “Yet again a court sides with a union”

    Yet again, you miss the point.

    There is no union. It doesn’t exist. It dissolved.

    That’s point one.

    In the absence of a union, a business can run itself however it sees fit. However point two is this: the NFL is not a single business. You seem to forget that the Supreme Court … 9-0, including all the conservatives … already decided that the NFL has to be treated as 32 separate businesses.

    And why should it be otherwise? They have separate profits. They have separate ownership and separate management.

    So, point three is that 32 separate businesses cannot collude on joint business arrangements without violating the anti-trust laws, unless there’s an exemption. There is, of course, an exemption for collective bargaining with a union. And so I must take you back to point one … there’s no union.

    If the Green Bay Packers want to shut down their operation, they are entitled to do so. However, what they cannot do is agree with 31 other teams that they will ALL shut down their operations. That’s an anti-trust violation.

    And that’s why the league office had better tread very carefully here. With triple damages at risk, a multi-billion dollar verdict against the league is not out of the question, if they ignore the court order and collude to violate the anti-trust laws.

  14. 6thsense79 says: Apr 28, 2011 8:19 AM

    Let’s see….after Dotty ruled against the owners in the lockout insurance case you owner ass kissers said ‘let’s see how they do with another judge’. They got another judge and still won. Now you’re bitching and moaning about liberal judges and think the 8th circuit will be different. Whether the judges hearing the case are considered liberal or conservative by you the end result for the league is they always lose anti trust cases. Or did you forget the 9-0 shellackings the supreme court gave the NFL in the American needle case? On a conservative supreme court the NFL couldn’t muster a single vote????

    Anyways you owner ass kissers keep your blood pressure down before you have a stroke. The rest of us are just glad the courts lifted this illegal lockout and the league is open for business.

  15. fanofbrowns17 says: Apr 28, 2011 8:19 AM

    Agreed. Well put, lostsok.

  16. clintonportisheadd says: Apr 28, 2011 8:21 AM

    The appeal won’t be heard for months.

    And her opinion/ruling was crafted in a way to be un-reversible with a heavy relaiance on precedent case law.

    The only way the it could be reversed would be that the appeals panel would be made up of activist judges who don’t follow that law but make up law. And of course that would NEVER happen here since these folks are all conservative appointees.

    Right?

  17. chapnastier says: Apr 28, 2011 8:23 AM

    @ lostsok

    I guess you know more than the rest of us. What exactly do you think players want? Do they want a limit on how much they can earn? Or would they rather be like baseball and earn 20 some million dollars a year or so? Do players want to be limited in free agency based on years of service? Or would they want the ability to jump from team to team year after year? Do players want to have to wait in a draft and get a slotted salary or would they like to go from team to team trying to get a higher pay day? You and all of your fellow “thumbs down” crowd just don’t get it.

  18. broncoway says: Apr 28, 2011 8:27 AM

    Owners: Despite record revenue last year, we’re not making enough money. We need you to take a pay cut.

    Players: Well, ok, we’ll trust you and take a 12% pay cut.

    Owners: It’s going to have to be a 30% pay cut.

    Players: That seems like a lot, can you show us the books as to why such an excessive pay cut on our part is necessary? I mean, we’re pulling in record revues, it seems like profits shouldn’t be down that much….

    Owners: Absolutely not. You can’t see the books. Trust us and take the pay cut.

    Players: This doesn’t seem right…. why are you so reluctant to show your books?

    Owners: It’s our right, now shut up and take your pay cut.

    Players: No. Not unless you prove that you’re telling the truth about losing money.

    Owners: Fine then, you’re locked out. No more NFL.

    Players: Guess we’ll have to file a lawsuit to keep the NFL open for Business.

    Judge Nelson: The owners were in the wrong to lock the players out. You must remain open for business.

    Owners: We’re appealing to a higher court.

    That’s the summary of what happened so far.

  19. 3octaveFart says: Apr 28, 2011 8:31 AM

    chapnastier says: Apr 28, 2011 8:23 AM

    “@ lostsok
    I guess you know more than the rest of us. ”

    Seriously?
    You’ve been standing on your soapbox for weeks now pontificating over every aspect of this labor issue in minute detail, almost as if you were personally involved and were present for every event.

    Isn’t it about time you went and sat down and just STFU?

    /yet I still love how you demonize the players and their rights, while you continue to post from work, on your boss’s dime.

  20. firstand4ever says: Apr 28, 2011 8:32 AM

    The courts have to ask themselves this.

    Why have the owners locked out their work force and closed down business?

    The league and it’s owners have no hardships. If this was the NBA. You could see a reasonable justification for struggling franchises to look to re-model and save their league.

    The NFL doesn’t need saving. The league has never done better from a financial standpoint and The League stands to grow even further. There really is no legitimate reason for the league to be locked out. NONE.

    The owners locked out their own league because they are looking to maximize and further profits. They are already making the most money that any sports league has ever made in the history of sports leagues. The league stands to grow even further and the owners know this. They are looking to get a larger piece of the pie moving forward.

    The lockout is based on greed and greed alone. There is and was no real challenge or hardships towards their businesses.

  21. mattyc says: Apr 28, 2011 8:33 AM

    If the owners were smart, they would go to the *NFLPA & make an agreement to extend the previous CBA for a period of 1 year. Don’t wait until March of next season to begin negotiations, begin them now & reach a new CBA.

    This is THE ONLY WAY the players side will agree to do business in the sense of negotiating. If the owners don’t do this, the players will continue to move through litigation & continue to win. If anyone thinks the 8th Circuit is going to rule differently, your nuts. The Govt has much more to worry about & sees a failing govt & economy. Left or Right wing doesn’t matter…. They will not deal with & side with greed at this time. They will scald the owners & the league for waiting until the last minute to attempt negotiations & for not wanting to renue an agreement that was very profitable for both sides. Irreperable harm is on the players side, the fans side, the employees side, & the side of the economy. Also, no league = no taxes for the government. For the league & the owners to think they will win any facet of this lawsuit is completely ridiculous. What the players can do in the long run is for rich upcoming retirees like Manning, Palmer, Brady, & others to purchase a franchise in a league started by all the players. They don’t have to go to the CFL, they can start their own league & their own teams & hire folks coming out of the 32 seperate franchises. There are guys smart enough & wealthy enough to do this…. The players don’t have to have these specific owners.

    The owners played hardball & lost. It is time to go back, sign a 1 year deal based on the previous CBA with the cap, & work specifically on where the current CBA hurts the league. But, it has to be willing to show all financials if they are wanting significant profits back. If there is no loss or several teams failing, they will not agree to a significant amount of profit loss to themselves without reasoning behind it.

  22. airraid77 says: Apr 28, 2011 8:33 AM

    6sense79,
    where will you be when the 8th circuit calls the union tactics for what they are, a sham?
    clintonportisheadd,
    irreversible, and where will you be when it is reversed?

  23. quirtevans says: Apr 28, 2011 8:36 AM

    One further thought. For historical reasons, you can’t use baseball as a precise analogy. Baseball has an existing anti-trust exemption, but it’s the only sport that has that exemption. Therefore, the NFL (and the NBA, and every other sports league) is in a slightly different position, and has to find a different anti-trust exemption in order to operate collectively.

  24. fltharley says: Apr 28, 2011 8:37 AM

    it is absolutley clear that the owners wanted this work stoppage and set this whole thing up . why else would they take less tv money so they could set up there cash cow when the shut everything down. it amazes me that people are blind to the greedy owners . how can anyone blame the players ? its time the owners got with the program and get this done .

  25. dennis2488 says: Apr 28, 2011 8:37 AM

    i read some of the comments on this site and i lose faith in america. laws that were created in response to the industrial revolution over 100 years ago aren’t being upheld any longer. everyday we lose out on workers rights while large conglomerates come in and run out small businesses, corner the market and dictate their own laws. i realize some of the players are dumb snobby and removed from society (just like the owners). but if the law isn’t upheld for one group it cant be upheld for anybody. im not about rooting for the players because i really dont care about them. i am rooting for progress and for the law.

  26. 3octaveFart says: Apr 28, 2011 8:40 AM

    chapnastier says: Apr 28, 2011 8:23 AM

    “I guess you know more than the rest of us. ”

    Look who’s talking.
    You’ve been predicting a landslide victory for the owners since this thing began. You were wrong then, and you’re still wrong now.

    “You and all of your fellow “thumbs down” crowd just don’t get it.”

    Wrong again. :roll:

  27. hoopsdoc says: Apr 28, 2011 8:50 AM

    quirtevans said-Yet again a court sides with a union”

    Yet again, you miss the point.

    There is no union. It doesn’t exist. It dissolved.

    That’s point one.

    In the absence of a union, a business can run itself however it sees fit. However point two is this: the NFL is not a single business. You seem to forget that the Supreme Court … 9-0, including all the conservatives … already decided that the NFL has to be treated as 32 separate businesses.

    And why should it be otherwise? They have separate profits. They have separate ownership and separate management.

    So, point three is that 32 separate businesses cannot collude on joint business arrangements without violating the anti-trust laws, unless there’s an exemption. There is, of course, an exemption for collective bargaining with a union. And so I must take you back to point one … there’s no union.

    If the Green Bay Packers want to shut down their operation, they are entitled to do so. However, what they cannot do is agree with 31 other teams that they will ALL shut down their operations. That’s an anti-trust violation.

    And that’s why the league office had better tread very carefully here. With triple damages at risk, a multi-billion dollar verdict against the league is not out of the question, if they ignore the court order and collude to violate the anti-trust laws.

    Many past court rulings have found that leagues like the NFL HAVE to operate outside of Anti-Trust laws in order to thrive. In other words, they HAVE to have rules governing things like parity among the different clubs.

    Check out the transcript of PFT Live with David Boies. Its very enlightening.

  28. hoopsdoc says: Apr 28, 2011 8:54 AM

    @ chapnastier

    Well put. These union shills just dont get it. These players care ONLY for themselves. The future of the game we all love means NOTHING to them. Thats why I’ve said all along, a victory for the players means a loss for the game.

  29. clintonportisheadd says: Apr 28, 2011 9:27 AM

    chapnastier says: Apr 28, 2011 8:23 AM

    I guess you know more than the rest of us. What exactly do you think players want?

    =====================

    That’s already been answered 1000 times. They want the same CBA they were working under when the league walked away from it. Everyone was making tons of money. There was labor peace.

    There was no reason to opt out of the CBA UNLESS the owners saw a huge windfall of money coming in the next few years and wanted even more profits than they were already getting.

    So they did.

  30. jonesjack says: Apr 28, 2011 9:27 AM

    “And that’s why the league office had better tread very carefully here.”

    Well put. They do have options but for now they better abide by the district court’s ruling and as you say tread very carefully in choosing their next move. American Needle had language that suggested the possibility that the teams could make rules about how they conduct business but as you point out the cost of getting it wrong is pretty steep.

  31. eagleswin says: Apr 28, 2011 9:31 AM

    clintonportisheadd says:Apr 28, 2011 8:21 AM

    The appeal won’t be heard for months.

    And her opinion/ruling was crafted in a way to be un-reversible with a heavy relaiance on precedent case law.

    The only way the it could be reversed would be that the appeals panel would be made up of activist judges who don’t follow that law but make up law. And of course that would NEVER happen here since these folks are all conservative appointees.

    Right?
    ——————————–
    I take it you didn’t read the interview with Boies that was posted on this site because you were to busy posting?

    As NFL lead counsel David Boies told PFT Live on Tuesday, the league believes that legal questions regarding the validity of the decertification of the union and the ability of the federal courts to prevent a lockout will be reviewed from scratch, essentially giving the league a fresh bite at the apple.

    What that’s saying is that, if the league is correct, the appellate court can use Nelson’s ruling for kindling if they so choose. It could’ve been war and peace and potentially be used for a doorstop.

    You get the idea. We’ll see if the league is right.

  32. phillyrocks says: Apr 28, 2011 9:36 AM

    Unions rule! Those who bitch are whiney little babies who don’t have enough attention span to understand what this is all about.

    To you…..Eat Crap!

  33. fillyfan says: Apr 28, 2011 9:38 AM

    burgandyandgold says: Apr 28, 2011 8:15 AM

    Are Republicans so hateful of any other ideology that they side with NFL owners and would rather see no football if the leagal system does not agree with their personal opinions of the way things should be? I used to be pretty moderate and had lots of Republican friends but something sinister has taken over the soul of the Republican party over the last 20 years and has turned it into a self-destructive, loathing, racist, intolerant and hateful group of people who, like “capnastier” above would rather burn the house down instead of logical compromise. Good Lord, it is football, it is supposed to be a diversion from the nonsense of political theater.”

    *************************
    Wow, and this comment isn’t divisive or partisan, is it? I thought this was a pro-football blog.

  34. tobyv29 says: Apr 28, 2011 9:48 AM

    The criminal owners just can’t accept the fact that they are in the wrong and can’t have their way lol.

  35. eagleswin says: Apr 28, 2011 10:02 AM

    clintonportisheadd says:Apr 28, 2011 9:27 AM

    chapnastier says: Apr 28, 2011 8:23 AM

    I guess you know more than the rest of us. What exactly do you think players want?

    =====================

    That’s already been answered 1000 times. They want the same CBA they were working under when the league walked away from it. Everyone was making tons of money. There was labor peace.

    There was no reason to opt out of the CBA UNLESS the owners saw a huge windfall of money coming in the next few years and wanted even more profits than they were already getting.

    So they did.
    ————————-

    I have yet to see anyone prove that the owners were making tons of money (ie.. Profit) for league year 2010. Keep in mind that DeMaurice admitted publicly that he turned down the leagues offer of a 3rd party audit due to PR concerns.

    There was labor peace because the players were gorging at the trough. That’s not a reason to keep things as status quo for the owners.

  36. zerored78 says: Apr 28, 2011 10:03 AM

    @eagleswin:

    The league has had about as much success in the courts as the Eagles have had in the postseason. Why should we think they are right now?

  37. goawayeverybody says: Apr 28, 2011 10:04 AM

    EAST96ST: You are my new hero.

  38. vadog says: Apr 28, 2011 10:17 AM

    I’m not for the players OR the owners. I say a pox on both houses. Yet, it is probably obvioous to most that the league has presented a very weak case. They should probably fire their lawyers.

  39. laeaglefan says: Apr 28, 2011 10:17 AM

    When is Obama going to blame George Bush for this whole mess?

  40. enrgy2burn says: Apr 28, 2011 10:24 AM

    Doesn’t the fact that there have been no free agent signings, coupled with the perception that any transactions made will not contain players, make the owners guilty of collusion (or at least perceived to be guilty of collusion)? At this point, there seems to be no doubt that the NFL is guilty, at least, of contempt and Roger Goodell should be arrested just as he is taking the stage to announce the first pick!!!

  41. sgtr0c says: Apr 28, 2011 11:15 AM

    I am not a law person and do not understand alot of it. But these are my thoughts……

    1. How is it legal to file a law case in a court district that you virtally know you will win there, for multiple cases, for over a thirty year time span? Since this is a national case, and not one only set in Minnesota, I feel it should be moved to a random court somewhere in the United States.

    2. 90 pages of opinion on why she is not wrong??? Thank you for spending our tax dollars wisely. Irreprual harm that the free agents will suffer this spring? The real harm is to the fans pocket book, we are the ones paying for all of this. Why don;t you defend the american worker like that instead of millionaire eliteist. I don;t see anyone writing 90 pages about construction workers, medical, factory, farm workers rights to make more money.

    3. Now the players are asking for 1billion dollars if the stay is accepted, that is about 625,000.oo dollars per player for the summer months of no work. I was in a union 10 years ago, our contract was fought over 50 cents more an hour or dental.

    4. I really hope the whole thing fails for both parties, millionaire vs billionaires, they are screwing it up all over and will only force the fan to pay more with this mess. Irreprual harm, right!

  42. clintonportisheadd says: Apr 28, 2011 11:17 AM

    eagleswin says: Apr 28, 2011 9:31 AM

    clintonportisheadd -

    What that’s saying is that, if the league is correct, the appellate court can use Nelson’s ruling for kindling if they so choose. It could’ve been war and peace and potentially be used for a doorstop.

    You get the idea. We’ll see if the league is right.

    ===============

    What makes you think they will win? They have lost EVERY case so far on the labor side as well as the TV money scam case. The track record of the NFL in court is abysmal. The last case they actually won was Maurice Clarett a decade ago.

  43. quirtevans says: Apr 28, 2011 11:21 AM

    “Many past court rulings have found that leagues like the NFL HAVE to operate outside of Anti-Trust laws in order to thrive. In other words, they HAVE to have rules governing things like parity among the different clubs.”

    Hoopsdoc,

    That may or may not be true. Personally, I don’t believe that parity is necessary for the NFL to exist.

    But, putting that disagreement aside, the law simply doesn’t provide for the leagues to operate outside of the anti-trust laws. Baseball has an anti-trust exemption. Other leagues do not. They can only operate outside the anti-trust laws if they do so in the context of collective bargaining.

    We have to remember that the owners consciously chose this path. They voided the CBA early … they didn’t have to do that. They instituted a lockout … they didn’t have to do that. If the current circumstances are difficult for them, they have no one but themselves to blame.

    And, if they deceived themselves into believing that they had an anti-trust exemption, even without collective bargaining, after the Needle case … they have no one but themselves to blame for that either.

    They are at pretty severe risk of contempt of court this morning. If I were Judge Nelson, I’d be awfully pissed that the owners are flouting my ruling, and I’d be issuing an order to show cause why they aren’t in contempt of court and shouldn’t be hit with sanctions.

  44. mackie66 says: Apr 28, 2011 11:49 AM

    To NFl owners and staffs, open your doors then go on a 6 month vacation. No law says you have to hire/sign free agents.

  45. tdotsteel says: Apr 28, 2011 12:01 PM

    @laeaglefan says:

    When is Obama going to blame George Bush for this whole mess?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    When George Bush admits responsibility for the: wrecking the economy, bailing out the banks, starting 2 wars, eroding our civil rights, lying to the American People, bankrupting America, the worst security failure in U.S. history, biggest annual deficit in history, biggest energy crises in U.S. history, cutting unemployment benefits for out of work Americans, the biggest corporate stock market fraud, etc…….this list can go on forever.

  46. pittman2052 says: Apr 28, 2011 12:02 PM

    isn’t the owners fault for paying the players as much as they did? would they be complaining about losing money if that wasn’t the case? there is no rule saying you HAVE to pay a player x amount of money.

  47. nmeagle33 says: Apr 28, 2011 12:36 PM

    Gees, now it’s personal. Repub BAD Demos GOOD.

    I sure won’t want Obama and dems handling this. They put the union in front of investors when it became GM=government motors. Now it appears B O wants to sell with we the people taking a major lose.

    The d… union wants to run the NFL then I’m all for the owners shuting down, sell the teams to the players/union and move away from this B…S… They sure don’t need the money. Dump it all, the team, the debt, the players and all that goes with the everyday operation of a football team.

    Wonder what football will be like in the coming season and years to come. Sure let the inmates run the aslym. I am no longer a fan after 60 years of faithfully watching the game; well, there’s always college ball and I wonder how that game will be affected by all this SH…

Leave a Reply

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