Skip to content

NFL files brief, uses players’ words on lockout against them

Randall Cobb AP

Still feeling that “back to football” buzz after draft weekend?   The NFL is ready to kill it.

The labor legal war rolled on Monday morning, when the league filed a brief to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, making their case for a more permanent “stay” of the injunction lifting the lockout.

NFL Network’s Albert Breer notes this is the final order of business before the court decides on the stay.  It’s uncertain when the court will rule, but it may come fairly soon this week.

The league argued that more “irreparable harm” would be suffered without a stay than if one was granted.  They even gave an expected timeline to how things might proceed, saying “an expedited appeal . . . could readily be resolved during the off-season.”

The league also suggested it wouldn’t matter if free agency started in “late June or early July” as opposed to May and tried to prove players don’t really mind the lockout.

Ray Lewis’ comment that he’s “never had a summer to myself” was used in the briefing to show that players aren’t suffering harm.  Wes Welker’s sarcastic joke that the league should do a “lockout every year” was also thrown in the mix.

So this is what we’ve been reduced to: Using joking comments by a player known for his foot fetish references as legal evidence.

We think the league underestimates the harm caused to the game by starting the lockout again after its fans were teased all last week.

Permalink 73 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Top Stories
73 Responses to “NFL files brief, uses players’ words on lockout against them”
  1. jbl429 says: May 2, 2011 11:17 AM

    the NFL is using quotes by a handful of players who have already made more money than the average NFL player will ever make. And they’re trying to say that a small minority of players is representing the majority.

  2. smacklayer says: May 2, 2011 11:21 AM

    Just because someone says something half-heartedly or says an otherwise innocuous comment, doesn’t mean it can’t be used against them. I think it is very fitting that all these stupid bonehead comments the players have made recently are starting to catch up with them.

  3. bfridley says: May 2, 2011 11:21 AM

    …maybe the players should show more responsibility and not joke about something they’re engaged with in a court room…

    I could only imagine your reaction if Goodell tossed out a one-liner about how he’s financially secure during this process, tried to play it off as a joke, and expected the media to dismiss it the way these irresponsible jokes are dismissed

    Younger, back-up players are losing money and developmental time, but the vets are enjoying their vacation.

  4. jmphinsfan says: May 2, 2011 11:21 AM

    hopefully the judges read through all that garbage.

    the biggest argument here to get the lockout lifted is that there will be irreparable damage to those players who went undrafted and would typically make it into the NFL (20 of which made the NFL Pro Bowl last year alone).

    if you dont believe me, see the article on the UFL recruiting those guys heavily… $50,000 for base salary in the UFL and $325,000+ for rookies in the NFL.

  5. zoxitic says: May 2, 2011 11:22 AM

    Boy and girls……..greed kills.

    The golden goose is in peril.

  6. vahawker says: May 2, 2011 11:25 AM

    If the players were concerned about irreparable harm, they would have continued negotiating instead of walking away from the bargaining table with an offer out there that could have been used as a basis for getting a CBA done.

  7. steelhammer92 says: May 2, 2011 11:26 AM

    You know what NFL, nobody gives a damn. There are far more important things going on in the world right now for anyone to care about this stupid spat with the players. If the NFL doesn’t think it can lose fans, or at least the obsessive nature of a lot of fans (and willingness to spend money on the NFL product), it needs to look at the MLB in 1994.

  8. revisisland says: May 2, 2011 11:27 AM

    I think they should use Derrick Mason’s comments as well, “Goddell is a joke”. That should hold up in court than as well.

  9. firethorn1001 says: May 2, 2011 11:29 AM

    ‘Using joking comments by a player known for his foot fetish references as legal evidence’

    As much as you are gnashing your teeth, you do know it is within the NFL’s legal rights to use whatever ‘evidence’ they come up with right?

    The courts will ultimately decide whether or not it has merits.

  10. warmachine2112 says: May 2, 2011 11:29 AM

    So, the owners who, by player admission, last time the CBA was struck gave the Players a pretty good deal are expected to bend over again by a “Union leader” who appears to be determined to go the route of litigation (as he has from the outset).

    This was supposed to be about bargaining. That’s the B in CBA.

    One side walked away from the table with over 5 hours left of the original negotiations. That was the same side of whom we heard so little in the “compromises offered” statements. It was also the side that put together a blatantly mock decertification.

    Yes, of course the owners and league should just accept that and acquiesce to the will of the Union’s leadership.

    There just isn’t a facepalm of adequate size.

  11. harmcityhomer says: May 2, 2011 11:29 AM

    Lewis and Welker have contracts and money in the bank. What about all the younger players and free agents.

    Ray Lewis does not usually come to the OTAs anyway, but guys trying to make the team in camp need those sessions to have a chance of beating out a veteran.

    I also do not see why the NFL needs to lockout the players in order to try to make a new CBA. Unless the courts force the union to reform, the owners are going to have to implement rules without a CBA and treat the players as individuals.

  12. dwoofer says: May 2, 2011 11:29 AM

    The owners have the right to lock the players out. The players’ union has the right to engage in a work stoppage – a strike. The fans have the right to tell the owners to find other suckers to purchase tickets and merchandise.

  13. jjay9 says: May 2, 2011 11:31 AM

    Try taking your player-tinted glasses off.

    This is about league longevity, not shortsighted player gains.

    Funny how ignorant comments from a midget and murderer are “joking” as long as it fits your agenda.

    Since you are so heavily pre player. Why don’t you head to Charlotte and have a face to face with Steve Smith. Pretty sure he still wants to bash you face in.

  14. brutus9448 says: May 2, 2011 11:32 AM

    they can end the lockout end of august and the fans for the most part will still watch and go to the games.

  15. dublinpacker says: May 2, 2011 11:32 AM

    You just have to love those player comments.

  16. geo1113 says: May 2, 2011 11:33 AM

    Ray Lewis was not joking. And Welker who may have been joking did also say it won’t be a problem until guys don’t get their paychecks. As my father told me, sometimes it is best just to keep your mouth shut.

  17. tjacks7 says: May 2, 2011 11:33 AM

    All these guys are capable of working at Wal-Mart or elsewhere in the offseason. Hard to feel bad for these guys. Welcome to real life.

  18. jfluke65 says: May 2, 2011 11:34 AM

    Gregg, do you think it would be possible for you to at least to pretend to be neutral in all this? At least Mike skewers both sides. You seem to be firmly in the players camp.

  19. ravenution says: May 2, 2011 11:35 AM

    Notice how neither side mentions the fans. And yet you have moronic fans arguing on behalf of both sides.. Dummies.

  20. nj22 says: May 2, 2011 11:35 AM

    I don”t blame them for using the stupid comments that stupid players made at all. But I do agree with you on this. Fans like myself who were on the side of the league do NOT care about who is right or wrong anymore. We want this BS over with! Stop wasting everyone’s time trying to posture and get the upper hand and get this BS done! Every move both sides have made since the sham mediation has been only about leverage and has had zero to do with the issues at hand. It is ridiculous and I am disliking both sides a little more each day. I am an NFL draft junky and even for me, it did not feel the same for me, because of this garbage. Get in a room, not a court room and figure it the F out!

  21. tdk24 says: May 2, 2011 11:36 AM

    You mean to tell me that there is some kind of a lockout happening?

  22. nutsacjac says: May 2, 2011 11:37 AM

    @steelhammer92

    You’re right; MLB’s attendance was down a lot when they came back from the strike in 95.

    Fast forward to now, they’re doing just fine.

    Fans don’t care. As soon as games are played, people will be there and cheering and this will all be forgotten, which is really sad.

  23. armchairgm9 says: May 2, 2011 11:38 AM

    The courts need to force the owners to open the season and tell them the date the league year begins and enforce last year’s rules. Give the league a week, maybe two, to get their stuff in line and then make them do it. And force supervised mediation and make sure that if one side isn’t negotiating in good faith, then they have to make a concession.

    At first I hated the thought of the courts getting involved, but if that’s what it takes to get football, I’m all for it.

  24. PFTiswhatitis says: May 2, 2011 11:39 AM

    Gregg,
    Don’t look now but your bias is showing.

  25. iamtalkingsolistenandlearn says: May 2, 2011 11:40 AM

    When the majority of players have been raised by the likes of Momma Talib, then you will always have problem with your EMPLOYEES being greedy, unaccountable, irresponsible, immature, ungrateful, self entitled, excuse making, lying, embarrassing, always in legal trouble, uncaring, and a belief they are above rules.

  26. hendawg21 says: May 2, 2011 11:41 AM

    You know i’d really like to know if all the owners feel the same about this lockout or if there are some just going along because they belong to the private boys club???

    I’m sure on both sides owners and players there are those who wish this crap would end and we get back to football business instead of this tag your it court battle which is wasting time and only alienating more fans each day.

  27. rad312 says: May 2, 2011 11:43 AM

    The NFLPA / NFLPA* sought the legal action and choose litigation over negotiation as they believed litigation gave them the greatest leverage.

    So at the moment the scales have been balanced.

    As a fan, I believe it is in the best of all for the NFL and players to begin negotiations / mediation again with the objective of working towards a new CBA.

    Litigation is not the solution.

    In front of a very liberal court in Minnesota the owners lose / players win. In front of a bi-partisan 8th Circuit panel (2 elected by Rep and 1 elected by Dem) the owners win / players lose with the vote by the judges right down party lines…..

    For the sake of the fan let’s get this out of the court system and out of the political region, back to the boardroom so that business people can talk the business of constructing a new CBA!

    Less lawyers and judges, less tempers and personalities, and more tempered discussions between business people led by the likes of Robert Kraft and others.

  28. pixelito says: May 2, 2011 11:43 AM

    What happened to all the fan support for the Owners???

  29. jamaltimore says: May 2, 2011 11:47 AM

    Wow, irreparable harm being used by any side in this debate is a JOKE! Irreparable harm actually occurs when fans stop paying way too much money for everything NFL because both sides look like TOTAL fools in this argument. Here’s hoping the NFL seating starts looking like MLB games!!

  30. impeachgoodell says: May 2, 2011 11:47 AM

    How about the fans lockout the players and the owners.
    Buy no merchandise, boycott the games. Sucks for the season ticket holders but both parties need to realize eventually who foots the bill

  31. chapnastier says: May 2, 2011 11:48 AM

    Well done NFL. These players have been arrogantly trashing the league all along. Why not slap them down a peg to help them remember that they are indeed employees. Good to see this sites bias isn’t going anywhere though :)

  32. mattyc says: May 2, 2011 11:49 AM

    If they have a brain, they will use all the quotes by ignorant people, like Mike Vrabel & Chester Pitts, that doesn’t suggest but rather proves the decertification was a sham & the players are still operating as a Union.

    If that isn’t their argument, then they lose.

    Even smarter people would go lift the lockout, extend the previous CBA with the cap for no less than one season & more likely 2 seasons, & use all that time to negotiate properly, like they should have done the first damn time. Why that isn’t an option is completely beyond me. If the bottom line is everyone wanting the best deal & everyone wanting football, then this is the best option.

  33. halasfan says: May 2, 2011 11:51 AM

    What I don’t understand is why the player/employees can go on strike, but they don’t believe the league/employers should be allowed to shut them out.

    I think the league should work in an no-stirke rule in the next CBA like the Federal worker Union has to deal with….

    Of course, I am still confused why the NFL isn’t considered one business with 32 Franchises under it.

    Ole George should have set it up that way at Canton back in Sept, 1920.

  34. hendawg21 says: May 2, 2011 11:58 AM

    Both sides think the fans can’t live without the NFL hmmm let’s go to the video MLB 1994…

    Guys I think you better get back to the bargaining table or else there will be fans locking themselves out from the stadiums…less $8.00 beers, $5.00 water etc., concession funds being lost… what was that you’ll make it up by raising beer prices to $10.00 a bottle and water $7.00…folks this is where we the fans are headed….

  35. dccowboy says: May 2, 2011 11:58 AM

    Seriously? If that’s part of the NFL’s ‘defense’ I expect we’ll have football back this week.

    If I’m a judge I think that might piss me off. Kind of like, “I’m not sure whether to be pissed because you made such a lame argument or that you must think I’m an idiot for proposing the lame argument to me.”

  36. fltharley says: May 2, 2011 12:04 PM

    lets see two republican judges one democrat judge , i cant imagine which side they will come down on ? i know one thing there isnt a republican around that dont think filthy rich a__holes are right. and the fans better think long and hard if roger goodell has his way this game will be forever changed. the only way they get to go to a 18 game schedule is if they take all the hits out of the game so the owners can get more tv revenue. but i for one will not watch a glorified track meet

  37. olcap says: May 2, 2011 12:15 PM

    Forget about it NFL. I will not be spending any of MY money on anything related to the NFL for the forseeable future. I am proud to stand alongside the other former fans who refuse to compensate you for your insatiable greed, and will therefore no longer purchase anything with “NFL” on it, be it a game ticket, a jersey, a tote or anything else from your market of greed and overindulgence.

    I gave up on the MLB years ago for the same reason, and have never looked back, as many other MLB fans did. Welcome to MY world, losers.

  38. p4ever says: May 2, 2011 12:17 PM

    The NFL is running out of serious argument

  39. 2011to2020lions says: May 2, 2011 12:18 PM

    I am starting to shift my support to the players side, unless I can see on the 16th that the NFL is willing to move enough in negotiations to say they only are doing this to get the players back at the table and out of the court room.

    I think that is what the NFL really wants, and if football is as it always was we will stay in the court room. I, we, them and those don’t want that

  40. iamtalkingsolistenandlearn says: May 2, 2011 12:23 PM

    The players have been making telling statements for weeks enjoying the time off and clearly stating that disbanding the union was tactical and that they still operate as a union.
    All these statements are a direct contradiction to what they are claiming to the courts, SO WHY SHOULDN’T THE LEAGUE BRING THESE STATEMENTS UP?
    Pull your noses from the players backsides!!!

    The PLAYERS and their ambulance chasing leader are the ones harming the game. They are trying to turn the league into the NBA where the inmates/players are in charge. These players such as Dez Bryant, Plaxico Burress, Randy Moss, T.O. OchoStinko, etc. want to be “partners” . Are you freakin serious?
    These greedy players havent even been taught how to keep their pants up off the ground, pay their bling bills, not shoot themselves in crowded nightclubs, stop doing drugs, stop dealing drugs, not beat women, not rape women, etc. etc. etc

    These ungrateful players would not be making the money they are making if it wasn’t for the owners and league. They would be working in factories, semipro leagues, and prisons. The league and owners would survive if the games 32 best players suddenly quit. But there is no way the players could all survive if all 32 owners shut down the league.

  41. olcap says: May 2, 2011 12:24 PM

    @ iamtalkingsolistenandlearn

    Here’s hoping Mama Talib and her son pay you a visit and inquire of you why you’re running your mouth like that.

    You transparent, owner shill nitwit.

  42. rickyoung1212 says: May 2, 2011 12:27 PM

    This whole thing is about the big market owners wanting more money. Due to the current TV revenue sharing which gives each team equal TV money, the big boys are missing out. The little boys don’t want to lose their equal share, so they decided they would just take more off the top, about $1B more! Lock out the players until they run out of money and get the deal they need to futher bloat their inflated egos. They must have missed out on the Wall Street schemes or possibly invested with Bernie!

    The players are making more because the league has been very successful and they had a fixed percentage of the pie. They only asked to see some proof that the League needed more money, but that was a no go. Owners don’t even want other owners to see their books. The greedy bastards make me sick.

    The rookie salaries are out of control, but who caused that? Fans? Players? Lets see…..yep, you guessed it the Owners did this to themselves.

    The owners have caused this problem, not the players. They don’t even have a competing league chasing their players. They have (had) the best pro sports league in the country and they are messing with the recipe in the name of GREED.

    Greed is crippling this country. Money is ruining our beloved sports…all of them. What a sorry mess we are in!

  43. revooc48 says: May 2, 2011 12:37 PM

    At a time when the economy is down, people are forclosing there house and getting sick of paying $4.00 for a gallon of gas you would think football players would be thankful for the position they are in an thankful that a dad who works his butt off making $500.00 a week would buy a $100.00 jersey for his son and two tickets to the game so they are able to buy there million dollar homes and luxury cars but hey sometimes its not enough I guess

  44. ndallasruss says: May 2, 2011 12:41 PM

    jbl429 says:
    May 2, 2011 11:17 AM
    the NFL is using quotes by a handful of players who have already made more money than the average NFL player will ever make. And they’re trying to say that a small minority of players is representing the majority.

    ………………………………………………………………………….

    Maybe the players should have thought about that when picking the players that they named to lead their class-action lawsuit. Brady, Brees, Manning, Vincent Jackson, Logan Mankins, etc don’t really represent the majority of NFL players, but that’s who they went with. Had they picked a handful of low-level free agents and career backups to lead their lawsuit, the argument might be valid, but instead they went with the big names.

  45. pakasprz says: May 2, 2011 12:41 PM

    Until players learn to take care of the guys before them then let them rot.

    Steve McMichael said it best that he will suffer the same fate as a lot of the senior former players have suffered through and that was proven today by the report that his teammate Dave Duerson had CTE.

    To the players its all about getting paid. There are more important things in life like family and those retired players are their family and what they are doing is telling their parents and other family members to bug off.

    Let them sit, rot and feel how is life without football. Just maybe then they will get their priorities straight.

  46. iamtalkingsolistenandlearn says: May 2, 2011 12:42 PM

    @ olcap:

    On no!!! Please no!!!!
    Please Mr. DEmo Smith, don’t send the Bonnie and Cyde of the league to rub me out.

    Don’t you have an ambulance to chase? Or a gullible wife to convince into long drawn out costly divorce?

  47. tyelee says: May 2, 2011 12:46 PM

    Greed is an ugly thing and does nothing but ruin relationship and businesses…..

    Find a way to end this petty “Millionaires vs. Billionaires” squabble and let’s get back to business as usual before players get out of shape and lose their chemistry as a team making whenever they do play again boring and unentertaining!

  48. ravensfan4life52 says: May 2, 2011 12:47 PM

    maybe the players should be careful of what they say and then it won’t come back to bite them.

  49. nagaswan says: May 2, 2011 12:50 PM

    Could an individual owner decide to end his part of the lockout? Could the Packers do it? Why aren’t they?

  50. superspanky36 says: May 2, 2011 12:55 PM

    To all those complaining that Gregg is showing bias…this is not a news site. This is a rumor site/blog, he’s allowed to show bias and state his opinion. That’s kind of the PURPOSE OF A BLOG! If you’re coming here for official news, I think you’re in the wrong place.

    I agree with rickyoung1212, greed is ruining it all. When 50 million is not enough because you want 51 million, you are just plain greedy. New players will never realize they don’t deserve 50 million for simply getting drafted and never playing a game.

    Both sides are at fault. Both think they don’t make enough money. Oddly enough the ones that make the least money are the ones you don’t hear complaining…I haven’t seen one minimum wage player saying anything about not getting paid more, only the ones with more money than all of the posters on this thread will ever see. The Browns owner isn’t complaining about not having enough profit, it’s Jerry Jones and the other highly profitable owners. Greed.

  51. Chris Fiorentino says: May 2, 2011 1:00 PM

    For you guys who are siding with the players, you do understand that if the players win, we all lose, right? People can say all they want “Oh, the players aren’t attacking the draft or free agency…the players want the same competitive balance as the owners.” BULLS**T. The players would be happiest with 100% freedom to go where they want and do what they want. The problem with that is that without an minimum salaries, there is absolutely nothing stopping the Browns from paying no more than $100K to any player.

    That isn’t collusion. It is ONE COMPANY deciding to pay its players no more than $100K. If they do that, their payroll is around $6 million. Even if they absolutely suck, they will take in more than that over the course of a season plus the TV revenue. And who is to stop them? There’s no union. There can’t be collusion because it is the Browns acting as they want as they are their own entity. Benefits? Nah, go somewhere else. 401(k)? Nope. Retirement funds? Screw you go play for the Cowboys. Oh they are full? I guess you are SOL then. Try the UFL…I am sure they will pay you more.

    What it will come down to is a bunch of smaller market teams will not pay for the FAs and their roster will be full of rookies and 2nd year players. They will have all this turnover, and after about 5 or 6 years, the league will be 10% being the cream of the crop, guys like Brady, Manning, etc. And the other 90% will be 1st and 2nd year guys. Those guys with 4-6 years experience, who may or may not be Free agents right now, will either play for less, be good enough to demand more, or be SOL.

  52. Slackmo says: May 2, 2011 1:02 PM

    Attorney Johnson is exploiting a hole in the defense case and is heading for the end zone…OOooooo, what a crushing hit from attorney Jones, citing Halston v. State of Alabama and knocking Johnson’s helmet clean off.

    Are you ready for some lawyer football?

  53. lostsok says: May 2, 2011 1:06 PM

    The players have a solid case for “irreparable harm” considering around 300 players that weren’t drafted this last weekend would have been signed by now if they stay had not been granted on Friday.

    Those players are facing a VERY serious risk to their careers. If there are no mini-camps, and players are not allowed to prepare for the season until pre-season at the earliest, than those players will likely NEVER been signed.

    I would call that irreparable harm…in a big way.

  54. ampats says: May 2, 2011 1:29 PM

    You go girl Olcap.

    You show the NFL owners whose boss just like you showed MLB !

  55. snnyjcbs says: May 2, 2011 1:31 PM

    No harm at all and most of the players love it, it is a snow day. They should get use to it as an extended stay will be granted by the Court as the NFL requested.

    Foe being a Lawyer you sure are not right on the majority of your calls regarding this so far. Does not look like the Lower Court Judge had such a Air Tight Ruling locked up in her decision as you claimed.

    As for the Fans?, I am a Fan and I am loving it. I want to see the owners bring these greedy players that are trying to change the game to their knees. Do you think the owners are going to let some immature jerk that thinks he is cool wearing a Truck Tire around his neck studded in Diamonds change the game the real Football players that came before them built. For what the WR punk they drafted in Dallas?

    Grant the stay and bring these players to their knees, protect the game NFL because the players could give 2 ^%$#@ about the game, they are all about the money and the Bling lol

  56. mr92687 says: May 2, 2011 1:31 PM

    we’re hearing what the nfl has to say on this matter. what about what the nflpa has to say about the league putting words in the players’ mouth?

  57. favrefan says: May 2, 2011 1:31 PM

    These judges are republicans so those BS arguments from the league may fly over

  58. joe6606 says: May 2, 2011 1:33 PM

    “The players have a solid case for “irreparable harm” considering around 300 players that weren’t drafted this last weekend would have been signed by now if they stay had not been granted on Friday.

    Those players are facing a VERY serious risk to their careers. If there are no mini-camps, and players are not allowed to prepare for the season until pre-season at the earliest, than those players will likely NEVER been signed.

    I would call that irreparable harm…in a big way.”
    ——————————————–
    This.

    In the battle of irreperable harms, it is really, really hard to imagine judges determining that the harm suffered by undrafted players that arises by permitting a lockout to remain in effect, during the appeals process, is less than the
    irreperable harm suffered by the owners by removing the lockout.

    Would there be annoyances? uncertainty? yes..but overall the owners argument that the Judges smackdown order should be stayed is extraordinarily weak. I honestly would be shocked if the lockout isnt lifted, by tonight.

  59. iamtalkingsolistenandlearn says: May 2, 2011 1:49 PM

    lostsok says:
    May 2, 2011 1:06 PM
    The players have a solid case for “irreparable harm” considering around 300 players that weren’t drafted this last weekend would have been signed by now if they stay had not been granted on Friday.

    Those players are facing a VERY serious risk to their careers.
    *****************************************

    I have news for you. Those “players” are already facing a serious “risk” to their chances of playing in the league. It’s called undertalented , not lockout.
    The odds are against them of ever having a “career” in the league. They were undrafted for a reason,,,all 32 teams dont think they are good enough to waste a pick on.

  60. phreakin says: May 2, 2011 1:57 PM

    “The players have a solid case for “irreparable harm” considering around 300 players that weren’t drafted this last weekend would have been signed by now if they stay had not been granted on Friday. ”

    Don’t watch football much then do you? These guys won’t be signed until about August.

  61. GG Eden says: May 2, 2011 2:04 PM

    This really highlights how out of touch the NFL and its lawyers are with the legal case itself.

  62. narutofan10 says: May 2, 2011 2:23 PM

    i am so tired of that if the players win we all lose crap if you are saying it that way then either way we lose it is such an unfounded thing to say so crappy

  63. eagleswin says: May 2, 2011 2:23 PM

    lostsok says:May 2, 2011 1:06 PM

    The players have a solid case for “irreparable harm” considering around 300 players that weren’t drafted this last weekend would have been signed by now if they stay had not been granted on Friday.

    Those players are facing a VERY serious risk to their careers. If there are no mini-camps, and players are not allowed to prepare for the season until pre-season at the earliest, than those players will likely NEVER been signed.

    I would call that irreparable harm…in a big way.
    ——————————-

    I disagree. Each team will have their 53 man active roster + practice squad before the first game of the season.

    They don’t get paid until they make that 53 man opening day roster. Unless you can argue that the league would have larger roster (more employees) then I don’t see the irreperable harm.

    For every undrafted FA that you think might get a job there’s another player that would have to lose his. In that case, anyone who loses a job to an undrafted FA would be irreperably harmed by the lockout being lifted.

  64. deljzc says: May 2, 2011 2:24 PM

    I’m really getting tired of the cheap-shot one liners you start every article about the labor situation against the owner.

    You keep whining about missing free agency and potentially a few games this year like it’s the end of the world.

    I would put the vision the NFLPA has for the future of football at a much bigger issue that this website refuses to even acknowledge.

    I would gladly give up this entire season if it meant the owners retained a majority of power, restrictions on owner spending remained in place, a reasonable rookies salary structure gets instituted and player movement is restricted to allow developed players to stay on the teams doing the good work of drafting well and coaching well.

    Are these things legal? Probably not. But those rules make for the best product to watch and enjoy. And as a fan of the NFL, that’s what I’m rooting for the most. NOT weather games happen on some silly time-table that doesn’t mean anything in the big picture.

  65. narutofan10 says: May 2, 2011 2:26 PM

    people are so quick to point out people with player biases but when someone comes on here spewing the crap of the owners hmmm…no one really bats an eye i have a feeling most of the people who comment on this site are goodell himself

  66. nekelund says: May 2, 2011 2:29 PM

    To get a stay granted before a matter has been fully heard requires the party seeking it to meet a high burden of irreparable harm. If players, especially prominent ones, are making flippant comments in public about how they will enjoy the lockout, they should not be surprised or especially upset that these comments are being used against them. If an owner makes a stupid comment in public, what he says is fair game as well.

    When involved in a matter such as this, it is best for the parties other than the lawyers to shut the heck up, because otherwise they risk becoming their own worst enemies. The NFLPA (asterisk or otherwise) should have made this perfectly clear to its members, as should the NFL to the owners/commissioner.

    Silly/stupid? Maybe.

    The way the law works? You bet.

  67. gchristo1 says: May 2, 2011 2:32 PM

    We need every or a majority of fans to say more tickets. We the fans go on strike. No FANS no nothing. Lets see how they split $1.98. The FANS hold the power.
    Of course the FANS probably won’t do a thing.
    How about the FANS writting to botcott the sponsers of football. The FANS have the power!!!

  68. nekelund says: May 2, 2011 2:36 PM

    Also, with respect to the undrafted players, I am curious whether or not they would now belong to the class of players represented by this action, as they lack the connection to NFL teams that every other player who finished the season with a team did. Certainly Von Miller was a named plaintiff before being drafted but, unlike the undrafted players, he and the drafted ones have a connection to NFL teams.

    I ask this because, while the undrafted players who teams might sign might indeed suffer irreparable harm, the fact that many of them will never even get a whiff of an NFL contract, let alone an NFL game might suggest that their harm arises from their inability to crack a roster, potential refusal to play in other leagues (CFL, UFL, etc.) and/or their ill-timed decision to declare and, thus, become ineligible for college ball.

  69. farmmbig says: May 2, 2011 3:06 PM

    This is why sarcasm sucks.

  70. umiami11 says: May 2, 2011 3:21 PM

    Both of those players are currently playing under long term contracts and are not free agents. In that case I would clearly like the time off but not if I was looking for a job.

  71. joe6606 says: May 2, 2011 3:35 PM

    “They don’t get paid until they make that 53 man opening day roster. ”

    ———————————
    Untrue

    Most undrafted free agents who sign with a team get a signing bonus of 5k-35k. Everyone who invited to OTAs gets a per dium for meals, lodging of about $100/day and a weekly salary, of around $600-800/week.

    Every day that goes by that’s closer to the start of the season, assuming it’s not delayed, means there is less of a chance that these undrafteds will make a the 53m roster or practice squad. Not only that, but by leaving these guys hanging in limbo, they are losing out on other opportunities. For example, if you were an undrafted, by Monday night you would know if you were going to be heading to training camp. If your phone didnt ring, you would then start preparing a plan B, whether its Arena or some non-football related career.

    Every second that the lockout is in place is costing these guys valuable time and opportunties that can NEVER be replaced. Pretty much the text book definition of irreparable harm

  72. CKL says: May 2, 2011 4:36 PM

    ndallasruss says: May 2, 2011 12:41 PM

    jbl429 says:
    May 2, 2011 11:17 AM
    the NFL is using quotes by a handful of players who have already made more money than the average NFL player will ever make. And they’re trying to say that a small minority of players is representing the majority.

    ………………………………………………………………………….

    Maybe the players should have thought about that when picking the players that they named to lead their class-action lawsuit. Brady, Brees, Manning, Vincent Jackson, Logan Mankins, etc don’t really represent the majority of NFL players, but that’s who they went with. Had they picked a handful of low-level free agents and career backups to lead their lawsuit, the argument might be valid, but instead they went with the big names.
    _______________________________________
    Ndallas…I feel you on the reason behind your logic but if you think about it again, I am sure you will realize that the only way to protect players 100% from any “surprise cuts” that could possibly result from high profile union involvement was to pick players that their teams wouldn’t even dream of cutting/not re-signing/getting blackballed in FA because they are among the best at their positions. They even picked a highly ranking draft prospect who was considered by some to be the “safest pick in the draft” who is also of solid character to represent the lawsuit’s challenge of the draft. None of that is an accident I would guess.
    –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

    superspanky36 says: May 2, 2011 12:55 PM

    The Browns owner isn’t complaining about not having enough profit, it’s Jerry Jones and the other highly profitable owners. Greed.
    ______________________________________
    You know, I dislike JJ immensely but this is not an example that supports your point well. There are two kinds of owners in the NFL: the inheritors and the money makers/business builders. Lerner never really earned anything. Everything was handed to him on a silver platter by the man who DID earn everything, his late father. And JJ, much as I don’t like him, is a self made man. If anyone has more right to complain, it’s an owner who is actually an earner and a business builder, not someone like Randy L. And I certainly want the people who earned it the least to have the smallest say in things. This is probably why the owners are likely at odds more with each other than with the players. JMO.

  73. pitch87mph says: May 2, 2011 11:44 PM

    Disagree. I think YOU underestimate how much harm would be done if the player’s lawsuit moves forward. Though you’ve alluded to the potential harm, you discount it in favor of suggesting a temporary work stoppage that is likely to NOT cancel any games is more harmful (particularly if they simply get back to negotiating). I don’t know if the owner’s are “right” here. But I DO believe the player’s are WRONG and overstepping their bounds as EMPLOYEES of the NFL. They want upside without downside risk (growth equal to an aggressive assumed revenue growth, but salary floors that provide no reduction if revenue falls), want free reign to audit the books of PRIVATE organization they work for (I can’t get that from my employer), significant pensions and protections…. listen… whatever they can NEGOTIATE I’m all for. But using the legal system to do the dirty work–and using a scorched earth policy in the process (ruining competitive balance efforts by eliminating the draft, etc.)–I can’t support. I hope they LOSE. And frankly, I’m pissed enough at the players that I hope they get screwed in the end. In the long-run, I want a “fair” deal (whatever that is—oh yeah… it’s what is NEGOTIATED). But the tactics (sham decertification, said scorched earth policy), makes the players look completely unreasonable to me.

Leave a Reply

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