It just bears mentioning that NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and NFL Lead Counsel Jeffrey Pash are also lawyers that both have extensive backgrounds in litigation.
_______________________________
Roger Goodell is NOT a lawyer.

No wonder a deal isn’t being ironed out. The two sides are too busy out posting each other on this website.

Until they get their little squabble over how to spend MY money solved, I’ll go ahead and give it to the Lingerie Football League instead.

It must be nice with the gestapo…all rainbows, sunshine and the money of rich, white men.

Additionally, NFL players live shorter lives than any other group (53 yrs), if that’s not an indication that they should get a little more out of this deal than I don’t know what is.

Personally, I hope the lock out continues. I can stop watching the NFL, the wife will be happier. I can watch the UFL, less games and most of that league will probably be NFL guys anyway.

The owners should be freakin’ out that there is not more outrage one way or another.

Good stuff, bro!

Did anyone expect any thing different when you heard there were 2 rep judges on the eigth circuit? Its garbage that you can already tell an outcome by whos in what court.

Democrats and Republicans are no better then bloods and Crips. While the constituents Continue to get lured into either side.

Im sure our founding fathers envisioned a government run by 2 groups who hate each others guts and vote soley on party lines instead of individual beliefs.

The Owners will be able to Lock the Players Out as long as it takes. If they were smart they would dump that Chump they have running the show and get a person that does not wear his emotions on his sleeve that can sit down and hammer out a deal.

These millionaires and billionaires can’t put their egos aside to work out a deal. Thousands of people depend on the NFL for their livelihood and these rich jackasses can’t figure out how to divide a 9 BILLION dollar pie. Screw them all.

I just hope there is a way to ensure both sides lose.

The players have stated in no uncertain terms that they no longer wish to be a union.

It really seems like the guy is trying to convince himself, or more likely buck up the players, to believe the owners don’t have the upper hand. But they do. And it will in all likelihood strengthen in the next few weeks.

I do agree with him that now is a very good time to do a deal for all concerned. I’m afraid that the players don’t really get that yet, however. And I’m not convinced the owners do, either. It might be that both sides have to bleed to get a deal done.

It would probably be a really cool thing to see.

and it would be equally as gratifying to see the players in bankruptcy court in one mont if there was no league/teams to pay them.
as for the shutdown of the league..Good luck as a contracter suing the owners, I am certain that there is wording in every contract covering the owners butt, and probably in the corporation documents covering his butt.
as for your emminent domain theory, I severely doubt any court would grant emminent domain over a freaking name. Sounds to me like you are just another ill informed individual as far as contract law works.

You’re a liar. From your original post:

“The owners could easily “go out of business” and then re-form their business and offer $500 a week for any football player who wants to play for them.”

Are you now denying saying this? I wouldn’t blame you. It was really stupid.

I have no love for the owners….. While corporations get a 50% tax break on the luxury boxes and tickets I lose mine…….

Keep your tickets and your games…. Who’s got 30K for seats and $140 a ticket per game and you also have to buy the 2 preseason games……..

I am already really missing football, but if the fans never went to anymore games it would serve them right…..

We pay way way way to much for sporting events in this country…….. It is way out of wack….

And then we subsidize the corporations that take our seats….

Its all fixed…….

I do understand business. I own more than one. I did not say that it would be easy to shut down the league. There would be much pain, but the possibility of endless lawsuits could leave many owners with no other choice. Your comments reflect the perspective of a socialist union member or fifth rate immigration law attorney. You’re even more idiotic than your words reflect if you believe that the NFL owners have signed personal guarantees on the stadiums, media contracts and other facilities.

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

No, you don’t own multiple businesses. Lawn mowing and lemonade stands don’t count.

Your clumsy insults about me being a socialist and a “fifth rate immigration law attorney” and a “socialist union member” (WTF- LOLOLOL) give you away.

No one with even a rudimentary (look it up) understanding of business would get that impression from my comments.

“Personal guarantees” on the stadiums? What the hell are you talking about?

No business person lays out their own cash to buy franchises or build stadiums. They all have creditors.

Please- you are way out of your element here.

“only a group of people as greedy as the nfl owners could possibly think to SHUT DOWN AN ENTIRE SPORTS LEAGUE because they couldnt get their way.”
————-

Oh, you mean the exact same thing the players did when they went on strike? If the players have the right to strike, the owners have the right to lockout.

The players sit there and act like the lockout is unfair when they have pulled the same trick before, and that is ridiculous to me.

Actually, most of the pro-owner posters on here have shown a remarkable ignorance as to how businesses in the United States operate.
…
And no, the players are not employees in the traditional sense. In the words of the owners- and in fact, as they share revenues- they are partners. The players, if you to compare them to their “real life” equivalent, are independent contractors, negotiating agreements with teams to provide their services for a set period of time for set compensation.
…
They are also different from traditional employees in that they can’t really be replaced. Just as there are a finite number of teams for these players to contract with, there is a finite number of players capable of providing the level of play necessary to sustain the NFL product at it’s current level of popularity.
———————————–

I don’t know if any of the so called “pro-owner” posters are business owners or not and you may be the most successful poster here, but you are wrong about the players.

Just like every other employee, players are employees who negotiate their own deal with each team subject to the union agreement (CBA). In fact, unless it is a big business with a large number of employees doing the exact same job, whenever an employer is hiring a new employee, the employer will ask the prospective employee how much $$ they expect to be paid and then make a deal.

Further, teams control when the players practice and play. Teams supply the tools with which players work and control how they do their jobs. There is not a single aspect in the team – player relationship that would lead any court to determine that a player is anything other than an employee.

Also, players can and are replaced. Sometimes, the new player/employee is not as good as the old player/employee. Sometimes, they are better. But players can be replaced.

Finally, fans are loyal to teams, not players. There may be a great player on my team and I may wear his jersey, but let him go to a new team and I hope that my team crushes him every time that we play him and I do not wear his jersey.

FACT: D. Smith walked out of CBA negotiations, decertified the union, had certain players file suit, and then did not attend at least one court ordered mediation session.

If fans, players, and PFT employees really want football, then they need to tell D. Smith to get his butt into negotiations.

I would guess they would be in bankruptcy court within six months.

And how long before cities, such as Dallas, use eminent domain to take the NAME of their franchise?

While tragic…it would be freaking HILARIOUS to see these rich d-bags get their hats handed to them. It would be almost worth it.

commandercornpone says:
the replacement players will play for significantly less.

Maybe, but not in the NFL.

Why?

It is illegal for the owners to use replacement players during a lockout
———————————————-

You cannot legally lock out a non-union workforce.
Are you admitting that you guys are still a union?

just asking

Folks, D. Smith just wants to litigate and transfer millions of dollars, $$$, from the players to himself and his lawyer buddies.

As for the players, what do they really want other than to keep the old CBA which the owners cannot and will not do?

Why can’t they (owners and players) tweak the old CBA by reducing the player’s portion and decreasing the restricted agent period or get rid of it so that players would reach free agency (and their big payday) quicker?

Why can’t the players give a little and gain a little?

FACT: D. Smith walked out of CBA negotiations, decertified the union, had certain players file suit, and then did not attend at least one court ordered mediation session.

If fans, players, and PFT employees really want football, then they need to tell D. Smith to get his butt into negotiations.