I’ve been seeing bits of news here and there, so and so judge issued an injunction so it went to so and so who issued a stay and I really have no idea wtf is going on.
Does anyone have a good grasp on the situation?
The way I understand the situation based on listening to sports radio is that the lockout is currently on. The players rep and owners were waiting for that decision to be made before meeting again because, basically, they wanted to see who would have the upper hand. It appears the owners do. So, now they can meet and talk and maybe make some progress. Or not.
On a personal note, I’m starting to care less and less about the NFL. Some of the comments from big name players indicating they don’t care if they stay locked out because “hey vacation!” kind of turns me off.
The players union decertified and sued in court to get the lockout dropped, since there was no union. In late April the judge ordered the NFL to open it’s doors back up and refused to stay the order while the league appealed. This week the Appeals court granted the stay while it went over the appeal. Legal minds seem to think the appeal is going to side with the NFL and not the players, but that decision has not been made yet.
There is an antitrust lawsuit that is going through the courts on the back of Brady and Brees. I don’t know the state of that.
There is another thing before a judge about the money the NFL is able to collect from the networks even if no games are played. Players claim that the deal that the league made with the lockout insurance was not as good as one they would have made otherwise. Therefore, they are liable for damages. No decision on this, so far, either.
As it stands now, the court case is going to be appealed no matter the initial verdict, but the owners will ultimately prevail. Perhaps the players will win some individual ruling, at best. Even if some TV-deal money is won by the players, the lockout will go on and they’ll eventually have to make a deal.
There are court-mandated negotiations going on now, but neither side is budging. No need to when the court case is going on. Once the court case is settled, they will probably agree on something very close to the last owners’ offer (from what I’ve heard, it’s something like: additional ~$200 mil off the top, rookie wage scale, 16 games, post-career health coverage, some off-season tweaks).
I wish a court had the authority to impose a CBA on the two sides, like a mother scolding quarreling children.
The real question is whether this will all happen before the season starts. It’s not looking good at the current pace, yet only the fans seem to care. When the first pre-season game is cancelled, you might see some action.
Here is National Football Post’s primer on Brady v. NFL, the players’ predominantly antitrust suit against the League. As it dates from the end of March, clearly some events have transpired since then.
The Players moved for a preliminary injunction against the League, seeking to block the lockout. District Court Judge Nelson agreed with the players, and issued a preliminary injunction, enjoining the NFL from continuing the lockout. Her order to this effect can be read here. Later, she then dismissed an attempt from the League to stay her order pending an appeal. On appeal to the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals, four days later, a panel of three appellate judges first ruled 2-1 to temporarily stay her injunction stopping the lockout while they considered the merits of her injunction. They have now done so, and issued an order Monday, May 16th, that continues the stay until the appellate court panel comes to a final ruling on the injunction. There is a hearing before the 8th to expedite the appeal, on June 3rd. With an expedited appeal, the panel will hopefully issue a final ruling on the injunction much quicker than otherwise.
I do not know whether the players can appeal the Appellate Court’s stay of the injunction, by asking that the entire 8th Court of Appeals of 15 judges or so, hear the matter en banc. En banc review can be had if there is a split of the panel, and if the entire Circuit Court agrees to it, but I don’t know whether the panel’s stay counts as an event that could trigger en banc review. If the panel had finished their deliberations, and drafted an order that upheld/dismissed the injunction, then that order could be reviewed en banc. As for right now, the lockout is in effect until the 8th issues that order. I do not know whether the players can appeal the stay to the U.S. Supreme Court. You’d think that an en banc panel would get to look at the stay before SCOTUS, but I don’t know.
Keep in mind, this is not Judge Nelson’s final judgment in Brady v. NFL. This is merely litigation over a preliminary matter, the injunction to lift the lockout. Her case has a much longer way to go than this. And any judgment she issues—assuming the League and Players don’t settle in the interim—will be appealed back up to the 8th.
Meanwhile, while this litigation is going on, the players and NFL are arguing over the NFL’s handling of the latest TV deal. This litigation is going on in another court room, though in the same judicial district in Minnesota. The players alleged that the NFL had a duty to the players to get the best possible TV deal when negotiating with the networks. They further alleged that the NFL breached that duty by negotiating the contracts in such a way as to prepay the owners in the event of a lockout. This concession would not benefit the players at all, and in fact probably cost the NFL and players money from the networks. Judge Doty agreed with the players in February 2011. We are still waiting though, for what Judge Doty’s relief to the players will be. The players are asking for $700 million in damages, with triple that in punitive damages. A short primer of this from the Forbes blog can be found here.
Yes. Its FUBAR.
Lester Munson at ESPN has what I feel is a concise description of the latest legal machinations in Brady v. NFL here. He provides some expected timelines, as well as projected outcomes. Worth your time, I think.
Good God. These people are seriously overpaid already. The only people who deserve more money less than the players are the owners, so I’m not quite sure who to root for. I’d rather neither group get the money and the teams build their own frickin’ stadia, and I say this as a fan.
I wonder how overstated the loss of revenues from taxes and job losses is from citiy officials that have NFL franchises that are afraid of them leaving are.
Cincinnati has a bad deal with the Bengals.
I found this explanationhelpful as a total outsider.
Although it’s a month old and the legal stuff has moved on since.
Pretty much it. Look for opening weekend shortly after the World Series.