Jeff-Pash-reacts-to-DeMaurice-Smiths-criticism-of-NFLs-last-offer

[RashanGary]

You guys can be open to the possiblity that the NFLPA really believes they'll get a better deal in court and that's why they're doing this.

[Lurker64]

You guys can be open to the possiblity that the NFLPA really believes they'll get a better deal in court and that's why they're doing this.

I agree with the supposition that the NFLPA believes that they will get a better deal in court.

What I am questioning, however, is whether the NFLPA will actually get a better deal in court.

It's entirely possible that the NFLPA loses in court, and has to accept a much worse deal, which is why I support negotiation over litigation. Litigation carries risk, negotiation doesn't.

What I am hoping is that the NFLPA simply hopes to use the initial courtroom decisions to move leverage and thereby get a deal done. However, if Judge Nelson doesn't find that granting a preliminary injunction blocking the lockout is appropriate (after all, no game checks are being lost) I'm not sure what the NFLPA will do now that they've lost considerable leverage in this gambit.

[Patler]

You guys can be open to the possiblity that the NFLPA really believes they'll get a better deal in court and that's why they're doing this.

I am convinced they believe the lawsuit is to their advantage. I have been arguing all along that they stonewalled the negotiation process to get to where they are right now. However, I am not convinced that it will work out the way they hope, if litigation carries through to the end. It might be that all the players want is the uncertainty of litigation, hoping it will cause the owners to relent on a few more issues. Filing the action doesn't mean they want it carried through to the end necessarily.