Injunction Junction

[Smeefers]

All this is such a fucking joke. Just keep pissing on the fans people. I know they'll keep coming, but there will be a good number that will say "eff you" to the NFL and never look back..

I don't think they piss on the fans until we start loosing regular season games. If that happens, I believe donkey kong and it's on form a rock group.

[Smeefers]

Rotoworld writes ESPN retracts it's report that the stay was granted

[Guiness]

Rotoworld writes ESPN retracts it's report that the stay was granted

From Rotoworld

ESPN has retracted its report that St. Louis' Eighth Circuit Court granted a "stay" of the lockout injunction Friday.

Yahoo Sports' Mike Silver is still reporting that a stay is expected, but it isn't official yet. Some reports claimed teams were already kicking players out of their facilities; that isn't the case. Expect a formal ruling to be handed down from the Eighth Circuit Court before the start of round two.

[SkinBasket]

Suck it NFL! You can't lock us out! Our careers are on the line!

[Lurker64]

They may still grant a stay, it's just that when they do so they'll do it about 5PM. In fact, they probably will grant an administrative stay, since NFL business happens on weekends but court business does not. Nobody's careers are jeopardized by being locked out an additional 2-3 days.

[retailguy]

Suck it NFL! You can't lock us out! Our careers are on the line!

Can't keep the "little men" down! Damn the torpedos! We want JUSTICE damnit!

[bobblehead]

What makes you think that the issue is about prohibiting new teams from entering the NFL? I've never seen that before. In fact, I haven't seen a lot of the assertions you are making. Where is this coming from?

It was the best understanding I could gather from reading about the NFL's anti trust exemption on wiki. If you can explain what it is better please enlighten me as I admit that I haven't found anything solid, just the stuff I wrote above. I USED to think the MLB exemption meant no one could start a competing LEAGUE, but it can't mean that since the NFL has had several competing leagues. As I read as much as I could I came to understand it that it meant that the NFL doesn't have to allow anyone in THEIR league...thus, anti trust exemption. If you have different understandings I am not being sarcastic, I am truly trying to understand this.

[get louder at lambeau]

So, lockout. Then no lockout. Then lockout. Next week, maybe no lockout again. It's like Brent Faver is running this shit.

[mraynrand]

I don't think they piss on the fans until we start loosing regular season games. If that happens, I believe donkey kong and it's on form a rock group.

THe fans won't leave unless the NFL screws up the competitive balance. Once fans think their team hasn't a chance, it's over. Like the NBA. Like baseball. Once fans know that a groups of guys can just up and form whatever team they want at any time, with no rules, it's over. Like the Miami Heat pickup team. That's the crap fans will flee from. Most fans want an even shake for the players and they want their owners to try to win. Fans will flee teams with owners who are trying to leach off the league too - eventually.

[sharpe1027]

It was the best understanding I could gather from reading about the NFL's anti trust exemption on wiki. If you can explain what it is better please enlighten me as I admit that I haven't found anything solid, just the stuff I wrote above.

If some potential team owner was suing, then you might have a point. The issue at hand, however, is regarding the players and the owners setting the prices for the players. I don't understand why you are talking about letting another team into the league.

I USED to think the MLB exemption meant no one could start a competing LEAGUE, but it can't mean that since the NFL has had several competing leagues. As I read as much as I could I came to understand it that it meant that the NFL doesn't have to allow anyone in THEIR league...thus, anti trust exemption. If you have different understandings I am not being sarcastic, I am truly trying to understand this.

First, the MLB and NFL exemptions are different. Second, what WIKI page were you reading? The only one I could find says that the NFL exemption relates to TV rights including, a unitary video package to TV networks, a right for blackouts and a general right to allow the NFC-AFC merge. Where did you find talk about an exemption relating to adding teams to the league, and why would the NFL need one?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_Broadcasting_Act_of_1961

[bobblehead]

If some potential team owner was suing, then you might have a point. The issue at hand, however, is regarding the players and the owners setting the prices for the players. I don't understand why you are talking about letting another team into the league.



First, the MLB and NFL exemptions are different. Second, what WIKI page were you reading? The only one I could find says that the NFL exemption relates to TV rights including, a unitary video package to TV networks, a right for blackouts and a general right to allow the NFC-AFC merge. Where did you find talk about an exemption relating to adding teams to the league, and why would the NFL need one?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_...ng_Act_of_1961

I can't find the page I was reading, but nowhere did I ever see anything regarding owners rights to set prices for players....as a matter of fact just the opposite has happened. If they truly had a collusion exemption they wouldn't have lost the Reggie White case. Again, I don't understand a lot of this stuff. Again, I don't even understand why the NFL needs rights to negotiate TV contracts in the way they wish to. As for the merger that actually makes sense, because by allowing it you gave a monopoly at the time....but again, that doesn't stop anyone else from creating a competing league as the WFL and the USFL have tried. I'll try and do more reading on it and get a better understanding when its not 2am and I'm not dead tired. I still would like even more information though (or better comprehension maybe).

[sharpe1027]

I can't find the page I was reading, but nowhere did I ever see anything regarding owners rights to set prices for players....as a matter of fact just the opposite has happened. If they truly had a collusion exemption they wouldn't have lost the Reggie White case. Again, I don't understand a lot of this stuff. Again, I don't even understand why the NFL needs rights to negotiate TV contracts in the way they wish to. As for the merger that actually makes sense, because by allowing it you gave a monopoly at the time....but again, that doesn't stop anyone else from creating a competing league as the WFL and the USFL have tried. I'll try and do more reading on it and get a better understanding when its not 2am and I'm not dead tired. I still would like even more information though (or better comprehension maybe).

The current lawsuit is about the owner's right to set prices for players. You can google and find the player's complaint, and there was also a thread in here discussing it in detail. Thus, the current issue has nothing to do with adding a new team and that's why I don't understand your point. As far as I know, the NFL has never tried to stop a competing league so it has never been raised as an issue that needed some type of exemption.

[Guiness]

I can't find the page I was reading, but nowhere did I ever see anything regarding owners rights to set prices for players....as a matter of fact just the opposite has happened. If they truly had a collusion exemption they wouldn't have lost the Reggie White case. Again, I don't understand a lot of this stuff. Again, I don't even understand why the NFL needs rights to negotiate TV contracts in the way they wish to. As for the merger that actually makes sense, because by allowing it you gave a monopoly at the time....but again, that doesn't stop anyone else from creating a competing league as the WFL and the USFL have tried. I'll try and do more reading on it and get a better understanding when its not 2am and I'm not dead tired. I still would like even more information though (or better comprehension maybe).

It is interesting...if by interesting you mean 'dry'

MLB and NFL anti-trust exemptions are different. MLB has more sweeping protection, from what I understand. The NFL's major exemptions are related to being allowed to bargain as a unit to negotiate their TV contracts.

In the early Rozelle days, the NFL did try and get MLB-like exemptions, and were initially denied. However, the lawmakers never pressed the issue, so the NFL decided to let sleeping dogs lie.

If you want information on this, have a look at the book "The League: The Rise and Decline of the NFL" by David Harris. It deals a lot with Al Davis, and his long fight with the league, but gives a good overview of everything that was going on. I started a thread about it a while back, but, amazingly, no one was interested.

[Tarlam!]

The current lawsuit is about the owner's right to set prices for players.

It'll be interesting to see how the courts view this. I actually disagree with the premise that the owners set individual player prices. They have a bandwidth of a minimum/ maximum spend for their players. They have a minimum salary based on years in the league.

I have no idea how many players are really negatively impacted by the rules the league has to guarantee parity. That parity, though, is what has attracted fans world wide and has allowed th league to expand. Thus, more jobs for more players were created. Without that parity, it becomes as boring as club soccer has become in Europe, where only 4 teams per season out of between 12 and 20 clubs per league have a realistic chance.

That's also why the per capita revenue of the NFL is sooooooo high by comparison.

[get louder at lambeau]

Looks like the NFL might actually have a counter move equivalent to the NFLPA decertifying. They can just shut down the league completely and just not exist as a business for a while, similar to what the NFLPA is doing by not being a union anymore. Looks like both sides can use bullshit legal maneuvers and "not exist" temporarily as negotiating leverage.

The story-

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/05/08/rumors-fly-of-a-complete-nfl-shutdown/