NFLPA Files Collusion Lawsuit Against NFL, Owners

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by HoopheadVII

The only problem with that is that the NFLPA's complaint says they signed the salary cap reallocation agreement on March 11, but claims they only learned of the collusion on March 12...and their "new" evidence of collusion is the press / blogger reaction to the announcement of the salary cap reallocation.

Yes, their complaint essentially says that the salary cap reallocation wasn't evidence of collusion, but that the press release announcing it and the press / blogger reaction to it was new evidence of collusion.

Read that again.

Well if you read the complaint, the NFL didn't justify the reductions they just used hard negotiating tactics to get the NFLPA to agree. It was not until Goodwill and more specifically Mara made statements regarding the underlying reason for the reallocation that the NFLPA had concrete comments and linkages to what they already suspected, that the NFL and several teams secretly agreed to work within a salary cap framework even in the uncapped year.

[HoopheadVII]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Well if you read the complaint, the NFL didn't justify the reductions they just used hard negotiating tactics to get the NFLPA to agree. It was not until Goodwill and more specifically Mara made statements regarding the underlying reason for the reallocation that the NFLPA had concrete comments and linkages to what they already suspected, that the NFL and several teams secretly agreed to work within a salary cap framework even in the uncapped year.

I understand what they're claiming. I just don't find it believable.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by HoopheadVII

I understand what they're claiming. I just don't find it believable.

I think there was a point they knew there was collusion but didn't have the proof (which was before March 11), and a point in which they had proof (during the meeting on March 11) and with the blackmailing decided to agree cause now they also had proof of blackmail, and a point where they wanted to let everything play out in order to collect as much information as possible (after March 12).

Nothing in the rules says they had to not agree with the NFL, they now had evidence of blackmail, and nothing in the rules says they had to file their paperwork March 11 or March 12. So who cares that they took their time getting their paperwork together and collecting as much hard evidence as they could.

Remember the Skins named the NFLPA in their appeal which kinda put them on the wrong side of the equation and sorta made them defendants and by filing their law suit who knows how the outcome would have turned out for them plus they probably didn't want the NFL to see their evidence they had at that point when both sides were co defendants. Now that the appeal is over is it not interesting that the NFLPA has named the two teams punished in their law suit? It essentially now makes the two teams and the NFL co defendants, unless the NFLPA is going to use the two teams at some point to speak out about the collusion. At that point either the two teams are hostile witnesses and being forced to testify or the NFLPA has worked something out with the two teams behind closed doors hat for their help they will seek relief for the two teams at sentencing.

[HoopheadVII]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

I think there was a point they knew there was collusion but didn't have the proof (which was before March 11), and a point in which they had proof (during the meeting on March 11) and with the blackmailing decided to agree cause now they also had proof of blackmail, and a point where they wanted to let everything play out in order to collect as much information as possible (after March 12).

Nothing in the rules says they had to not agree with the NFL, they now had evidence of blackmail, and nothing in the rules says they had to file their paperwork March 11 or March 12. So who cares that they took their time getting their paperwork together and collecting as much hard evidence as they could.

Remember the Skins named the NFLPA in their appeal which kinda put them on the wrong side of the equation and sorta made them defendants and by filing their law suit who knows how the outcome would have turned out for them plus they probably didn't want the NFL to see their evidence they had at that point when both sides were co defendants. Now that the appeal is over is it not interesting that the NFLPA has named the two teams punished in their law suit? It essentially now makes the two teams and the NFL co defendants, unless the NFLPA is going to use the two teams at some point to speak out about the collusion. At that point either the two teams are hostile witnesses and being forced to testify or the NFLPA has worked something out with the two teams behind closed doors hat for their help they will seek relief for the two teams at sentencing.

There is ZERO chance the Redskins and Cowboys do anything to help the NFLPA here. They're the League as far as this is concerned.

Even if they wanted to help, I believe the League bylaws prevent them from voluntarily participating in a suit against the League. They could testify if legally compelled, but not voluntarily.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by HoopheadVII

There is ZERO chance the Redskins and Cowboys do anything to help the NFLPA here. They're the League as far as this is concerned.

Even if they wanted to help, I believe the League bylaws prevent them from voluntarily participating in a suit against the League. They could testify if legally compelled, but not voluntarily.

In either case compelled or not I doubt the NFL wants them on the stand saying anything remotely about collusion or agreements made without the NFLPA's agreement to it. Which takes me back to I could see the NFL finding a way to settle our CAP issue to make us happy to conveniently forget or should I say "not recall" any agreements.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by HoopheadVII

There is ZERO chance the Redskins and Cowboys do anything to help the NFLPA here. They're the League as far as this is concerned.

Even if they wanted to help, I believe the League bylaws prevent them from voluntarily participating in a suit against the League. They could testify if legally compelled, but not voluntarily.

Is this the same laws that stated there was an uncapped year?

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Is this the same laws that stated there was an uncapped year?

No the bylaws are the set of rules that owners abide as part of their ownership responsibilities. They are the governing "laws" of the ownership agreements. Different than the CBA which is a settlement that outlines the rules governing working conditions and rights for labor.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by HoopheadVII

I understand what they're claiming. I just don't find it believable.

It's not a matter of claiming, who cares if they knew ahead of March 12th, fact is they had no actionable facts to lay before a judge and say, here is the proof of collusion until Goodell, and later, Mara, made statements validating there beliefs.

Look if I believe that two local gas companies are fixing the price at the pump, I may see the trend early on, but I can't go to the courts, just because every monday station 1 puts up a penny lower price, and every thursday station 2 puts up a penny lower price. But if station 1 owner comes out one day, and says I am having a sale on Thursday, and the media asks him why, he says "because station 2 owner didn't keep to his side of the bargain", then the consumers could take the data of Monday/Thursday price fixing, and tied with Station owner 1's foot in mouth statement and sue the bejeebus out of both of them. It's not the media report that is the proof, it is the statement that is the basis of the media report. Further, if the judge says that looks shady, then the consumers and their lawyers could dig and ask for emails/communications that might further prove the depth of the collusion.

Just because the initial complaint doesn't lay out time/date/medium doesn't mean that Kessler and the other NFLPA lawyers won't go back now and start looking for trends and actions that are clearer in hindsight.

Back to my example, lets say station 1 owner and station 2 owner met in October 2010 and had some emails arranging that meeting, but not specifically discussing the collusion, and then in Jan 2011 met and agreed to begin in February 2011. At the time, the consumers might be curious, but have no direct information, or detectable pattern of behavior that would allow for further discovery. But after Station 1 owner's statement, the lawyers go back, see the emails about the meeting in Oct., then find that they met again in January, and the detectable price fixing pattern began in February. Maybe it's enough in court to convict, maybe not, but the consumers would absolutely have enough to make a media circus and living hell for the two station owners until they did something to make the consumers "forgive" them.

If the NFLPA gets to that point, we very well may see a whole new labor agreement, that is more favorable to the players. Remember, Kessler is an absolute free market, no salary cap, no restrictions period attack dog.