Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRedskin
Although I am not certain, I would imagine that the standard NFL contract has many clauses that are tied to a CBA by reference. Unless the league decides to adopt those refrences, a lot of contract language will have to be rewritten or created from whole cloth
For example: "Player agrees to the code of conduct and penaltiies set forth in Article !V(a)(1), (2) of the 2006 Collective Bargaining Agreement."
Unless the referenced provision is adopted, the club would need to specifically define all the various infractions and penalties.
Thinking about it, it might be considered collusion if all the clubs adopt the same set of standard clauses. Also, this might present clubs an opportunity for getting very creative, in all sorts of small ways, in their contract language. For example, I believe that, under the old CBA, signing bonuses were guarranteed. Well, maybe clubs could now stick in clauses and/or language that gives them greater leeway in recouping bad signing bonuses.
I am just speculating on this. I have zero experience in anti-trust/labor law stuff - just some semi informed knowledge.
|
Your semi-informed law knowledge is better than my semi-educated guesses. You're probably right, that adds a whole other layer of confusion.
I am guessing that as this confusion begins to get cleared up, the NFL is going to look like a bunch of assholes. Business is going to have to resume at some point, and the league will not be prepared in the least.
Free agency will start at an awkward time, or there will be no salary cap, or teams will be in the dark. OR... the NFL will cave in its negotiations with the players and accept a deal just to keep some rules in place and maintain competitive balance.
The players have all the leverage at this point. What a mess.