|
Re: Owners' Motion for Stay Pending Appeal Denied
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat
Its simple - Judge Nelson was completely wrong from a legal perspective and horribly short-sighted.
Judge Nelsons ruling would have forced the NFL to establish some sort of rules. the NFLPA* would have then filed an anti-trust suit, as 32 independant teams could not unilaterally impose any kind of rules on a non-unionized workforce. The ultimate result of this would be a horribly one-sided "CBA" where the owners got an even worse deal than the one they have been in.
As a result, this deal would be VERY short and whenever it expired, we would be right back in the same mess we're in now.
From a logical perspective, consider this - if the union is allowed to strike, then the NFL should be allowed to lock out the players. Anything else is simply unfair. Both sides have to have equal leverage if they are going to negotiate a deal that is fair for both sides. It seems pretty clear that DeMaurice Smith sabotagued the entire process and never once negotiated with the NFL in good faith. His remarks are always to the extreme and border on insanity.
Ultimately, the only way we will have long-term labor peace in the NFL is if both sides negotiate a fair deal. The best chance for that to happen is during the lockout. Both sides have to get back to the bargaining table and continuing the lockout will essentially force both sides to do just that. If the players had any sense, they'd remove Smith from the process ASAP and assign a delegation to talk with the owners and work out a deal, using the last offer the NFL made back in march as a starting point.
|
Great post.
__________________
"I would bet.....(if), an angel fairy came down and said, '[You can have anything] in the world you would like to own,' I wouldn't be surprised if you said a football club and particularly the Washington Redskins.'' — Jack Kent Cooke, 1996.
|