Updated Title: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Reinstated

[SBXVII]

In a nut shell it still sounds to me like the players should be at fault for the majority of all this.

I know the owners gave a crappy deal. I don't dispute that. But right now no one can say if the negotiations kept going that at the 12 o'clock hour both sides might have agreed to another extention since progress was being made. Just like we really don't know if no progress would have been made and no extention, CBA expires, and the players forced to wait 6 months to do anything. But thats my point, 6 hours might have been a completely different story but the players chose not to sit and even try to work out a deal, they chose to walk out.

In almost any negotiation even though one side says this is the final offer, it can be negotiated and in this case it sounds or looks like it was never attempted.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

In a nut shell it still sounds to me like the players should be at fault for the majority of all this.

I know the owners gave a crappy deal. I don't dispute that. But right now no one can say if the negotiations kept going that at the 12 o'clock hour both sides might have agreed to another extention since progress was being made. Just like we really don't know if no progress would have been made and no extention, CBA expires, and the players forced to wait 6 months to do anything. But thats my point, 6 hours might have been a completely different story but the players chose not to sit and even try to work out a deal, they chose to walk out.

In almost any negotiation even though one side says this is the final offer, it can be negotiated and in this case it sounds or looks like it was never attempted.

I agree with this.

The problem from the players perspective is that for 6 months they would have had near zero leverage, while the owners still could have, and likely would have locked them out. So the question for the union was will their membership withstand a 6 month lockout and still be in the mood for a lengthy legal battle. The leadership figured no.

Both sides had 2+ years to sit and truly negotiate, and instead spent most of that time posturing, and angering the other side's leadership. That animosity isn't just going to disappear...

(I will add a jab at the out of whack judiciary that has basically emboldened the players union to try tactics that have never been used before (that I could find), and that will only continue when Doty rules in the next week that the players are due some humongous damage settlement which the NFL will then put back in the 8th district court of appeals. I would not be shocked for Doty to rule that the players are due the whole 4Billion, 1.5 Billion as split of revenue, and 2.5B as damages) with the whole amount put in escrow pending resolution.)

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

In a nut shell it still sounds to me like the players should be at fault for the majority of all this. .

Absolutely and totally 100% false. No idea where you are coming up with that crap, but the federal mediator that was overseeing this bargaining even stated that there obviously no use in continuing the discussions because they were both at sticking points that neither were budging on. I posted this a while back when it was said. So this whole notion that the players didn't try to negotiate till the final hour is a bit misguided.


Again, they would still be under the same CBA and rules had the owners not opted out 2 years ago. This squarely is on the shoulders of the owners, not the players.