Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRedskin
Simple - I am betting that Burbank's decision reads like some version of this:
1. Parties to the 2012 CBA = NFL & NFLPA;
2. Players & NFL agreed to the restructured salary cap for 2012, 2013;
3. Individual clubs have no standing to in this forum to challenge the agreement between the NFL & NFLPA.
Just read Hoophead's discussion in the old closed thread. I am betting the arbitrator pretty much followed the same line of reasoning.
|
Haven't read the actual decision, but here is a key section from a WaPo article on the decision:
Burbank, in a 10-page decision, wrote that a March 11 “reallocation” letter from the league and players’ union to the two teams informing them of the salary cap reductions, along with a March 27 vote by almost all NFL teams to affirm the cap reductions, represented a proper amending of the sport’s collective bargaining agreement.
The objections by the Redskins and Cowboys “all must fail as a matter of law if the reallocation letter, as originally executed or as ratified by the March 27 resolution, constitutes a valid amendment of the CBA,” Burbank wrote.
Later in the decision, he added: “The CBA and valid amendments thereto are binding on the clubs.”