Decertification

[ThPantherFan]

I think one of the "rules" of collective bargaining is that both parties bargian in good faith. Since the NFLPA decertified at 4Pm while the bargaining was still going on, infact while the owners were giving a new proposal, could signal to the courts that the NFLPA was not negotiating in good faith.

I hope someone shoves it so far up their asses it causes permanent constipation.

[OBXPantha]

Wrong.

Wrong, because you said so? Explain please.

[riddel]

Exactly why mediation was a sham. Litigation was the end game for the players from word go. The 'talks' were simply a PR move by the NFLPA.

It's cut and dry.

If you are losing money show the union that you are losing money and they would take a pay cut. If you refuse to show the books, then don't ask for money out of the unions pockets. Keep the exact same pay split that you had prior to the CBA expiration. The owners wanted to take money out of the players pockets without showing a loss.....now the choice is not theirs...the courts will open the books and for the NFL owners sake, I hope they are losing money....otherwise they are liars and good faith bargaining never took place. Antitrust suits will prevail.

[Jaxel]

And I also believe that was Jerry Richardson's lie

I disagree.

[Hawk]

So does this mean we get fuged after all?

as fans....YES!

[riddel]

I think one of the "rules" of collective bargaining is that both parties bargian in good faith. Since the NFLPA decertified at 4Pm while the bargaining was still going on, infact while the owners were giving a new proposal, could signal to the courts that the NFLPA was not negotiating in good faith.

After 5pm the union could not decertify because the courts would be closed....the current CBA would have expired at 12am.....the players union would not be able to decertify for 6 months once the CBA expired.....they players union waited to the very last minute to decertify....the owners refused to open the books and show a loss....the players union decertified so now the courts will force the owners to show a loss...if the owners don't show a loss, then the entire negotiations were a scam and the owners will lose antitrust lawsuits....somebody better get to cooking the books...quick!

[Happy Panther]

I disagree.

How many other owners have publicly stated this lie?

[carolinarolls]

glad the owners stood their ground. The talent should never get as much control as they have attained over the years.

Now we will see what happens next and just what a bunch of greedy, stubborn afaletes have done to themselves by listening to a moron like Smith.

[Jaxel]

How many other owners have publicly stated this lie?

Jerry was leading the negotiations for the Owners... they didn't have to.

[ncbobcat]

It's cut and dry.

If you are losing money show the union that you are losing money and they would take a pay cut. If you refuse to show the books, then don't ask for money out of the unions pockets. Keep the exact same pay split that you had prior to the CBA expiration. The owners wanted to take money out of the players pockets without showing a loss.....now the choice is not theirs...the courts will open the books and for the NFL owners sake, I hope they are losing money....otherwise they are liars and good faith bargaining never took place. Antitrust suits will prevail.

The owners attempted a split of their differences and the players refused. In other words, they didn't want to give anything back.

The NHL and NBA opened the books and it didn't help resolve the issue. David Stern has even stated as much.

You nor the players trust the owners. Fine. However, it seems that the NFLPA could have just decertified at the start of the process and got it going sooner because this was were it was heading all along.

The only other option was for the owners to just give up and that wasn't happening.

[Evil Hurney]

If you were a player and stood to "possibly" make less money would you interpret financial records in favor of the owners?

[riddel]

Furthermore....decertification enables the players to prevent a lockout....meaning the courts will not allow the owners to lockout a union that no longer exists...the players actually did the owners a favor in that now a judge can reinstate the 2010 CBA conditions while the antitrust cases go through the courts...meaning we could have football if the judge finds that it losing the NFL for a season would cause the economy financial hardship....so....we should thank the players....a judge will definately tell them to play to prevent economic distress....

The owners may not lockout, because it is worthless to lockout at this point.....it would only be a formality....who are they locking out? The union no longer exists.

[OBXPantha]

After 5pm the union could not decertify because the courts would be closed....the current CBA would have expired at 12am.....the players union would not be able to decertify for 6 months once the CBA expired.....they players union waited to the very last minute to decertify....the owners refused to open the books and show a loss....the players union decertified so now the courts will force the owners to show a loss...if the owners don't show a loss, then the entire negotiations were a scam and the owners will lose antitrust lawsuits....somebody better get to cooking the books...quick!

I understand what you are saying. I am saying that legally the owners could claim the same thing. The union had decertified while listening to a new proposal (as per the NY Giants owner). That could be seen as "not in good faith".

[riddel]

The owners attempted a split of their differences and the players refused. In other words, they didn't want to give anything back.

The NHL and NBA opened the books and it didn't help resolve the issue. David Stern has even stated as much.

You nor the players trust the owners. Fine. However, it seems that the NFLPA could have just decertified at the start of the process and got it going sooner because this was were it was heading all along.

The only other option was for the owners to just give up and that wasn't happening.

Why should the players take less money? Someone please tell me why? Because the owners "claim" they are losing money on the deal? SHOW ME! The owners played poker and they lost.....now they will show the courts.