This is not BREAKING NEWS or anything.Judge rules in favor of the NFL Union...

Link:

MINNEAPOLIS Just as a fourth-quarter turnover can swing the momentum of a game, NFL players got a big gain at a key point in their labor fight with the league.
Writing that the NFL enhanced "long-term interests at the expense of its present obligations," U.S. District Judge David Doty overturned a special master's ruling and backed the NFL Players Associaton's claim that the league illegally secured a potential $4 billion revenue stream for 2011 to wield against the union as lockout protection.
NFL lawyers have argued that sound business judgment was used in the last round of television contracts to maximize money for owners and players to share, but Doty disagreed.
The union's contention is that the league left money on the table for broadcast rights to the last two seasons in those negotiations with the networks to create a war chest for this year.
The current collective bargaining agreement expires at midnight Eastern time Thursday night, and a lockout could come next.
Doty criticized special master Stephen Burbank for legal errors and erroneously concluding earlier this month that the NFL can act like a self-interested conglomerate when in fact it is bound by legal agreements to make deals that benefit both owners and players.
"The record shows that the NFL undertook contract renegotiations to advance its own interests and harm the interests of the players," wrote the judge, who has overseen NFL labor issues since he presided over a 1993 settlement that cleared the way for the current free agency system.
Doty cited a chart-style NFL "Decision Tree" memo as a "glaring example" of the league's intent, and quoted from it in his 28-page ruling: "Moving forward with a deal depended on the answer to the questions: 'Does Deal Completion Advance CBA Negotiating Dynamics?' If yes, the NFL should 'Do Deal Now'; if no, the NFL should 'Deal When Opportune.'"
The union had asked that the TV money be placed in escrow until the end of any lockout, so the owners can't use it as a safety net, thus equalizing the risk level for both sides during a protracted work stoppage. Doty will preside over a hearing, yet to be scheduled, to determine potential damages for the players as well as an injunction involving the TV contracts.
NFL spokesman Greg Aiello downplayed the significance of the ruling, saying the 32 teams were "prepared for any contingency."
"Today's ruling will have no effect on our efforts to negotiate a new, balanced labor agreement," Aiello said. He told The Associated Press the NFL had not immediately determined whether it would appeal.
The case, however, has billions at stake.
The union accused the NFL of failing to secure the maximum revenue possible when it restructured broadcast contracts in 2009 and 2010, claiming the deals were designed to guarantee owners enough money to survive a lockout. The union argued this violated that 1993 agreement between the sides that orders the NFL to make good-faith efforts to maximize revenue for players.
George Atallah, the NFLPA's assistant executive director for external affairs, said Doty's ruling "means there is irrefutable evidence that owners had a premeditated plan to lockout players and fans for more than two years. The players want to play football. That is the only goal we are focused on."
The NFL has described the $4 billion as a loan that the league eventually would need to repay - or make up to - the networks, with interest. But Doty said $421 million of the total would have been guaranteed without repayment.
In his ruling, the judge also revealed previously confidential details of NFL TV contracts and said that the league "consistently characterized gaining control over labor as a short-term objective and maximizing revenue as a long-term objective ... advancing its negotiating position at the expense of using best efforts to maximize total revenues for the joint benefit of the NFL and the Players."
Doty said at least three networks expressed "some degree of resistance to the lockout payments" and that the NFL "characterized network opposition to lockout provisions to be a deal breaker." He also wrote that DirecTV would have considered paying more in 2009 and 2010 to make the lockout provision disappear.
His decision revealed that DirecTV, in fact, would pay up to 9 percent more to the NFL if no games are played in 2011 than if they go on as scheduled. Of the total amount payable if there is a canceled season, 42 percent of DirecTV's fee is nonrefundable.
Under the CBS and Fox contracts set to expire at the end of the 2011 season, the NFL would have been required to repay those networks that same year if there were a work stoppage. Under the contracts extended to the 2013 season, the NFL will repay the funds, plus money-market interest, over the term of the contract, Doty wrote. If the season is canceled, the contracts would be extended another season.
NBC's contract through the 2011 season contained the same work-stoppage provisions as the CBS and Fox contracts, according to Doty. Citing Burbank's opinion, Doty wrote that during extension negotiations, NBC felt the NFL was "hosing" the network by its demands.
To "bridge the gap," the league agreed to award NBC an additional regular-season game for the 2010-2013 seasons. The NFL did not seek additional rights fees for the 2009, 2010 and 2011 seasons, and NBC agreed to pay increased rights fees for 2012 and 2013.
Although ESPN's contract was not set to expire until 2013, the work-stoppage provision was amended. In the negotiations, ESPN requested that the rights fee not be payable if there is a work stoppage, but the NFL rejected the request.
Doty wrote: "The NFL stated that the digital deal and the work-stoppage provisions were 'linked.' ... To secure ESPN's agreement to the work-stoppage provision, the NFL granted the right to a Monday Night Football simulator via the wireless partner."

Read more: http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2011/03/01/1388776/federal-judge-sides-with-nfl-union.html#ixzz1FSpxE4QJ

Did you read it? Oh you knew already? EVEN BETTER. Because I can admit that yesterday I didn't know this WHOLE story. I knew the players had a ruling in their favor but didn't know it was VIA THE FEDERAL COURT JUDGE WHO HAS JURISDICTION OR power to rule over the situation. That was the part of the blurb I missed. 

I know it is a lot but here are the key points...

 

Judge David Doty overturned a special master's ruling and backed the NFL Players Associaton's claim that the league illegally secured a potential $4 billion revenue stream for 2011 to wield against the union as lockout protection.

Translation: The owners...NOT THE PLAYERS..conspired to have a nest egg to help float them in the invent of a lockout that they KNEW WOULD BE COMING due to them asking for double amount of revnue shares from 1 BILLION TO 2 BILLION. Now for all of you who are automatically going to say 'Yeah they need more money...' I need you to REREAD what I just said. A BILLION. I probably couldn't even scale it to you so I will skip the 'It is like you having to pay $100 light bill and it jumped to $100k' 'cause some kinda way you will still 'find away' to understand. But really? A whole other billion. Nevermind the fact that WHAT THEY DID WAS ILLEGAL. This isn't you working down at the local call center. The players are UNIONIZED and there have been things signed that state...well...just keep reading...

NFL lawyers have argued that sound business judgment was used in the last round of television contracts to maximize money for owners and players to share, but Doty disagreed. 

The union's contention is that the league left money on the table for broadcast rights to the last two seasons in those negotiations with the networks to create a war chest for this year.

Translation: The NFL owners: We played fair. (wink wink) Besides, they are too STUPID to catch on that we 'sandbagged' that last two years! They will never SUSPECT THAT! The first judge fell for the okey doke? Oh SHIT! Lets move forward. The PUBLIC at large has a fascination with 'the bad buy' with all the money who controls everything anyway so we are HOME FREE. They will LOOK AT ALL THE BROKE ATHLETES, give us credit for MAKING MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ELSEWHERE THUS ABSOLVING US OF HAVING AN MONETARY INTEREST and blame the ATHLETES for 'crying about money' we are 'paper gangstering' them out of by sand bagging these contracts....

The Union: We were born at night but not last night. We have lawyers too plus unlike the PUBLIC (who we are GOING TO BE CAREFUL NOT TO DISS SO THEY CAN SEE IT FOR THEMSELVES) WE KNOW WHAT WE SIGNED ON FOR....it ALL is in writing and it isn't just about taking hits.... Lets use the process...Bingo. Someone saw through the charade. Next move?

Doty criticized special master Stephen Burbank for legal errors and erroneously concluding earlier this month that the NFL can act like a self-interested conglomerate when in fact it is bound by legal agreements to make deals that benefit both owners and players.
"The record shows that the NFL undertook contract renegotiations to advance its own interests and harm the interests of the players," wrote the judge, who has overseen NFL labor issues since he presided over a 1993 settlement that cleared the way for the current free agency system.

Translation: What the players signed up for, in addition to getting hit, concussed and the HONOR AND BLESSING OF GETTING PAID PRETTY WELL BUT NOTION THAT THEY SHOULD JUST SHUT UP AND LIKE IT, was an agreement back in 1993 that STATED THAT ALL NEGOTIATIONS were to be on the up and up. Again, we are talking about LAWS. 

In other words, what many of you would consider 'good business' as long as you didn't get caught. Well, the NFL got caught and they Union knew they had them dead to rights. That is why DeMaurice was that adamant about 'opening up books' It wasn't about 'players bucking up' to owners who 'worked hard to get ALL OF THEIR RICHES and who could just skip on off their merry way if this shit didn't work.' No. It was about the fact that the players knew the owners were trying to screw them and if they didn't speak up now, players would get screwed from this point forward. That and this simple fact....

In 1993 the League agreed to this: 

Once the league agreed to pay the players 59.6 cents of every dollar made (after $1 billion comes off the top), the league assumed a duty to maximize revenues. This is what was agreed to in the settlement. In English, the owners can't negotiate with THEIR BEST INTEREST at heart solely for their own gain and at the player's expense.

They are in a contract. A LEGAL BINDING CONTRACT that could land you in court. The kinda contract that could have you liquidating all of those 'other lovely assets' that you hold OUTSIDE OF FOOTBALL just to maintain. Now they wouldn't be 'broke' like you or I but let me tell you something. Them fools ARE NOT THAT ARROGANT and stupid enough to take something this 'small' to bring down their whole foundation. They can't be. You don't get to the positions these men and women have gotten to by being that passe about money. Maybe Fabian the Drug Dealer or Dervin the Store Owner can be that passe about it. He might be able to lose a corner here or there and say 'Fuck it'. You lose the corner and that's it. There is no civil suit for that. Hell there is no LAWSUIT for that. I can tell you right now that wouldn't be the attitude you would have if you were Robert Kraft. Al Davis. And certainly not the man that got $325 million dollars funded by the City of Arlington. No SIR.  'Cause with that mentality, you wouldn't be in that position to do it. You see who showed up at them meetings today too didn't you? You keep believing they aren't 'worried about it' and they are 'secure'. Especially after that aforementioned 4 BILLION dollars might just either be made untouchable until they can resolve this lil tiff or SPREAD OUT EVENLY. THEY WERE COUNTING ON THAT MONEY TO SEE THEM THROUGH. Do you get it now? Remember, there are 32 owners. If the MAIN OWNERS LIKE the ones whose names everyone likes to cite are showing up to the table with a vested interest and they HAVE MONEY LIKE YOU THINK THEY DO (I say that to say that they have money to the point that they can say 'Forget football let 'em sit) what do you think the OTHER OWNERS THEY ARE REPRESENTING who DON'T HAVE IT QUITE LIKE THAT ARE SAYING? The owner of that damm near EMPTY stadium in Jax? Or KC's owner who has a strong fan base but lets face it, they don't live inn Chi, Philly or LA. 

What you think they are saying? I'll tell you. "I thought you said they wouldn't catch on...." 

Doty criticized special master Stephen Burbank for legal errors and erroneously concluding earlier this month that the NFL can act like a self-interested conglomerate when in fact it is bound by legal agreements to make deals that benefit both owners and players.
"The record shows that the NFL undertook contract renegotiations to advance its own interests and harm the interests of the players," wrote the judge, who has overseen NFL labor issues since he presided over a 1993 settlement that cleared the way for the current free agency system.
Doty cited a chart-style NFL "Decision Tree" memo as a "glaring example" of the league's intent, and quoted from it in his 28-page ruling: "Moving forward with a deal depended on the answer to the questions: 'Does Deal Completion Advance CBA Negotiating Dynamics?' If yes, the NFL should 'Do Deal Now'; if no, the NFL should 'Deal When Opportune.'"

Translation: I case you think I am interjecting 'theory' into this. I am not. Even those staunch supporters of the owners have conceded that what is in that 28 page doc tells the story. It was what I sensed in the day's leading up to the lockout but had no proof of. I do now though. I knew it was more than a 'Its my money and I shouldn't have to open up anything' stance that the owners were taking. I also knew they had a binding contract that stated they negotiate fair deals (like most PLACES OF EMPLOYMENT) so I understood it from that side. Now perhaps if you have never had to be in any sort of negotiations of that nature, it makes no sense to you or is not natural to think like that. Perhaps you are of the ideal of 'owner'/'worker' be happy you have some shit. Which is cool. But this situation is not CONTRACTUAL set up this way. Nor was the player/NFL working relationship defined in that manner. You can see that here...@ this part of the ruling.

Doty criticized special master Stephen Burbank for legal errors and erroneously concluding earlier this month that the NFL can act like a self-interested conglomerate when in fact it is bound by legal agreements to make deals that benefit both owners and players.

So any ideas that you had about them just saying 'I can leave this alone' and it will be okay. Let 'em sit.' go out the window with this judgment. Oh don't get it twisted, THEY THOUGHT THEY COULD DO IT LIKE THAT TOO. Just like I thought though, they are wrong. You can't. That isn't an accident either. So to the 20 or so people who I have discussed this with...this is why I took the stance I did on the impending NFL stoppage. See, I never thought it was the workers..I always thought it was the owners. But that is not a 'new' ideal for me so I didn't go around shouting it. 

Now THIS IS A NEGOTIATION. Lets be clear. The players ARE NOT GOING TO GET EVERYTHING THEY WANT. Nor should they. That is why it is a negotiation. But ya'll gotta look deeper into things before you start hollering that 'spoiled athlete' shit. 'Cause it is deeper than that. Whether you like it or not it just is. Luckily, SMART PEOPLE OF COLOR like Gene Upshaw were in that Union to make sure that the 'worker' always got treated fairly or at had the chance to be. 

I hope they can work it out but if not, I understand. I don't BLAME THE PLAYERS at all on this one. You aren't gonna take 1 billion off the top, COME TO THE TABLE DEMANDING ANOTHER BILLION and HIDE MONEY/DEPRIVE ME OF MONEY 'cause you are gonna get paid 4 BILLION MORE DOLLARS while I sit and suffer and think I am gonna be 'okay' with it. Just 'cause some fans don't know what is REALLY GOING? Sheit.....

Now here is a MUCH MORE ENTERTAINING VERSION OF SOME OF THE THINGS I touched on. Ironically enough, as I was composing this post, Bomani Jones was getting KNEE DEEP into the topic. He gets into some of the companies that were basically 'paying' the NFL like Direct TV. It is high comedy. He also brings up an interesting point about the 'jealousy factor' of some folks when it comes to how they look at the athletes and take the attitudes they do. I will let him tell you though.  I think you will enjoy it. It is about 50 mins...You ain't doing shit anyway except watching reruns of Everybody Hates Chris anyway....( I stagger posts sometimes and auto post them..shhhhhh..@ the time this up. Sue me.)