The lawyers who represent the players and owners have prepared briefs for the judge, who will hear the case involving the players injunction request to stop the current NFL lockout.
The owners have argued that there isn’t any irreparable harm being done to the players right now because the players aren’t missing any games and anything that they do miss now or in the future can be compensated for with payments of money, therefore they don’t believe an injunction is needed.
The players argument against that contention focuses on the young players, who aren’t being given a chance to show their stuff in order to make the team or earn a spot in the starting lineup.
“Players are suffering irreparable harm now, before games are lost,” the players’ brief states. “The offseason is the time when Players compete to try to find a team, make a roster, establish themselves as starting players, demonstrate that they can overcome injuries, or otherwise prove themselves. To do this, they need the opportunity to sign with the right team, begin off-season workouts, learn the team’s system, and compete before training camp begins. Absent immediate injunctive relief, it will be impossible to turn back the clock or quantify in damages these lost opportunities.”
Which argument do you agree with? I’m siding with the players on this one.
I’m with the players on this one. And i’m with the players on most points in this whole sitiuation. They lay it on the line..they sell millions of jerseys…no Dad spends 400bills to take his kid to see Lurie.
The owners have become like those oil tyccon dudes. We’re rich..we need to be richer.No matter the consequences to our workers.And forget the consumer keeping us in business,they’re suckers and will eat what we feed them. It’s whats wrong with business today and will continue to drive this country into more econimis peral.
Maybe the NFLPA and the Owners should have thought about these things before breaking off Negotiations.. It sounds like a lot of people on both sides are now crying over spilt milk as if they didn’t fully understand their consequences of a work stoppage from the Players to the Franchises themsevles with having to lay off people, cut staff and Franchise Employees
Neither side is a victim here. The players have every right to make their claims and the owners have every right to try to guide their businesses the way that they see fit. That being said, Paulman is right, they knew that this was coming and they did nothing about it. We all have known for a year that this was going to be a problem, so why haven’t they been negotiating for a year? Why do they always wait until after the 11th hour to try to make a deal? Both sides have said that they want to negotiate, but they aren’t? Why?
Both sides are now trying to force each other to do what they want through court instead of actually trying to compromise. Arrogance is the real winner here.
I don’t think anyone is crying over spilled milk as much as this filing for an injunction is a counter strike from a blueprint the NFLPA probably drew up months ago in the event that there was a lockout. In fact I’m pretty certain this was what was pitched to the players as part of the potential lockout strategy to help them to agree to not budge in the negotiations. Considering constant flow of new talent, the brevity of the average NFL career (4 years), the lack of guaranteed contracts, the free ability of teams to trade players without notice or permission and the open emphasis on competition riddled throughout player contracts the players are arguing from a pretty strong position in terms of defining irreparable harm…which would ultimately allow them to sue for major damages down the road.
The current structured system already has the players making more than enough compromise as critically important PARTNERS and not employees.
The players chose this course. The NFLPA chose to decertify, and pursue their interests in the court room. The Owners were willing to extend the deadline and continue negotiating. The players forced the lockout by shutting down the union and going to court.
How can you side with the players on this issue? If there is harm to the young players it’s because of the unions choice. It seems to me that we are right where the players wanted us to be.
I don’t get why it is beneficial for the owners to lock out the players. I know money is being saved by not providing off season facilities and services but I would think if the players weren’t locked out, it would put all of the pressure on the players to settle since a lot of players need rehab facilities and such to continue with their careers.