The Official Nfl Cba/lockout Thread

[SJ_Browns]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6232940

 

MARCO ISLAND, Fla. -- Chiefs veteran linebacker Mike Vrabel has an idea for progressing talks between the NFL Players Association and the owners who have locked them out: Cut out the middle men.

 

Vrabel, speaking to ESPN's George Smith in a roundtable interview during a break at the former union's annual meeting Friday, suggested meetings that don't include commissioner Roger Goodell and the NFL's lead labor attorneys would be to everyone's advantage.

 

"We are willing to negotiate. But we don't want to negotiate with Bob Batterman, Jeff Pash or Roger Goodell," Vrabel said, referring to the NFL's outside labor counsel in Batterman and its executive vice president and lead counsel in Pash. "Our executive committee needs to negotiate with Jerry Jones, Bob Kraft, Jerry Richardson -- their executive committee. People that are willing and can agree to a deal. Jeff Pash can't agree to a deal."

 

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said the league accepts Vrabel's invitation to negotiate but didn't rule out the top executives' participation.

 

"The NFL's negotiating team -- accompanied by the three owners Mike mentioned, Jerry Jones, Jerry Richardson and Robert Kraft -- is prepared to meet immediately. Just tell us when and where," Aiello said of the Cowboys owner, the Panthers owner and the Patriots owner.

 

A week after the union decertified and a lockout began shortly thereafter, Vrabel was among several players who continued to ratchet up the rhetoric publicly, targeting the owners group's motives and means in the NFL's labor stalemate.

 

Pete Kendall, the NFLPA's permanent player representative, told reporters labor negotiations broke down last week because the owners' last proposal would have made salaries a fixed cost and eliminated the players' chance to share in higher-than-projected revenue growth.

 

"That's a fundamental change as to the way the business has been done with the players -- player percentage always has been tied to revenues," said Kendall, a former 13-year offensive lineman who retired after the 2008 season.

 

Colts center and player representative Jeff Saturday, speaking to ESPN's Smith along with Vrabel, Saints quarterback Drew Brees, Broncos safety and player rep Brian Dawkins and Ravens player representative Domonique Foxworth, bashed a letter Goodell sent to all NFL players Thursday in which he detailed the owners' version of events that led to last Friday's lockout.

 

"It's his attempt to, you know, to divide us as a group of men," Saturday said. "You know, anytime you send something out like that after we've been in negotiations for two-years plus, you know, 15-day extension -- all the things we've been through -- you know it's just one of those tactics different people use during the negotiations."

 

Mediation cut off last Friday, and the union dissolved itself, allowing players to file suit in federal court. Hours later, when the old collective bargaining agreement expired, owners locked out the players.

 

"The reality is we've been communicating to our men throughout this whole process about what the offers really are, what the numbers really are, things that we have tried to agree upon that have not been agreed upon and as a group of men we knew it wasn't a deal that our membership would accept," Saturday said.

 

In a speech Friday to players at the NFLPA's annual meeting, NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith said he won't be paid during the work stoppage -- the league's first since 1987. Goodell and Pash, the league's lead labor negotiator, already said they would reduce their salaries to a dollar each.

 

"Our players are locked out," Smith said during a brief session with reporters. "The league made a unilaterial decision to punish the people who made this game great."

 

Smith said he does not consider Goodell's letter an attempt to engage in good-faith negotiations. The league, he said, could attempt to restart talks by writing, instead, to lawyers representing the players now that the union has dissolved.

 

"Let's not kid ourselves. Jeff Pash ... knows that class counsel can always engage in discussions with counsel for the National Football League to have discussions relating to a settlement," Smith said. "He knows what letter should have been sent."

 

Kendall described the league's 11th-hour offer as "kind of the old switcheroo," saying that throughout negotiations the players' chance to share in increased revenues had been a key component of how to divide the NFL's yearly take of more than $9 billion.

 

Kendall said the discussions until talks stopped last Friday -- the 16th day of federal mediation -- always revolved around the premise that if the rise in league revenues exceeded a certain percentage each year, players would get a cut.

 

"The most important thing is getting back to playing football again," Brees said. "And that's why we're enjoining a lockout. Like all these guys have said, we, our intention was never to get locked out, we wanted to get a fair deal done. We always had guys there to do that."

 

Brees addressed the perceived Catch-22 surrounding rookie prospects' decision over whether to attend next month's draft, set for April 28-30.

 

"Each rookie has -- if they've been invited to New York -- they absolutely have the option of going to New York," Brees said in the interview with ESPN. "I think to our point it was -- how do you feel about walking across the stage and shaking the hand of the commissioner who just locked you out? And as great an experience as it is to get drafted, which it absolutely is, I think the even greater experience is to play your first game, and to have to opportunity to win a championship and right now that's being threatened with this lockout."

 

While the addition of an immediate 18-game schedule was tabled in the negotiations early last week, the possibility for instituting it in future seasons -- with the players' approval -- was retained.

 

"Eighteen games does nothing for our health and safety," said Foxworth, the former defensive back and Ravens player rep who retired in 2009. "We're not looking to make any financial gains, we're looking to protect former players and make protections and safety improvements for current players."

 

But the players told ESPN's Smith it wasn't a deal-breaker.

 

"No. We'll negotiate on the economics of football," Vrabel said. "We're not negotiating on health and safety. And as far as we're concerned 18 games lies right in the way of our players health and safety."

 

Pash told the AP this week that the owners' final proposal was for a 10-year CBA. Kendall confirmed that.

 

"A 10-year, fair deal might be something worth considering," Kendall said. "A 10-year deal where the players don't participate in any of the upside is not a deal that I think is ... something that the players should have taken."

 

An April 6 hearing date is set for U.S. District Court in Minnesota for a ruling on the players' request for an injunction that would end the lockout.

 

But a settlement between the owners and players before the hearing is unlikely, an NFLPA source told ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter earlier this week. The source said a ruling on the players' injunction request was expected within a week of the hearing.

 

"We're confident that this injunction is gonna be granted," Foxworth said. "And I think the message to the fans is -- all the fans should just unite and root for this at this point. You don't have a team to root for at this point, you wanna root for your team when the season comes, you need to be outside the courthouse with your face painted cheering for the judge to grant this injunction. Because I think simply put if we are granted this injunction there will be football."

[medicineman]

At this point I am jusd fed up with both sides. All the money these jerk offs have and they are to stupid to come to a deal that there might not be a season. I would love to see all of them go broke and have a brand new leauge start.

[SJ_Browns]

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2011/03/former_cleveland_cornerback_fr.html

 

Cleveland - The most recent time there was a work stoppage in the NFL was the players' strike in 1987. They walked out to force owners to give them free agency after their contracts ran out.

 

Ultimately, the players got what they wanted. But to get there, they had to endure the immensely divisive strike, which was broken by the owners' use of replacement "scab" players; four years of partial free agency and other management-friendly rules imposed by owners; decertification of the players union; and finally a huge win in federal court.

 

By the time a new collective bargaining agreement was reached in 1993, featuring unrestricted free agency for players and a salary cap for owners, many of the players who walked picket lines in 1987 were too old to take advantage of the new system.

 

Browns cornerback Frank Minnifield was one of them. Minnifield joined the Browns in 1984 and retired after his last season with them in 1992. A successful businessman in his hometown of Lexington, Ky., Minnifield views the current work stoppage with interest. His son, Chase, a starting cornerback at the University of Virginia, will be a draftable player in 2012.

 

"It's a shame," Frank Minnifield said of the labor dispute. "It happens probably to every generation. I guess it's just part of the evil that's associated with the NFL. You know, money is the root of all evil."

 

This time, the owners have precipitated the stoppage. They've locked out players and want a deal that is less favorable to the players.

 

"The owners have such a huge advantage on the players," Minnifield said. "I'm sure we're all amazed [the players] have been able to negotiate to the position where the owners feel they're at a disadvantage. But I don't believe the owners are going to lose that much money."

 

Minnifield, naturally, sides with the players in this newest scuffle. He said they deserve all the money they can make in their short careers.

 

"There's just too many kids who get hurt to the point where their life is affected the rest of their lives," he said. "I saw a statistic . . . it was mind-blowing, about how many kids in college are maimed because of football. Then you're talking about a person in the owner's box, just taking a financial risk. That's a different risk than a physical risk."

 

Minnifield is 51. He played two years in the United States Football League and came to the Browns after surgery to fix a busted a knee. The rest of his injuries in his nine-year NFL career, including a lacerated kidney, were treated without surgery.

 

"I think anybody that was on the football field trying to win has a [health] problem," he said. "I'm not in no hospital, but I know I played 11 years of pro football. I like playing golf. There are many times I have to say, 'I can't play today,' with something hurting. There's many of those days. That goes on with all of us.

 

"Some of these guys get through it unscathed, without paying a real heavy toll with their health. But I would say the majority, over 50 percent, when they get to my age will be experiencing some problems they don't even realize. And they're going to need all the money they have to make it to 70. It takes a lot of money to make it to 70."

 

When Minnifield thinks back to the 1987 strike, the memories are not pleasant. The players walked out after the second game. The third game of the season was canceled. By the fourth week, owners had rounded up whole new teams of "replacement players" -- former college or pro players who had gone on to their life's work as truck drivers, teachers and the like.

 

Stressed for money, the regulars slinked back late in the week after the second "scab" game -- only to be turned away until the replacements were given a third game. Divide and conquer was a successful strategy for the owners.

 

The strike tore apart the Browns, Minnifield said.

 

"It got real ugly," he said. "I think those days are still kind of a little messy for all of us because of how we were all divided. I really believe that it really messed up the chemistry of our team from that point on."

 

Surprisingly, Minnifield did not begrudge the replacement players from taking his job temporarily. Much stronger emotions were spent on the regular players who broke ranks and crossed picket lines. Eight Browns did that for the third replacement game, including team leaders such as Gary Danielson and Ozzie Newsome.

 

"It was kind of hard dealing with the fact some guys went back, some didn't, and some guys were financially better off because they went back [versus] the guys who stayed together," Minnifield said. "I think that was tough. We didn't talk about it because everybody would get mad. But I think it affected us for the rest of our careers together.

 

"We didn't want anybody to go back. We wanted to stay together and whatever consequences there were we wanted to face them as a team. If we were going to have to fight harder because we were behind and lost those three games, then so be it. I don't think anybody was going to accept any reason for crossing the line.

 

"We had a special relationship. Our whole team was special. We'd go over each other's house. We actually liked each other. There aren't too many [teams] that hung out like we did. It was common to go over somebody's house each week and just eat together. Thanksgiving was unbelievable. After that strike, we didn't do it again. Most of that stuff just stopped. There was a whole lot of guys who were upset that didn't talk about it. We went on with our business. But our relationship was never the same."

 

The Browns were hurt more than most teams by the disruption. Coming off the AFC Championship Game loss to John Elway and "The Drive," 1987 was to be their year. The strike wiped out Game 3 of the '87 schedule. It happened to be Elway's regular-season return to Cleveland.

 

Had the game been played and the Browns won, they would have finished with a better record than Denver and earned home-field advantage in the '87 season AFC Championship. Instead, they had to play in Denver. Elway again prevailed in the loss remembered by "The Fumble."

 

"We would have beat Denver in Cleveland because we were a better team," Minnifield said. "They wouldn't have beat us two years in a row. That was our best team. We were all young kids. We were probably as good as football players in '87 as we were in our whole career."

[SJ_Browns]

this article just backs up my reasons for siding with the players. plus it's nice to get a perspective on this from minny. he went through it before and knows it all too well.

[Harry Buffalo]

Two new articles on the Plains Dealer today about the lock out.

 

Audit shows NFL players received 52.9% of revenues, not 70 as league says

 

Basically is what the title says. Both owners and players were lied too.

 

NFL files suit to keep lawsuit in place, accuses players of trying to maniuplate the law

 

The NFL trying to keep the lock out in place if the Players Association's lawsuit gets what it want's and the federal courts rule that the lockout is illegal.

[SJ_Browns]

this ish is getting more and more ridiculous!

[SJ_Browns]

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2011/03/court_motions_keep_nfl_from_bu.html

 

New Orleans -- When will the NFL get back to the business of free agency and other player transactions?

 

It most likely won't be before April 6 and very likely could be days -- maybe weeks -- after that date. April 6 is the day a federal judge hears the players association's request to lift the owners' lockout and trigger the start of the league year.

 

The owners would immediately appeal an unfavorable ruling. If unsuccessful, they would have to decide how to proceed -- what temporary set of rules to institute in the absence of a comprehensive collective bargaining agreement -- without violating antitrust rules and cementing the players' class action suit.

 

The NFL filed a motion in federal court in Minneapolis on Monday asking a judge not to lift the lockout. It argues it should wait for the National Labor Relations Board to rule on the NFL complaint filed Feb. 14, which challenges the players union's decertification as "a sham."

 

The NFL made two other main points in Monday's filing, the Associated Press said in its story from Minneapolis. It said the injunction issue shouldn't be in federal court at all and the players' claim of "irreparable harm" has no merit.

 

Stopping the lockout, the NFL argued, would open all 32 teams up to additional antitrust claims even for working together to solve the labor fight, the AP story said. Antitrust claims carry triple damages for any harm proven, meaning hundreds of millions of dollars are at stake.

 

In arguing that Congress has barred judges from halting lockouts, the league cited the Norris-LaGuardia Act -- Depression-era legislation passed with the intent of limiting employers' ability to crack down on unions, including their ability to seek court orders halting strikes, the AP said. The NFL contends the law also protects an employer's right to impose a lockout in a labor dispute.

 

It's getting more complex by the minute.

 

At the league meetings in New Orleans, owners were brought up to speed for the first time as a group since negotiations with the players association under the auspices of a federal mediator broke down March 11.

 

Among the six owners not attending the meetings here is the Browns' Randy Lerner, who was absent because of family matters. Others not in attendance were New England's Robert Kraft, Tennessee's Bud Adams, Buffalo's Ralph Wilson, Seattle's Paul Allen and Al Davis of the Raiders.

 

On Monday, four NFL lawyers briefed media for over an hour. One of them said, in answer to a question, that nothing legally prevents the owners from ultimately using replacement players if they so choose. That's the first time that idea has come out. And then NFL chief legal counsel Jeff Pash held a separate news conference to amplify the league's stance.

 

The overriding message of the day was that the NFL is quite anxious to hammer out a collective bargaining agreement at the negotiating table and not in court, where it has not fared well on antitrust issues.

 

Behind closed doors, owners were given "a thorough" briefing on all the labor issues, Pash said, and "the full range of alternatives" on what the league can and cannot do going forward.

 

The Browns were represented in executive session -- only two per club permitted -- by President Mike Holmgren and his top business assistant, Bryan Wiedmeier, executive vice president. Holmgren said that Lerner's absence could not be avoided.

 

"He planned on being here," Holmgren said. "I'm on the phone with him every hour."

 

The Browns were much more active in league affairs when the expansion franchise returned under the ownership of Al Lerner, Randy's father. The elder Lerner's expertise in business matters made him a powerful, respected voice on the league's finance committee.

 

But Randy Lerner seemingly has shown less and less interest in league issues since he took over as Browns owner in 2003. The NFL has 15 various ownership committees to deal with everything from finance and broadcasting to business ventures and digital media. Lerner is the only one of the 32 owners who does not sit on a single committee.

 

"I think his involvement is going to change," Holmgren said. "He's expressed to me that he would like to get more involved. How that manifests itself, I don't know."

 

Part of the impetus for hiring Holmgren as president last year was for him to represent Lerner at league meetings. Holmgren doesn't cast a vote on anything without first consulting with Lerner.

 

"He's got a lot of responsibilities," Holmgren said. "He gave me this charge. I told him, there will be meetings in the future where I need you to be there, and he said fine. The important thing is he'll be there [when needed]."

 

Kickoff update: Holmgren said he would not vote for the drastic changes in the kickoff rules as proposed by the competition committee.

 

To reduce injuries on kickoffs, the committee proposed moving the kickoff line to the 35-yard line, which would promote more touchbacks and reduce returns. Further changes would limit players to a 5-yard running start on covering kicks, eliminate the two-man blocking wedge and bring the ball to the 25-yard line after touchbacks.

 

Holmgren acknowledged the changes would hurt the Browns because it would reduce Josh Cribbs' impact as a returner.

 

"Why should I hurt my team?" Holmgren said. "The injury thing is a big thing, so move the guys running down on kickoffs to 5 yards, and eliminate the wedge, but keep the kickoff at the 30."

 

Rich McKay, chairman of the committee, said changes in the proposal could be made before a vote Tuesday.

[SJ_Browns]

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/03/printing_mogul_ken_lanci_suing.html

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Businessman Ken Lanci sued the NFL, the Cleveland Browns and the league's 31 other teams on Thursday, aiming to save the upcoming football season.

 

Lanci says in the suit that the lockout violates his private seat license contract with the Browns and jeopardizes his right to watch a full season of home games.

 

He filed the suit in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court, asking the court to prohibit the lockout that threatens to cancel the 2011-12 NFL season ( lancisuit.pdf ).

 

The 60-year-old Gates Mills resident said he is hoping to make a difference with this suit.

 

"What tipped the scale for me is the labor issue between millionaires and billionaires and the fact they can't settle it when the country is in a recession," he said. "Worse yet, they have to rub this in our faces."

 

Lanci, a self-made millionaire, ran as an independent for Cuyahoga County executive last year in a mostly self-financed campaigned. He lost. But he became known, partly for his thick white hair that contrasted with the orange glow he gained from his personal tanning bed.

 

Lanci owns PSLs for 10 seats in Club Section C3, which he bought in October 1997. People pay an upfront fee for a PSL that gives them the right to purchase a season ticket for a specific seat in a stadium.

 

He is in effect saying the lockout robs him of his right to watch games this season because his PSL contract gives him "exclusive use and possession" of 10 specified seats in Cleveland Browns Stadium.

 

On March 10, the NFL Players Association decertified itself as the union for NFL players to avoid a strike, but a day later team owners nonetheless announced the lockout.

 

"The owners and players can't decide what to do with an extra billion dollars between them," Lanci said. "I have the perfect solution. That one billion should go to all cities that gave them money to build football stadiums they couldn't afford to build. This would give these cities badly needed tax relief."

 

The lawsuit caught the Browns by surprise, said Neal Gulkis, a team spokesman. He said he could not comment until the organization could study the suit.

 

Greg Aiello, a spokesman for the NFL, said the league would look into the matter further before commenting.

 

Lanci, who owns Graphic Arts Centre and is chairman and chief executive officer of Consolidated Graphics Group Inc. in Cleveland, is hoping to be a voice for the average Browns fan.

 

"The players union says NFL owners are offering what will be the worst deal ever," Lanci said. "Really? How about being unemployed? Right now they get 59 percent of the take, and that's beyond comprehension.

 

"These players should get on their knees and be grateful they can play a game for that kind of money when so many others in this city and country are hurting financially."

 

When NFL players went on strike in 1982, reducing the season from 16 to nine games, no teams had PSLs.

 

Today, 20 of the 32 teams -- mostly those with newer stadiums -- offer 'them. The Carolina Panthers were the first team to offer them in 1993, and the Browns followed upon their return to the NFL in 1999 after a three-year absence.

 

Lanci does not consider his lawsuit frivolous. He is seeking at least $75,000 in damages.

 

But does he really expect to win the suit?

 

"At the end of the day, [Cuyahoga County Common Pleas] Judge John P. O'Donnell has to judge if this suit has merit or not," he said, "but I'm sure the court of public opinion will certainly weigh in on this."

[LCDawgFan13]

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/03/printing_mogul_ken_lanci_suing.html

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Businessman Ken Lanci sued the NFL, the Cleveland Browns and the league's 31 other teams on Thursday, aiming to save the upcoming football season.

 

Lanci says in the suit that the lockout violates his private seat license contract with the Browns and jeopardizes his right to watch a full season of home games.

 

He filed the suit in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court, asking the court to prohibit the lockout that threatens to cancel the 2011-12 NFL season ( lancisuit.pdf ).

 

The 60-year-old Gates Mills resident said he is hoping to make a difference with this suit.

 

"What tipped the scale for me is the labor issue between millionaires and billionaires and the fact they can't settle it when the country is in a recession," he said. "Worse yet, they have to rub this in our faces."

 

Lanci, a self-made millionaire, ran as an independent for Cuyahoga County executive last year in a mostly self-financed campaigned. He lost. But he became known, partly for his thick white hair that contrasted with the orange glow he gained from his personal tanning bed.

 

Lanci owns PSLs for 10 seats in Club Section C3, which he bought in October 1997. People pay an upfront fee for a PSL that gives them the right to purchase a season ticket for a specific seat in a stadium.

 

He is in effect saying the lockout robs him of his right to watch games this season because his PSL contract gives him "exclusive use and possession" of 10 specified seats in Cleveland Browns Stadium.

 

On March 10, the NFL Players Association decertified itself as the union for NFL players to avoid a strike, but a day later team owners nonetheless announced the lockout.

 

"The owners and players can't decide what to do with an extra billion dollars between them," Lanci said. "I have the perfect solution. That one billion should go to all cities that gave them money to build football stadiums they couldn't afford to build. This would give these cities badly needed tax relief."

 

The lawsuit caught the Browns by surprise, said Neal Gulkis, a team spokesman. He said he could not comment until the organization could study the suit.

 

Greg Aiello, a spokesman for the NFL, said the league would look into the matter further before commenting.

 

Lanci, who owns Graphic Arts Centre and is chairman and chief executive officer of Consolidated Graphics Group Inc. in Cleveland, is hoping to be a voice for the average Browns fan.

 

"The players union says NFL owners are offering what will be the worst deal ever," Lanci said. "Really? How about being unemployed? Right now they get 59 percent of the take, and that's beyond comprehension.

 

"These players should get on their knees and be grateful they can play a game for that kind of money when so many others in this city and country are hurting financially."

 

When NFL players went on strike in 1982, reducing the season from 16 to nine games, no teams had PSLs.

 

Today, 20 of the 32 teams -- mostly those with newer stadiums -- offer 'them. The Carolina Panthers were the first team to offer them in 1993, and the Browns followed upon their return to the NFL in 1999 after a three-year absence.

 

Lanci does not consider his lawsuit frivolous. He is seeking at least $75,000 in damages.

 

But does he really expect to win the suit?

 

"At the end of the day, [Cuyahoga County Common Pleas] Judge John P. O'Donnell has to judge if this suit has merit or not," he said, "but I'm sure the court of public opinion will certainly weigh in on this."

 

I love it! I am actually proud of the fact that this came from one of our own and not a fan from another team. It was bound to happen at some time. Now the owners need to watch their backs because how many other fans will follow suit with this guy and file lawsuits as well?

[SJ_Browns]

I love it! I am actually proud of the fact that this came from one of our own and not a fan from another team. It was bound to happen at some time. Now the owners need to watch their backs because how many other fans will follow suit with this guy and file lawsuits as well?

 

good point. that could turn the heat up on the nfl if more fans followed suit.

[SJ_Browns]

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2011/03/with_break_in_labor_talks_line.html

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Browns linebacker Scott Fujita, an extremely active member of the NFL Players Association before and during the current labor impasse, has a message for fans of the team.

 

"I really want to be good this year," Fujita said in a phone interview from his home in Southern California.

 

Fujita is decompressing from months of labor talks. Aside from being a leader in the players' effort to reach a bargaining agreement through litigation, Fujita is a leader in the Browns' locker room.

 

He is looking forward to the extensive changes the Browns are planning.

 

"I think they made some good hires, for sure," he said. "[Coach] Pat Shurmur, I've spoken to him on the phone a number of times. I haven't met him in person, but I'm very impressed so far.

 

"[Defensive coordinator] Dick Jauron's a guy I've respected forever. I have a lot of friends who played for him as head coach and coordinator. They all love him. I hear he's just a good, good man. He and I have visited a few times. Billy Davis, the linebackers coach, same thing with him -- great guy, good reputation. Ray Rhodes, another guy, having him in the building will be huge for our players.

 

"So all those moves I like a lot. At some point, though, I'd love to sit down and start talking X's and O's and find out a little bit more about their philosophies and which way we're headed."

 

Fujita said he expects to play strongside linebacker in the Browns' new 4-3 alignment and believes Jauron's system "will be a lot simpler than our defense was last year. Way fewer checks and things like that throughout the course of the game."

 

The next date on Fujita's labor docket is April 6. That's when he will join NFLPA leaders and fellow players in a Minneapolis federal courtroom, where Judge Susan Nelson will hear the players' motion for an injunction to lift the owners' lockout. Her ruling is expected to take a week.

 

If the players win that round, the NFL will appeal, and it could be another few weeks before the league resumes with temporary rules.

 

Then there's the NFL complaint before the National Labor Relations Board that the NFLPA's decertification was "a sham." The NFL contends that ruling should come before Judge Nelson's review. There's also a huge day sometime in May when Judge David Doty -- the NFL's terminal nemesis -- will award damages to the players as a result of his finding that the NFL violated the collective bargaining agreement by essentially securing over $400 million in lockout insurance from its TV partners.

 

"I'd like to think we can get [players] back in the building and working in time for the season," Fujita said. "That's our top priority. But it is going to come down to who's losing [the most] money."

 

Fujita does not know when things will begin to resemble normalcy.

 

"It could be the next week [after the April 6 hearing]. It could be five months from now. It could be a year from now. We really don't know," he said. "So we've got to be cognizant of that and stay ready when we are called back to work."

 

At some point, Fujita expects his teammates to hold organized workouts on their own.

 

"We just have to be mindful that we have to be careful," Fujita said. "There's so many issues with workman's compensation and everything else.

 

"I know some guys by position group have already been meeting up a bit, having some workouts and stuff. Again, once we have a clear picture of what's ahead, I would expect guys do start getting together. Whether that happens before April 6 or not, I don't know. But I would expect something to get done because guys do want to get together. It's not like we have any material to install or work on."

 

At least the quarterbacks can throw to receivers and running backs. There's not a lot the defensive guys can do together.

 

"All I know about our defense is it's going to be a 4-3 and probably some variation of the Chicago Bears and Philadelphia Eagles defenses," Fujita said. "Luckily, I know the systems very well. Maybe you can go out and run around a little bit and work on some of your drops. But terminology and all that stuff, that's going to take some time to get everybody on the same page.

 

"If guys are available and they want to do it, by all means let's do it. I'm not going to be the one guy to say we're not going to meet at all. I want to be good this year."

 

He has faith through his experience in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina that all the pieces of the Browns' new puzzle can be put together in time for a successful season.

 

But Fujita adds, "These are strange times we're in."

 

 

Brownie points: At NFL meetings last week, Shurmur said he was interviewed by Eric Mangini to be New York Jets offensive coordinator in 2006, but lost out to Brian Schottenheimer. Shurmur said he has a lot of respect for Mangini, his predecessor as Browns coach, and hopes to reach out to him some day. ... Receiver Carlton Mitchell, a sixth-round draft choice in 2010, was hardly used as a rookie, but appears to be an early beneficiary of the change in coaches and offenses. GM Tom Heckert previously expressed his faith in Mitchell developing as a contributing player. Shurmur evaluated Mitchell for the Rams last year as offensive coordinator. "There's some things about him I really like. He's big and he can really run. He was a guy we thought had a chance to be a good receiver," Shurmur said. ... Shurmur doesn't come across as a fan of the WildDawg formation, but he views Josh Cribbs as a receiver in his quick-pass offense. ... Eagles coach Andy Reid on Colt McCoy's development in the West Coast offense: "McCoy will be very good at this. He's smart, has timing, anticipation ... he'll be very good."

[Gafreleets]

not sure if this should go into the pinned topic, but i thought it was enough of a breakthrough to post seperately.

 

per ESPN:

 

 

Judge Susan Richard Nelson told the NFL and NFL players that she will impose forced mediation on them early this week, sources familiar with the situation told ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter.

 

 

The league had wanted more mediation in Washington, while federal mediator George Cohen and the NFL Players' Association wanted mediation in Minnesota.

 

 

Judge Nelson will decide what she feels is best and announce her decision early this week.

 

 

Judge Nelson had a one-hour conference call Friday with both sides and said she would use the weekend to figure out a solution, a source told ESPN's John Clayton.

 

 

One of the keys to any type of mediation is whether NFL owners are willing to not use a meeting with members of the NFL Players executive committee or members of the decertified NFLPA against the plaintiffs in the Tom Brady lawsuit filed in Nelson's federal court in St. Paul, Minn. Lawyers for the NFL offered such protection Friday in a letter to Judge Nelson and also indicated any mediation session would include owners with decision-making ability.

 

 

After the Friday conference call, Judge Nelson told both sides to be quiet about the conversations.

[Harry Buffalo]

Ya I saw this last night and it's the best thing to happen. If it didn't the best case serious would be football in mid June. now we have a chance to get things going a few weeks after the draft.

[Dawgdamit]

The Owners and Players are meeting in a court ordered mediated negotiations on Thursday April 14th, Hopefully they can get a CBA done so we all can enjoy football again. The owners and players have been acting like two sixth graders in a stare down. Cooler heads need to take place and get this deal done once and for all. Negotiations is just that, you negotiate, either side has to give something to get something.

[The Gipper]

The Owners and Players are meeting in a court ordered mediated negotiations on Thursday April 14th, Hopefully they can get a CBA done so we all can enjoy football again. The owners and players have been acting like two sixth graders in a stare down. Cooler heads need to take place and get this deal done once and for all. Negotiations is just that, you negotiate, either side has to give something to get something.

 

 

Are you saying that all these guys are doing is engaging in a pissing match?

 

[SJ_Browns]

i'll look for a link to this but espn is reporting that the judge has lifted the lockout and the nfl is going to request it stays.

[Harry Buffalo]

i'll look for a link to this but espn is reporting that the judge has lifted the lockout and the nfl is going to request it stays.

Lock Out Lifted

 

I think this should be a whole new topic but I'll post it here.

[Harry Buffalo]

Does anyone know what this means though. They are saying that the Owners are just going to ask for a "Stay in Ruling?". I have no idea if this means that the end of the lock out is put on hold to rule on this. Also the Owner are having a committee rule on whether the Players Assosiation is still acting as a Union and they said they are looking into it and should have a ruling in 4-6 weeks, which people are saying means that the committee thinks that the NFLPA is actually still operating at as a Union for actually deciding to rule on it in a few weeks.

 

What I am trying to ask is does all this mean that FA can start right after the draft, or are will still stuck waiting 6 weeks.

[SJ_Browns]

http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/news/story?id=6424084

 

ST. PAUL, Minn. -- A federal judge on Monday ordered an end to the NFL lockout, giving the players an early victory in their fight with the owners over how to divide the $9 billion business.

 

U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson said she was swayed by the players' argument that that the lockout, now in its second month, was causing irreparable harm to their careers.

 

The plaintiffs "have made a strong showing that allowing the League to continue their 'lockout' is presently inflicting, and will continue to inflict, irreparable harm upon them, particularly when weighed against the lack of any real injury that would be imposed on the NFL by issuing the preliminary injunction," Nelson wrote.

 

The NFL promised an immediate appeal.

 

"We will promptly seek a stay from Judge Nelson pending an expedited appeal to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals," the league said. "We believe that federal law bars injunctions in labor disputes. We are confident that the Eighth Circuit will agree. But we also believe that this dispute will inevitably end with a collective bargaining agreement, which would be in the best interests of players, clubs and fans. We can reach a fair agreement only if we continue negotiations toward that goal."

 

Owners imposed the lockout after talks broke down March 11 and the players disbanded their union. A group of players filed the injunction request along with a class-action antitrust lawsuit against the league.

 

The owners argued it was their right to institute the lockout and suggested Nelson didn't have jurisdiction while the National Labor Relations Board considers an unfair labor charge filed by the league that players didn't negotiate in good faith.

 

Nelson disagreed, and said the NLRB proceeding shouldn't be used to affect the court case here.

 

Nelson heard arguments on the injunction at a hearing on April 6 and ordered the two sides to resume mediation while she was considering her decision. The owners and players, who failed to reach consensus after 16 days of mediated talks earlier this year, met over four days with a federal magistrate but did not announce any progress on solving the NFL's first work stoppage since 1987.

 

They are not scheduled to meet again until May 16, four days after another judge holds a hearing on whether players should get damages in their related fight with owners over some $4 billion in broadcast revenue.

 

And now comes Nelson's decision to lift the injunction.

 

"(T)he public ramifications of this dispute exceed the abstract principles of the antitrust laws, as professional football involves many layers of tangible economic impact, ranging from broadcast revenues down to concessions sales," she wrote. "And, of course, the public interest represented by the fans of professional football -- who have a strong investment in the 2011 season -- is an intangible interest that weighs against the lockout. In short, this particular employment dispute is far from a purely private argument over compensation."

 

If her ruling stands, it is still unclear exactly what happens next. The collective bargaining agreement has expired, so how the league would handle free agency, trades and offseason workouts at team headquarters, all of which were banned under the lockout, remains to be seen.

 

The NFL even argued to Nelson that stopping the lockout would open all 32 teams up to additional antitrust claims simply for working together to solve the labor dispute. Antitrust claims carry triple damages for any harm proven, meaning hundreds of millions of dollars are at stake.

 

But with appeals expected, the fight seems likely to drag on through the spring and, possibly, into the summer. The closer it gets to August, when training camps and the preseason get into full swing, the more likely it becomes that regular season games will be lost.

 

"Tomorrow is going to come regardless of what we do here, so we have to work within that framework," Hall of Famer Carl Eller, a plaintiff, said after one of the recent mediation sessions. "In order to have a season, preserve a season, prepare for a season, those are real consequences."

 

And the antitrust lawsuit is pending, too, with lead plaintiffs that include MVP quarterbacks Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. The suit has been combined with two other similar claims from retirees, former players and rookies-to-be, with Eller the lead plaintiff in that group.

 

Granting the injunction swings some of the leverage to the players' side, which could actually bring the two sides closer to a resolution, according to Seth Borden, a labor law expert at McKenna, Long and Aldridge in New York.

 

"It's still going to boil down to the way the parties view their respective positions and respective leverage," Borden said. "Until the league and the players feel like they're at the point of no return for next season, progress will be slow toward that overall resolution."

[Erie Dawg]

It was said as of now they will operate under the old cba.

Now im not sure when it will start or how it will effect the draft.

nonetheless it will be interesting in the coming days.

[SJ_Browns]

a legal analyst on espn said some agents are telling their clients to report to their teams tommorrow.

[Erie Dawg]

a legal analyst on espn said some agents are telling their clients to report to their teams tommorrow.

The team needs the reps with the new coaches so I hope its true

[SJ_Browns]

Does anyone know what this means though. They are saying that the Owners are just going to ask for a "Stay in Ruling?". I have no idea if this means that the end of the lock out is put on hold to rule on this. Also the Owner are having a committee rule on whether the Players Assosiation is still acting as a Union and they said they are looking into it and should have a ruling in 4-6 weeks, which people are saying means that the committee thinks that the NFLPA is actually still operating at as a Union for actually deciding to rule on it in a few weeks.

 

What I am trying to ask is does all this mean that FA can start right after the draft, or are will still stuck waiting 6 weeks.

 

from what the article says and what the legal analyst said on espn, the judge isn't buying what the nfl is saying and she's in agreement with the nflpa.

[SJ_Browns]

espn is reporting that steelers s ryan clark is asking his teammates to meet at their team's facility tommorrow at 8 am.

[SJ_Browns]

demaurice smith is on espn2 right now and he said they'll be in contact with agents and players tonite.

[SJ_Browns]

what we're waiting on now is the judge's ruling on the nfl's request for a stay on the lockout. from what was reported on espn a ruling should be made in the next 2 days and as early as tommorrow morning. i think the nflpa hit big with this one and they have the judge in agreement with them.

[jasont44094]

Twitter Wrote: ESPNCleveland: RT @WillBurge: Scott Fujita informed me that Browns players will return 2 work unless or until the judge orders for a stay

 

Twitter Wrote: ESPNCleveland: RT @WillBurge: Scott Fujita also says that Josh Cribbs & Ben Watson r among a number of players who will work out 2morrow morn in Berea ...

 

Twitter Wrote: ESPNCleveland: RT @WillBurge: Fujita also added that teams who do not allow access to players will be in violation of judge Nelson's order

[Harry Buffalo]

Twitter Wrote: ESPNCleveland: RT @WillBurge: Scott Fujita informed me that Browns players will return 2 work unless or until the judge orders for a stay

 

Twitter Wrote: ESPNCleveland: RT @WillBurge: Scott Fujita also says that Josh Cribbs & Ben Watson r among a number of players who will work out 2morrow morn in Berea ...

 

Twitter Wrote: ESPNCleveland: RT @WillBurge: Fujita also added that teams who do not allow access to players will be in violation of judge Nelson's order

 

Awesome, awesome, and awesome.

[drake54]

Nice. we can get this season going atleast for a little bit. Get the new schemes in place. Our rookies will be able to show up and get the reps. Does this mean FA starts immediately?

[Harry Buffalo]

Nice. we can get this season going atleast for a little bit. Get the new schemes in place. Our rookies will be able to show up and get the reps. Does this mean FA starts immediately?

 

It doesn't start until the judge denies the Owners appeal, which could be tomorrow, or at most two days from now. But I have heard conflicting stories about how this works. They either just go off the 2010 CBA, or they have to set up a set of rules for FA and contracts, ect and if that is the case then we won't have it because the owners will say the just couldn't come up with any fair rules.