KHL Struggling To Stay Afloat "TNF" Ratings Down For Titans-Jags League Notes Rams' Move To L.A. Unlikely For '15 Cuba Decision Could Impact MLB Silver Discusses Future NBA All-Star Sites 49ers Cut McDonald Following Assault Probe FIFA's Chief Investigator Resigns Chargers Staying In San Diego Next Year Current, Former Fighters Sue UFC
SBD/April 7, 2011/Leagues and Governing Bodies
NFL Lockout Watch, Day 27: Judge Urges League, Players To Resume Talks
Published April 7, 2011
LET'S MAKE A DEAL: Nelson offered to aid and "facilitate suggestions" for resolution, a message to get it done before she weighed in with her injunction decision. Her suggestion to use the auspices of her court seemed to be a mini-victory for the players. Returning to St. Paul soon to use Nelson's chambers as a venue for resolving the matter seemed to the players, on the face of it, like a good idea. "It's something we'll consider," Quinn told reporters outside the courthouse afterward. "We heard what the judge said, and she said it forcefully." But for the owners, putting their future in the hands of Nelson was not so appealing. "We believe these kind of matters ought to be settled at the collective bargaining table, not in federal court," said Boies, who gently sparred with Nelson through three separate sessions in which she allowed him great latitude to attempt to convince her that the league's lockout was legal. Meanwhile, NFL Senior VP/PR Greg Aiello last night in N.Y. said, "We have said since March 11 that we were prepared to return to mediation immediately." But when pressed about using Nelson's court instead, Aiello said in an e-mail, "We're not going to elaborate tonight" (Jay Weiner, THE DAILY).
TIME TO TALK? In N.Y., Judy Battista reports the players last night "were considering sending a letter to the league, offering to meet to conduct litigation settlement talks with a mediator." But "further talks before Nelson makes a decision seem unlikely." The NFL "wants only to engage in collective bargaining with the help of the federal mediator" in DC. The league "believes the decertification of the union is illegitimate and does not want to negotiate a litigation settlement that would leave it with another agreement overseen by the federal courts." The players "insist they will not go back to being a union, but say they are ready to engage in talks to reach a litigation settlement under the Minnesota court's purview" (N.Y. TIMES, 4/7). NFLPA outside counsel Jeffrey Kessler after the hearing said that he "will participate in mediation talks only as settlement discussions to the players' antitrust lawsuit against the league" (L.A. TIMES, 4/7).
JUDGE IN CONTROL: In Boston, Greg Bedard notes NFL attorneys yesterday "maintained that the decertification was merely a tactic by the players and that it shouldn't be valid," but Nelson "didn't seem to buy that" (BOSTON GLOBE, 4/7). In N.Y., Bart Hubbuch reports Nelson "seemed to mock Boies for trying to use a Depression-era labor statute called the Norris-La Guardia Act -- originally designed to protect workers from employers -- against the players." Nelson: "Isn't there some bit of irony that the Norris-La Guardia Act, which is designed to protect employees from strike-bearing federal judges, should now be used to prevent an injunction of a wealthy, multi-employer unit seeking to break players?" (N.Y. POST, 4/7). YAHOO SPORTS' Jason Cole wrote if there was "one winner in the latest round of cat-fighting between the NFL and its players" it was Nelson, "who came into these proceedings as something of a rookie in the grand scheme and left with the respect of almost everyone involved." Nelson "showed a deep grasp of the issues and history that have defined the past 30 years of NFL labor decisions" (SPORTS.YAHOO.com, 4/6).
OWNERS INFLUENCED BY NELSON? CBSSPORTS.com’s Mike Freeman cites sources as saying that the NFL and the players “could actually begin negotiating again as early as this week.” The sources said that some owners “are slightly fidgety about what happened” at yesterday’s hearing, as Nelson “seemed to query the lawyer for the owners more extensively than the legal representation for the players.” However, Freeman cites other league sources that are “strongly denying this.” Those sources “insisted owners would never meet with players until the now decertified union reconstituted itself” (CBSSPORTS.com, 4/7).
plaintiffs present at yesterday's hearing
MISSING IN ACTION: FOXSPORTS.com's Alex Marvez writes Patriots QB Tom Brady and Colts QB Peyton Manning, who are among the plaintiffs on the lawsuit, did not have "valid reasons for skipping Wednesday's preliminary hearing." The players' absences "raises questions about why they agreed to participate in the first place." If Brady and Manning "weren't going to champion the NFLPA's cause as loudly as they bark signals, the now-decertified union should have courted other stars" for the lawsuit. Quinn was asked why only five of the 10 named plaintiffs were in St. Paul yesterday, and he replied, "I guess some of them had other things they had to do and be in different places." Marvez writes, "Not to say that having Brady and Manning in attendance would have swayed Nelson into immediately ordering the lockout lifted. But it definitely wouldn't have hurt" (FOXSPORTS.com, 4/7).
PUBLIC OPINION: In exclusive studies conducted for SportsBusiness Daily/Journal, data showed that NFL fans under the age of 30 are more likely than fans 31+ to blame team owners for the league's current labor dispute. Poll data also showed that most NFL fans felt the CBA dispute would be resolved and there would be no impact on the '11 NFL season (THE DAILY).