If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
All: The new Billszone site with the updated software is scheduled to be turned on Tuesday, May 21, 2024. The company that built it, Dynascale, estimates a FOUR HOUR shut down, from 8pm Pacific, (5pm Eastern) while they get it up and running. Nobody will be able to post in any forum until they are done. Afterwards, you may need to do a web search for the site, as old links will not work, because the site is getting a new IP address. Please be patient. If there are bugs, we will tackle them one at a time. Remember the goal is to be up and running with no glitches by camp. Doing this now assures us of that, because it gives us all summer to get our ducks in a row. Thank you!
Please use this thread to report any issues you come across
http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/forum/feedback-forums/billszone-q-a/6521455-upgrade-report-bugs-here
I'm surprised no one commented on this here. It got big air time yesterday in Pittsburgh. Even though it would be very good for the Steelers, most everyone knows that it is very bad for NFL as a whole.
This will make it even harder for people like Jerry Jones and Snider of the world to share wealth with fellow NFL owners like Ralph Wilson. I see a bigger problem within owner's ranks.
The positive side however is that the Bills are free to market and design their own merchandise.
It would be a major win if the Bills inked an exclusive deal with New Era for hats and merchandise, considering the largest manufacturer of baseball hats in the world is headquartered in Buffalo.
There is some silver lining in terms of the CBA. The court found that the NFL is not entitled to an exemption from antitrust requirements, which gives the NFLPA some leverage in the CBA negotiations. I.e. they retain the threat of decertifying their union, and can threaten to sue on antitrust grounds. In fact, the current CBA framework came as a result of a similar situation in the early 90s, where the union decertified and won a series of antitrust victories against the NFL.
If this decision had gone the other way, the NFLPA would have lost those chips. I think you're more likely to see a deal when both parties have strong negotiating positions, and thus this might be a good thing in that regard.
Wake up, brush your teeth, and get ready for a day of hating the Dolphins. Or the Pats? How to choose?
here is a bit of an FAQ about this case, which kinda breaks it down in a way I could understand. It could be biased and Id have no real idea, but seems pretty good to me:
There's truth to the saying Buffalo is a drinking town with a football problem, where a passionate fan base believes it has more answers than Ken Jennings on "Jeopardy."
There is some silver lining in terms of the CBA. The court found that the NFL is not entitled to an exemption from antitrust requirements, which gives the NFLPA some leverage in the CBA negotiations. I.e. they retain the threat of decertifying their union, and can threaten to sue on antitrust grounds. In fact, the current CBA framework came as a result of a similar situation in the early 90s, where the union decertified and won a series of antitrust victories against the NFL.
If this decision had gone the other way, the NFLPA would have lost those chips. I think you're more likely to see a deal when both parties have strong negotiating positions, and thus this might be a good thing in that regard.
Maybe we could send DeMaurice Smith over to American Needle in disguise when they get to open the books for NFL teams.
There is some silver lining in terms of the CBA. The court found that the NFL is not entitled to an exemption from antitrust requirements, which gives the NFLPA some leverage in the CBA negotiations. I.e. they retain the threat of decertifying their union, and can threaten to sue on antitrust grounds. In fact, the current CBA framework came as a result of a similar situation in the early 90s, where the union decertified and won a series of antitrust victories against the NFL.
If this decision had gone the other way, the NFLPA would have lost those chips. I think you're more likely to see a deal when both parties have strong negotiating positions, and thus this might be a good thing in that regard.
no... you've got it backwards. the stronger the NFLPA's hand the less likely you'll see football in 2011
My wife told me that if I had a dollar for every girl who found me unattractive, girls would find me VERY attractive.
This affects the Bills, but not to a large degree. The TV contracts will still be shared, because the NFL has an exemption for anti-trust for them, and that didn't change with the ANI ruling. Where you might see a change is the 60-40 home-visitor split of gate receipts and merchandise sales. But tickets are a small part of revenue and the Bills were 15th in the league last year, while everything else is unshared.
no... you've got it backwards. the stronger the NFLPA's hand the less likely you'll see football in 2011
No, I don't. Here's a good explanation from yesterday's Wall Street Journal (link):
"....That doesn't mean, however, that the NFLPA isn't higher than a punt in Denver's Mile High Stadium over the ruling. Though NFL general counsel Jeff Pash played down the importance of the decision—"This case was never about collective bargaining, never about labor," he told reporters at the NFL's spring meetings in Irving, Texas—everyone who will be involved in talks for next year's collective bargaining agreement between the league and players knows otherwise. As the union's executive director, DeMaurice Smith, was quick to note, American Needle v. the NFL is the first favorable ruling for a plaintiff in an antitrust case in the U.S. Supreme Court in 18 years.
The current CBA expires at the end of the 2010 season, and it's been obvious to all observers that the team owners were in no hurry to begin serious negotiations until this case was decided. There's no mystery as to why: If the ruling had gone in favor of the NFL, they would have won legal status as "a single entity for all purposes," thus giving them immunity from antitrust challenges. A likely result, had the NFL won, would have been a move to impose player salaries rather than negotiate with individual players.
With the NFL now vulnerable to a possible antitrust lawsuit, the union has a strong bargaining chip in the coming negotiations over the CBA: The NFLPA could threaten to dissolve itself, allowing the players to deal with the league as individuals. Players would then be free to instigate literally hundreds of antitrust suits. The NFL doesn't want a mess like this any more than the union really wants to put itself out of business; it's the possibility that will drive both sides to strike a deal."
Tweet
Comment