Confusion still reigned throughout the NFL on the eve of
Thursday’s draft, even as U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson
tried to clear things up by denying the owners a request for a stay
on her decision to end the league’s 45-day lockout on Monday.
Technically, the lockout is over, which it has been since Monday.
However, the league isn’t expected to begin signing and trading
players Thursday. It’s likely to turn quickly to the 8th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals and ask for the same stay to be granted
throughout an appeals process that could last into the summer.
MINNEAPOLIS
Confusion still reigned throughout the NFL on the eve of Thursday’s draft, even as U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson tried to clear things up by denying the owners a request for a stay on her decision to end the league’s 45-day lockout on Monday.
Technically, the lockout is over, which it has been since Monday. However, the league isn’t expected to begin signing and trading players Thursday. It’s likely to turn quickly to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and ask for the same stay to be granted throughout an appeals process that could last into the summer.
Follow Free Lance Sports on Twitter.
Meanwhile, Nelson’s ruling, while coming down on the side of the players, does not force the NFL to start its league year by signing free agents and trading players.
“Defendants are under no obligation to enter a new contract with any player,” Nelson wrote.
What this does is take the league a step closer to playing the 2011 season. Pending an appeal, of course.
“Players face the real and immediate harm of a lost season in a typically short professional career,” Nelson wrote before adding, “Considering the wide-scale ramifications of a lost football season to the public weighs in favor of denying the NFL’s Motion for a Stay.”
Fans will no doubt celebrate that argument. However, at this point it’s uncertain what effect, if any, Nelson’s ruling has, other than it was yet another loss for the owners in court. The league has kept the status quo since the lockout was lifted Monday, and there’s nothing to indicate that will change, at least during the three-day draft.
Owners and players jabbed at one another via court filings throughout the day Wednesday. The league argued that being forced to lift the lockout would put it at risk of violating antitrust laws by forcing it to come up with league rules without a collective bargaining agreement (CBA).
Attorneys for the players fired back.
“If the NFL defendants are faced with a dilemma, they put themselves in that position by repeatedly imposing rules and restrictions that violate the antitrust laws,” they wrote. “Any alleged predicament is of their own making.”
The NFL argued that without a CBA and antitrust protection, the competitive balance that’s vital to its success would be harmed by unlimited free agency and the elimination of the draft in future years.
Meanwhile, teams still preparing for the grind of a three-day draft were left to scramble to put together contingency plans in the event the league year began at any moment. Even after Nelson’s ruling, there’s no clarity when things will start and what the rules will be.
Teams aren’t sure if they will be following rules from 2009, when there was a salary cap and less restrictive free agency, or 2010, when there was no salary camp and more free-agency restrictions.
They also could be told to follow an altogether different set of rules, which, by the way, could be out of date once there’s a new CBA. It’s enough to make heads spin from front offices to the league’s rabid fan base. And that concerns NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell.
“It’s one of the things I don’t think is healthy for the players, the clubs and, most importantly, our fans,” he told reporters during a predraft function Wednesday night.
— Story by Mark Craig, Star Tribune
