Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A question regarding contracts and the 2021 NFL seaston.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A question regarding contracts and the 2021 NFL seaston.

    From what I’ve read and heard so far, come 2021 there is a good possibility the players will either be locked out or strike. My question is what are owners’ obligations should they lock out the players? For example, Todd Gurley’s contract runs through 2023. If the owners lock out the players, would the Rams still on the hook to pay Todd Gurley given the owners initiated the work stoppage? I would assume if the players strike, the onus would be on them as that would amount to a holdout. Any thoughts/clarification on this??

  • #2
    I haven't done enough labor law to answer your questions. I think a lot will depend on whether the strike is considered lawful, regardless of who initiated the stoppage. I believe the prior strike in 2011 clarified the access to health care part, by agreeing players would have access to the health care for life. (In 2011, the owners prohibited players from the facilities, including training staff and doctors. That's no more). I couldn't tell you about pay and effect on contracts... that would likely be figured out in the negotiations and depend upon how many (if any) games were missed/cancelled.

    Comment

    Related Topics

    Collapse

    • MauiRam
      Todd Gurley: NFL players deserve guaranteed contracts, could strike to get them
      by MauiRam
      Rams running back Todd Gurley wants all contracts to be guaranteed in the NFL and he says players might have to strike in order to ge them, TMZ reports.

      It's been a heated debate for years with NFL players like Eric Winston saying they're so serious about making NFL deals more like the NBA and MLB and they're ready to call for a work stoppage to force owners to pay up.

      The current NFL collective bargaining agreement ends in 2021 -- and Gurley made it clear he's ready to heed Winston's call when the time comes.

      Over the weekend, NFL offensive lineman Russell Okung also spelled out his argument for guaranteed contracts:

      "Considering football’s level of brute, immanent physicality, high turnover as well as the short life cycle of its participants, it would seem to me that NFL players are in the most need of fully guaranteed contracts."

      NFL players have gone on strike before but, the last time they actually missed regular season games to get owners to meet their demands was way back in 1987.


      Possibly, but Todd is in a much better position financially to wait out an actual strike than lots of other guys who would have to hold out/strike on far less money .. One can't blame them for trying though ......
      -07-06-2018, 01:45 AM
    • jerseyramsfan
      The Gurley Question...
      by jerseyramsfan
      What are your thoughts? As much as it's not our most glaring need and I really like Tre Mason. This guy has the tools to become the next AP.Can't take him at #10 and he won't be there at #41. Wouldn't it be exciting to watch him carrying the ball in horns? How would you get a deal done? This should be interesting...
      -02-01-2015, 06:10 AM
    • MauiRam
      Mediation talks adjourn until Tuesday (Question for Av)
      by MauiRam
      Mediation talks adjourn until Tuesday
      4/15/2011 2:16:46 PM


      Day 2 of court-ordered talks between the NFL and its locked-out players recessed Friday afternoon, with the judge giving both sides a significant amount of homework in the form of questions they need to answer upon convening again at 11 a.m. ET Tuesday according to the Associated Press.

      Question for Av: Why would the judge give out "significant homework?" Is this a common occurrence? Any guesses as to what the "homework questions" might be? Thanks in advance!

      The sides began their second day of talks amid hopes for progress in their fight over how to divide $9 billion in revenue. The work stoppage entered its 35th day Friday.

      "There has been progress but it's not like [there's a deal] right around the corner," Hall of Famer Carl Eller, among those on the players side of the talks, told ESPN's Ed Werder.

      U.S. Magistrate Judge Arthur Boylan is overseeing the talks at the federal courthouse in Minneapolis. The two groups spent more than nine hours together in his chambers Thursday and for about five hours on Friday.
      -04-16-2011, 11:06 AM
    • MauiRam
      Jim Thomas: NFL's Labor impasse will hurt small market teams like the Rams ..
      by MauiRam
      Dissecting the NFL's labor impasse

      BY JIM THOMAS • Posted: Sunday, February 13, 2011 8:00 am

      Just under three weeks remain before the NFL's labor agreement expires. Most fans have little interest in the squabble between a bunch of millionaires (players) and a bunch of billionaires (owners). They just want football. But if there's no deal before March 4, there will be no football. At least no offseason football, beginning with the start of the free agency and trading period.

      So what's keeping the sides apart? Why hasn't a deal gotten done? With the clock ticking, the Post-Dispatch looks at these issues and more.

      Q: Why has the collective bargaining agreement reached its current impasse?

      A: At its most basic element, it's all about how much of the revenue pie is allotted to players and what forms of revenue are included in that pie. The owners feel they made a bad deal in March 2006 when they extended the collective bargaining agreement and made some changes in the way revenue is shared. Then-commissioner Paul Tagliabue was about to retire, and some feel the extension was rushed so that Tagliabue could leave the NFL with one more feather in his cap — labor peace. In any event, the players got a larger share of revenue, and smaller-market teams in particular felt the squeeze. In May 2008, NFL owners voted unanimously to opt out of the extension two years early — or following the 2010 season.

      Q: Why has there been so little progress made toward a new deal since that owners vote in 2008?

      A: It usually takes a deadline to increase the sense of urgency in any form of negotiation. And there really has been no deadline until now. Not even an uncapped year and more restrictive free agency terms in 2010 got things moving.

      More specifically, the NFL Players Association claims the NFL has not made all of its financial data available. Unless it has a clear picture of how teams are being squeezed financially, the players union says it can't make a prudent decision on what's being asked of it by club owners. The league counters by saying the players union has more than enough financial data to negotiate.

      Q: Why specifically do the owners want a new deal?

      A: More and more teams are privately funding new stadium construction, or financing large parts of stadium construction, something that wasn't the case 15 or 20 years ago. So the boom in stadium construction throughout the league has led to hundreds of millions of dollars in debt from financing, as well as increased costs for operating expenses, maintenance and capital improvements.

      On another level, however, the players are almost innocent bystanders. The way the current deal is structured, the smaller-market, lower-revenue teams — such as the Rams — are hard-pressed to keep up with the big boys such as Dallas, Washington and New England. Those big-market...
      -02-13-2011, 10:41 AM
    • MauiRam
      The NFLPA's power play: Cease to exist ..
      by MauiRam
      When the union decertifies, as it will shortly, the landscape will change dramatically

      By Lester Munson
      ESPN.com


      The expiration of the collective bargaining agreement that governs the NFL arrives at 11:59 p.m. ET Thursday, and the players' union is about to decertify. The NFLPA's decision to end its existence as a labor organization could come at any moment. The union's decision and its timing raise significant questions about the relationship between the players and the owners, as well as the status of the NFL's 2011 season. Here are some of the questions and their answers:

      The players and the owners are still working with a federal mediator, and the CBA hasn't yet expired. Why decertify now? Why not wait until they have exhausted any chance of negotiating an agreement?

      There are two reasons. First, if the union does not decertify now, before the current bargaining agreement expires, it cannot decertify for six months, according to a clause in the CBA. There is no reason for the players to wait until September to use their best weapons. (We'll get to exactly what those weapons are in a moment.) So far, it appears that bargaining as a union has accomplished nothing.

      Second, and perhaps more importantly, by decertifying now, before the expiration of the CBA, the players are trying to stay in the Minneapolis courtroom of U.S. District Judge David Doty, who over the years has issued several rulings that were unfavorable to the owners. That includes a ruling late Tuesday concerning the NFL's television network contracts. (More about that later, too.) Doty, 82, an ex-Marine who was appointed to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan in 1987, has presided over disputes between the players and the owners since the early '90s. Under his guidance, the players and the owners made the deal that is now expiring, a deal in which both sides prospered at levels beyond expectation. But Doty's jurisdiction over the NFL's labor case expires with the current agreement, meaning Thursday night. If the players wait and decertify later, they would have no chance of staying in Doty's courtroom and would have to take their chances before another judge. But if they decertify before midnight Thursday and then immediately file antitrust litigation, that litigation automatically goes to Doty, who will maintain control of it until its conclusion even if the CBA is no longer in effect.


      How will the owners react to decertification and litigation?


      It will not be a surprise for the owners, but they will not be happy. They will quickly claim that the decertification is a "sham," which is the word the league used in a complaint at the National Labor Relations Board. They will say that the players will continue to act like a union, look like a union and sound like a union. They will say that it's a labor dispute and does not belong in a courthouse. And...
      -03-03-2011, 10:17 AM
    Working...
    X