Player Contracts To Be Voided?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

BLAZER PROPHET

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
18,725
Likes
191
Points
63
I've been following some of the lawsuits and requests for rulings that started last May between the NBA Players Union and the owners and one interesting fact has come up.

In the latest court filing by the owners, in an attempt to make the players think twice about decertifying the union and then filing lawsuits regarding anti-trust issues, the owners are making an interesting case that the uniform player contract (signed by every NBA player) has language that governs the contract by the CBA. Therefore, if the union decertifies and there is no longer a CBA, they void all current contracts and all players are no longer under contract. Essentially, they all become free agents and the owners are free to start a new league however they want to (or at least that is one natural outcome if the court agrees). The players wil argue that the contracts are actually between players & teams and the connection to the CBA is casual. Further, if the NBA wins, it will be sheltered by other legal interjection. Also, players will instantly lose billions of dollars from all NBA and team revenue streams. That's some serious leverage. And, since that owner lawsuit has a fair chance of being approved the players may need to start thinking seriously about coming off their high horse.

In other news, NBA player association attorney Hunter told a meeting at the American Bar Association he doesn't think the NBA will play at all this next season. There's a lot of pessimism and lack of motivation between the parties.

Things are looking bleak.
 
Wow... that would be interesting.

Think of it.... an entire new league with all players being free agents. The owners could set up the league framework however they chose. Of course, ASAP the player would unionize and strike, but this time it'd be a much more level playing field.
 
Think of it.... an entire new league with all players being free agents. The owners could set up the league framework however they chose. Of course, ASAP the player would unionize and strike, but this time it'd be a much more level playing field.

The players wouldn't strike, they'd cut each others throats trying to sign for as much money as possible.
 
The players wil argue that the contracts are actually between players & teams and the connection to the CBA is casual.

What does casual mean. Stern will never be able to enforce it if that argument wins.
 
The owners would never go for it because they would lose claim to their best players. Chris Paul would leave the Hornets, Deron Williams would probably leave NJ, etc.
 
The players wouldn't strike, they'd cut each others throats trying to sign for as much money as possible.

You may be right. Or, through various new league rules changes, many revenue streams will be cut off from the players- things they cannot get thru collective bargaining.
For example, in the absence of players or a union, the owners could pass bylaws such as setting hard salary caps... that the new union would not be able to break. The new union would have an uphill fight on every point.
 
Last edited:
What does casual mean. Stern will never be able to enforce it if that argument wins.

In court the players would argue that contractual language regarding the contract having to adhere to the CBA is somehow not connected to the player's union with respect to enforceability. If they can't, then their union decertification will void all player contracts. That makes them all free agents.
 
The owners would never go for it because they would lose claim to their best players. Chris Paul would leave the Hornets, Deron Williams would probably leave NJ, etc.

And that's the leverage the players have in this scenario.

But if the owners don't do this the players are free to decertify and file as many anti-trust lawsuits as they please to force the owners to back down and accept what the players want. It would also bring such chaos to players, knowing that many of them will be removed from playing (for a host of reasons) and many of the players either retired on the job or injured with contracts never to be paid again. So it's like a game of chicken.
 
I would laugh my ass off.


As an owner I would be tired of making these guys rich as well.
 
another well funded league would start up swoop in a nab players

or the entire all star teams would sign with la and ny
 
Whatever the court rules I'd expect a long drawn out lengthy appeal.
 
The owners would never go for it because they would lose claim to their best players. Chris Paul would leave the Hornets, Deron Williams would probably leave NJ, etc.

Even on our team, yes we'd get out of Roy's contract but can you imaging Oden, LaMarcus, Batum, Crash, Matthews all being unrestricted free agents? I bet LaMarcus goes to Dallas and Oden signs with Indy. We'd be left trying to build a team around Jason Terry and Jamal Crawford.
 
And Krypto-Nate...but maybe Kevin Love.
 
Fuck it... let's go baseball style and have no cap at all!
 
In other news, NBA player association attorney Hunter told a meeting at the American Bar Association he doesn't think the NBA will play at all this next season. There's a lot of pessimism and lack of motivation between the parties.

Things are looking bleak.

It's just big talk, it doesn't matter until we miss 10-30 games.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top