Category: External Sports (Page 216 of 821)

The future is now, and it’s Jon Jones

Jon Jones’ rise to the top has been unprecedented but as Spencer Kyte of HeavyMMA.com writes, he could become one of the true mainstream athletes from the world of mixed martial arts.

The future of mixed martial arts began on Saturday night in Newark, New Jersey, as Jon Jones outclassed one of the best fighters in the sport, Mauricio “Shogun” Rua, dominating him from the word “go” and claiming the UFC light heavyweight championship.

Winning the belt alone is a major accomplishment, but it’s the way that Jones made Rua look like he had no business being in the cage with him that truly signals the dawning of a new era. I know that has been said many times before, and very famously in this division just two years ago, but this is different and very real.

Three years ago, Jones was a 23-year-old kid who turned to fighting professionally as a way to support his impending family. Three years later, he’s a world champion, in addition to being a proud and dedicated family man.

His rise to the top of the sport is unparalleled.

While announcers and media are often too quick to start building statues in honor of the fighter of the moment, Jones appears to be worthy of the work in stone, having completely broken one of the best light heavyweights of all-time and doing so with ease.

Read the full article.

Did the NFLPA overplay its hand?

I really don’t care which side “wins” this battle between the NFL owners and the players. Both sides have a ridiculous amount of cash-flow to split, and it’s tough to understand that in these difficult times that they can’t play nice and come to an agreement.

Also, the owners started the fight and got smacked down by a federal judge for improperly negotiating to receive $4 billion in income from television networks even if a work stoppage canceled games in the 2011 season. They were looking for an edge, and they got caught.

With this backdrop, the owners moved considerably with the offer they put on the table last week in an attempt to keep the negotiations going. They backed off the 18-game schedule, and moved a great deal on many of the financial terms. Sure, it was a last-minute offer, and they only made it after losing the court decision, but it deserved serious consideration by the NFLPA. They should have presented it to their players. The NFL was willing to go with another short-term extension of the bargaining session.

Instead, the union responded by demanding 10 years of audited financial statements from the teams. Anyone who knows anything about business will tell you that there’s no way the owners would ever give this much financial information, and this suggests that the NFLPA had predetermined to go to court and try to gain leverage rather than agreeing to a deal. If they were serious about negotiating, they could have insisted on more financial information without demanding 10 years of audited statements.

It was a high-risk strategy, and it suggests that the lawyers for the NFLPA, along with DeMaurice Smith, had hijacked the process on behalf of the players. I suspect that many players were dumbfounded when they heard the last offer from the owners and that the union had still decided to decertify instead of continuing to negotiate.

Now we have the response from the attorneys for the NFL in the lawsuit filed by the players, and it takes direct aim and the decertification decision, arguing that this was simply a “bargaining tactic” by the NFLPA. After listing numerous examples of players and union officials acknowledging that this was a tactic to be used to gain leverage as opposed to a serious and permanent move, the NFL put forward this argument:

In light of the mountain of evidence demonstrating that the NFLPA had long been planning a tactical disclaimer, not one that is unequivocal and in good faith, the NFL filed a charge with the NLRB on February 14, 2011, asserting that the NFLPA had violated its statutory obligation imposed by the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) to bargain in good faith. (Ex. K.) The NFL has amended the charge to assert that the Union’s purported “disclaimer” is invalid because it violates the NLRA. (Ex. L.) Proceedings before the Board are ongoing.

Basically, the NFL is arguing that this move by the NFLPA is a sham, and that the court has no jurisdiction here while this is being argued before the National Labor Relations Board. I’m not an expert in labor law, but as a lawyer I was impressed by the arguments put forward by the NFL in their brief. The idea that the union could flip a switch and go from collective bargaining to claiming anti-trust violations for items that had been bargained in the past simply by decertifying seems grossly unfair.

Now John Clayton is reporting that the NFLPA recently reached out to the NFL to resume negotiations, but that everything is complicated by the fact that the union has decertified.

During the weekend, NFL players — now under the direction of a trade association — reached out to NFL owners and negotiators and extended an invitation to get back to the table to try to pound out a collective bargaining agreement. DeMaurice Smith, who used to have the title of executive director of the NFL Players Association, went even further Monday, sending a letter to Gregg Levy, one of the lead attorneys for the NFL.

Talks could resume as early as next Monday, and it wouldn’t be out of the question for a deal to be struck within five days of the start of meetings.

But the NFL, according to NFL sources, will meet with the trade association executive board only if the board says it’s a union bargaining for its players.

The player representatives never would have offered to resume negotiations had they not gotten an earful from various players. Also, the union is in a real bind if they lose in court, and the NFL seems to have a strong argument regarding the decertification ploy. Also, this move to negotiate also supports the NFL argument that the entire decertification scenario was a sham.

The best result for everyone involved, including the fans, may be the court siding with the owners in the next round. The sooner they get this out of the hands of the lawyers, the sooner this dispute will be resolved.

Photo by Bill Moore

Has Michael Floyd played his last game for Notre Dame?

NFL Draft Countdown’s Scott Wright tweets that a source close to the Notre Dame program has told him that receiver Michael Floyd has played his last game for the Fighting Irish. Floyd was arrested on Sunday for driving under the influence, which was his third incident involving underage drinking. (The first two were citations in Minnesota.)

Wright is well respected by NFL draftniks, but he doesn’t break many news stories so we’ll just have to wait for more information to be released. If Floyd is indeed done at Notre Dame, Wright says that he should transfer to a D-1AA or D-II program instead of going into the 2011 Supplemental Draft in order to “rehab” his stock.

After Floyd was arrested, Notre Dame spokesman Dennis Brown read in a statement: “The University is aware of this incident and is confident that local law enforcement agencies will handle it in a prompt, thorough and professional manner. As for internal discipline, while we do not publicly discuss specific cases, it is well known that Notre Dame has high standards for student conduct, takes these matters seriously, follows the facts where they lead, and when necessary, institutes appropriate sanctions at the appropriate time.”

Does Notre Dame’s “high standards” include kicking a receiver with one DUI arrest and two drinking citations off the team? Or is it to get this young man some help? The somewhat overused phrase here is that everyone makes mistakes. But there are also consequences to every decision we make, which is something Floyd might find out the hard way.

Either way, this news certainly puts a huge damper on what’s supposed to be an exciting spring in South Bend.

Findings from Fiesta Bowl investigation forthcoming

Connecticut Huskies quarterback Zach Frazer looks to pass against the Oklahoma Sooners during the first half of the Fiesta Bowl college football game at University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale, Arizona, January 1, 2011. REUTERS/Joshua Lott (UNITED STATES – Tags: SPORT FOOTBALL)

The Fiesta Bowl might be on the verge of suffering an even bigger embarrassment than Oklahoma 48, Connecticut 20. (Yikes – remember that game on New Year’s Day? Me either.)

According to a report by the AP, the results from an internal investigation covering the “political and financial” dealings of the Fiesta Bowl could be released as early as next week. And officials are apparently bracing for the worst.

For those unaware of the backstory, prior to the 2010 matchup between TCU and Boise State, past and present Fiesta Bowl employees alleged that they were encouraged to make financial contributions to state political figures and were subsequently reimbursed by the bowl. If true, this would be a violation of both state and Federal campaign finance laws.

The Fiesta Bowl is a non-profit organization and thus, is prohibited from making political contributions of any kind. It’s alleged that Fiesta Bowl officials (which includes CEO John Junker) have spent a reported $4 million since 2000 in order to gain favor from BCS decision makers and elected officials. Junker was placed on indefinite administrative leave roughly a month ago.

The good news for the Fiesta Bowl is that because of its contract with the BCS, it will remain a BCS game for the next three years regardless of the findings from the investigation. But in three years, this scandal could open the door for other sponsors to gain BCS favor (uh, legally of course). The bowl that might make the most logical sense is the AT&T Cotton Bowl, which is now played at the brand new, luxurious Cowboys Stadium.

« Older posts Newer posts »