NFLPA Suing the NFL for $3 Billion over Collusion Charges in Uncapped Year

The NFL Players Association is suing the league for damages up to $3 billion stemming from allegations of collusion during the uncapped 2010 season. The NFL, of course, denies the charge both on its face and on its legal merit.

This is going to be another interesting offseason.

Information on the claim supplied by the NFLPA alleges that:

"

This proceeding arises from a conspiracy. Pursuant to the White SSA, the NFL and the Owners explicitly agreed that the 2010 season would not be subject to a salary cap and that they would not engage in any prohibited collusion or circumvention of the SSA.

"

The union had tossed around the "c-word" before, but had not done so lightly while negotiating the current CBA. This charge strikes not only at the wallet of the country's most lucrative pro sport, but at the very heart of how it operates.

It isn't like this is a surprise.

The NFL owners opened themselves up to this speculation when they opted to punish the Redskins and the Cowboys for overspending in the uncapped year. The league apparently didn't understand the contradiction in terms of that claim, and neither did the teams that attempted to appeal the penalties.

At the time, many questioned why the union hadn't spoke up, and now, it appears that the union was just biding its time. At the NFL Owners meetings in Palm Springs, Fla., the league gave the players the last piece of evidence that was needed.

From the NFLPA claim:

"

New York Giants Owner John Mara—who is Chair of the NFL Management Council Executive Committee (a.k.a., the CEC)—subsequently confirmed the existence of the conspiracy in his statements to the media regarding penalties imposed by the
NFL on those four Clubs.

"

What did Mara say that was so damning?

"

I thought the penalties imposed were proper . . . .What they did was in violation of the spirit of the salary cap. They attempted to take advantage of a one-year loophole, and quite frankly, I think they’re lucky they didn’t lose draft picks.

"

Again, Mara (who is normally a very smart individual) doesn't seem to get that there shouldn't be anything remotely resembling a spirit of the salary cap in a previously agreed to uncapped year. In short, the members of the NFLPA kept their mouths shut just long enough to let the league hang itself by its own admission.

The NFL, known for occasionally wanting to have its cake and eat it too, denies both the legal viability of the union's claim and also that any collusion took place. From league spokesman Greg Aiello:

"

Regarding the NFLPA's latest complaint: The filing of these claims is prohibited by the Collective Bargaining Agreement and separately..more

— Greg Aiello (@gregaiello) May 23, 2012"

Adding:

"

And so it is clear: There was no collusion. There was no agreement. These claims are totally unfounded.

— Greg Aiello (@gregaiello) May 23, 2012"

As with any NFL labor claim, this will be heard in the now-infamous Eighth Circuit US District Court in the courtroom of Judge David Doty, as noted thorn in the league's side. The major points of the case will include whether or not the summary judgement of the new CBA affects violations of the previous SSA. Also, the NFL will be asked to explain how its agreement between clubs did not limit spending when teams were penalized for not limiting their spending.

If the court finds itself in favor of the NFLPA, this will not only be a massive financial win for the players, but it will also affect the way the NFL does business. While many felt the new CBA was a push or a slight win for the owners, this could be the big victory the union was looking for.

Follow @Schottey

Michael Schottey is an NFL Associate Editor for Bleacher Report and an award-winning member of the Pro Football Writers of America. He has professionally covered both the Minnesota Vikings and the Detroit Lions, as well as NFL events like the scouting combine and the Senior Bowl.