NFL Lockout: Chad Ochocinco Tweets Lockout to Officially Resume
NFL Lockout to Resume Soon, As Ochocinco Claims Judge Rules In Favor of Owners on Stay of Injunction
Cincinnati Bengals wideout Chad Ochocinco has always been a ready source of news (or at least chatter) regarding the NFL lockout. Ocho has been forthright and honest, giving fans an inside look at the world of the CBA negotiations.
But, that makes one of his tweets from earlier today particularly troubling, when he told fans on his Twitter page that the league would be getting the stay of the lockout injunction, therefore continuing the labor stoppage.
#OCNN Unfortunately a union source expects that the stay will be granted today n that the lockout will now continue 4 at least several weeks
While the news is unconfirmed at this point, it's highly possible that Ocho's "source" is right. After all, we've heard for quite some time that the league would likely get it's stay of the injunction pending the appeal, meaning the lockout would continue until the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on the owners' appeal of Judge Susan Nelson's injunction.
What does Ocho's news mean for you, the fans?
If it's true, it means that there can be no practice at team facilities, no signing of contracts by rookies, no free agent signings and no trades until the court has ruled on the appeal. The case is scheduled to be heard on June 3, at which point a verdict can be expected 30-45 days after that point.
Obviously, the Bengals' wide receiver hasn't cited his source yet, but since he is a player, he would be among the first to hear what the judge's ruling will be. Sure, he could be wrong, but given all the rumblings we've heard coming from the courtroom, his news seems pretty plausible.
In other words, you might want to go ahead and settle in, after all, we're looking at a minimum of two more months with no football free agency, trades or minicamp.
Most recent updates:
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?