I wanted to lead off this piece with some pithy, labored football reference like "The clock has his 0:00 and the play is under review" but in the end I just couldn't come up with a good one... but I digress.
Andrew Brandt of the National Football Post gives a very good summary of today's proceedings in St. Louis, and comes away with the feeling that the owner's lawyers may have done a better job of arguing their point. I'll let you head over to NFP to read the whole story, but if you just want a concise 'Cliff's notes' version then join me after the jump and I'll wrap it all up pretty succinctly.
- Paul Clement for the owners forced the issue that this should remain a labor issue, not an anti-trust one. Also, pushed the argument that decertification was a tool to force the owner's hand.
- Ted Olsen for the players argued that making this a labor issue is forcing employees into a union, and they don't currently have one.
- Two judges seemed to openly favor the owners and question the players' argument more.
- Judge Bye closed the hearing by saying the court "wouldn't be hurt" if both sides worked this out themselves, which is a not so subtle nudge they need to get this done.