Jump to content

Alliance of American Football


Mr Dee

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, bryan35 said:

Wouldn't the AAF be in breach of the contract by not paying the players?

That's the same question I asked when the CFL decided not to pay players the bonus money.

IMO and I'm no lawyer... It's likely that the AAF are in breach, but that doesn't mean the contracts are automatically and quickly brought to an end. More likely that the players would have to sue, which they'd win, but that would take time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

That's the same question I asked when the CFL decided not to pay players the bonus money.

IMO and I'm no lawyer... It's likely that the AAF are in breach, but that doesn't mean the contracts are automatically and quickly brought to an end. More likely that the players would have to sue, which they'd win, but that would take time.

And a sizeable retainer to the lawyer up front. If the corporation (AAF) has no tangible assets, you would end up with an unenforceable judgement after spending a fair bit of money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Tracker said:

And a sizeable retainer to the lawyer up front. If the corporation (AAF) has no tangible assets, you would end up with an unenforceable judgement after spending a fair bit of money.

Wouldn't the reverse be true also?

Players could sign contracts with the CFL and the AAF would have sue to get the contract rescinded? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Jesse said:

Wouldn't the reverse be true also?

Players could sign contracts with the CFL and the AAF would have sue to get the contract rescinded? 

I would think so, but the international barrier would be an issue. However, there is not an agreement between the two leagues and there is probably no one at AAF left alive to pursue the action, or pay for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jesse said:

Wouldn't the reverse be true also?

Players could sign contracts with the CFL and the AAF would have sue to get the contract rescinded? 

But the CFL is not going to sign a contract with someone who may not be able to honour it. Then, the CFL would have to sue the player. Also, you can't knowingly enter a contract when you're bound by another agreement that would preclude you from playing in another league. I'm sure the AAF agreements are tight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Blueandgold said:

Pretty disgusting that they want to make it difficult for people to do their job or make a living. 

It is the bankruptcy trustee's job to wring every last dollar out of whatever assets might remain. I do not know if under US laws, employee owed wages are given priority in company dissolutions but I would bet not. So, the trustee is working for creditors and creditors only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tracker said:

It is the bankruptcy trustee's job to wring every last dollar out of whatever assets might remain. I do not know if under US laws, employee owed wages are given priority in company dissolutions but I would bet not. So, the trustee is working for creditors and creditors only.

I think it is prioritized by amount owed, those at the bottom will get....nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

I think it is prioritized by amount owed, those at the bottom will get....nothing.

It depends on the class of the creditor. Creditors are classified, the highest class getting paid first. Secured creditors will get what's owed to them. But most won't, including the players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JCon said:

Yes, but unsigned. 

Indeed but we only have the rights to them for something like 56 hours (according to one of the beat writer tweets) so we'll have to sign them sooner rather than later........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

What is the AAF or trustee going to do?  Initiate court action to stop someone from earning a living?  The AAF is a non-factor at this point.

The CFL ignores another league's legal contracts at its peril.  The NFL could always decide that if the CFL can do it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, WBBFanWest said:

The CFL ignores another league's legal contracts at its peril.  The NFL could always decide that if the CFL can do it...

Entirely different situations and we all know it. The CFL is honouring these contracts right now out of sheer respect for a process, but if push comes to shove, they're not going to think twice about providing a guy an opportunity to earn a living in spite of what some defunct circus thinks about their entitlement to these players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, WBBFanWest said:

The CFL ignores another league's legal contracts at its peril.  The NFL could always decide that if the CFL can do it...

The AAF contracts were void the minute they closed shop.  Very basic principle of contract law is that if one side does not live up to their obligations the other party is not bound to their obligations.  The AAF is not providing the opportunity for the players to earn money playing football, therefore contract is worthless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Mike said:

Entirely different situations and we all know it. The CFL is honouring these contracts right now out of sheer respect for a process, but if push comes to shove, they're not going to think twice about providing a guy an opportunity to earn a living in spite of what some defunct circus thinks about their entitlement to these players.

Mike, it's only different because the NFL says it is.  They're willing to honour our contracts because having a stable "feeder" league is in their best interest.  But don't doubt for a second that if they ever decided that they really don't need the CFL, our contracts wouldn't be worth the paper they are printed on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JuranBoldenRules said:

The AAF contracts were void the minute they closed shop.  Very basic principle of contract law is that if one side does not live up to their obligations the other party is not bound to their obligations.  The AAF is not providing the opportunity for the players to earn money playing football, therefore contract is worthless.

The contracts are void the minute that both parties say they are.  Until then, either side can claim that the contract is still in effect and binding.  That's why we have courts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...