Madison WI –

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, citing a budget crisis, has asked for increases in the amount government workers pay toward their health benefits and pensions.

Walker, a Republican who reportedly received big bucks from Tea Party backers, also wants to essentially strip unions of their collective bargaining rights, with the exception of wages.

"If I have to choose between the demands of a few union leaders, particularly those leaders from outside of Wisconsin, or standing with the hard-working taxpayers of Wisconsin, I'm going to stand with the taxpayers," the Republican governor said on MSNBC'S "Morning Joe" on Tuesday.

So, what does all of this mean to the NFL & their adversaries, the NFLPA?

Should Wisconsin generate the needed votes in their state senate, all future collective bargaining agreements would be prohibited based on the law.  That would mean an end to all unions throughout the state, including the greater GREEN BAY area.

The Packers, owned by the people of Green Bay & managed by the City would have to abide by the ruling and could not take part in any existing or future contractual arbitrations with the NFLPA.  This would include any other union related negotiations.  Plain & simply put; The NFLPA would legally have no power or position in the state of Wisconsin.

On a larger scale, with this legal precedent, other states will in fact go after their unions in the same matter as Wisconsin.  A prime example of this is the state of New Jersey, whose governor Chris Christy is attempting to exacerbate the end of tenure to the NJEA, would jump at the chance to legally stop any future collective bargaining agreements throughout the state.  That would affect the New York Jets & the New York Giants and place an even greater tug on the necks of the NFLPA.

Now mind you, this also affects the Anti-Trust issues extended to the NFL, NBA, NHL, MLS and MLB (Major League Baseball) by the federal government.  However, on May 25, 2010, the Federal Supreme Court Ruled in the case of American Needle Inc. Vs the NFL.

The initial case was thrown out at both the district and appellate court level with both court’s ruling that the NFL was a single entity — not a collection of 32 individual teams — and therefore could not violate antitrust laws.

Still, Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, in perhaps the final opinion asserted that the analyses of the lower courts were flawed. He wrote that each of the league’s 32 teams is an “independently owned and independently managed business.”

“To a firm making hats, the Saints and the Colts are two potentially competing suppliers of valuable trademarks,” Justice Stevens wrote. “When each NFL team licenses its intellectual property, it is not pursuing the ‘common interests of the whole’ league but is instead pursuing interests of each ‘corporation itself.’

“Decisions by NFL teams to license their separately owned trademarks collectively and to only one vendor are decisions that ‘deprive the marketplace of independent centers of decision making,’ and therefore of actual or potential competition.

So how does this change in Wisconsin affect the NFL?

It asserts that with the Supreme Court’s Ruling that the NFL is in fact not a monopoly; They (NFL) cannot negotiate as a group and therefore will make it easier for the individual player to seek a class action suit against the NFL for mistreatment in negotiations of players potential when a contract has expired.

In simpler terms; The Plan “C” free agency agreement would also be null and void.

So, it now appears that the fate of the new CBA rests not only in the hands of the NFL and the NFLPA but in the hands of the Wisconsin State Senate as well…

…And that’s this Baumerjet’s Story…