Court's Opinion re injunction

[Mickey]

Here is a link to Judge Nelson's thorough opinion with regard to the injunction sought by the players against the league imposed lockout.

 

Judge Nelson's Opinion in Brady et al v. NFL

 

You may find her discussion of the public interest at stake beginning on page 87. The discussion prior to this decision being issued around here seemed to imply that the Judge could just rule whichever way she wanted to effect whatever outcome she desired. Her opinion shows that she simply analyzed the applicable law and reached the conclusion that was dictated by that analysis. Anyone who disagrees with her decision should point out where her legal analysis went astray rather than complain about biased judges. Her reasoning is here laid bare, that of her critics should be as well.

 

For those whose position on these things is governed by their understanding of judicial philosophy, I would note that the league's position relies on their qualifiying for a "non-statutory" anti-trust exemption. That means the exemption was not created by congress but by the courts. I will leave it to those who regularly rant against "legislating from the bench" who nevertheless support the league being given the benefit of a non-statutory anti-trust exemption to explain away this apparent hypocrisy.

 

Being a fan and caring only for my self interest, I wanted the injunction to be granted because that is what I believed would lead to football continuing, pretty much as it has, while these titans square off to fight over the hideous amounts of cash fying around in their universe. The judge essentially felt the same way by pointing out the interests of the fans in football going forward in the 2011 season:

 

"And, of course, the public interest represented by the fans of professional footballwho have a strong investment in the 2011 seasonis an intangible interest that weighs against the lockout. In short, this particular employment dispute is far from a purely private argument over compensation."

I do not believe that this is step one of some grand plan by the players to change the face of professional football. The reason we have a draft and restraints on player movement is becuase it is in the long term economic interests of the league and, for the players to prosper, the league must prosper first. The players have been willing to essentially consent to a loss of ecomonic freedom in exchange for a share of the pie which meant more money for all. The league has been willing to do fork over that share of the gold in exchange for being able to limit player movement and thereby preserve competetiveness which is at the core of league success. The arguement here is not over the leagues business model, its over the numbers. Same formula, different numbers. That is the argument along with the rookie cap.

I don't think that as fans we have a dog in the hunt apart from the season being interrupted. I don't see any major change in the current system limiting player movement so as to preserve competetiveness. The rookie cap is a great idea and I think the players will have no issues with it as long as their overall share of revenue remains the same.

Edited April 27, 2011 by Mickey