Ohio State's Maurice Clarett Sues NFL

Milstein told ESPN.com that because the draft eligibility rule is not included in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, and that the rule is not a product of negotiation
between the league and the Players' Association, the NFL's draft eligibility rule is not exempt from antitrust laws. But that seems up for debate. In Brown v. Pro
Football Inc. (1996), eight Supreme Court justices decided that anything that is a mandatory subject of bargaining, which would include the NFL draft or any terms of
employment, are immune from an antitrust attack.

Please explain to me how it could possibly be restraint of trade when he has not met the requirements needed to make him eligible . . .

That argument is a non-sequiter, because "the requirements needed to make him eligible" are the issue that is under dispute.

Consider the irrationality of that argument . . .

Justice Department Official: "Mr. Landlord, we've determined that you have engaged in a long-term effort to refuse to rent apartments to minority applicants."

Landlord: "That's preposterous! How can you possibly say that?"

Official: "We've documented 150 cases in the last two years of prospective minority tenants with no criminal records, flawless credit reports, etc. -- all of whom were rejected. This is a clear case of systemic discrimination against minorities."

Landlord: "This apartment building has a written policy of renting only to white applicants. We didn't discriminate against any of those 150 applicants -- We simply turned them down because they didn't meet our written policy!"

No he does not have to be in class for the lawsuit.

On the other hand, if he wants to keep his NCAA options open, he needs to be in class.

I have heard nothing in Columbus but I doubt he will do the class work and act like a good citizen as reequired under the terms of the suspension. Too much help from Jim Brown, etc. to be a "student-athelete".

They are refusing a grown man the right to earn a living.

You are another one claiming this. Where do you guys get this idea? Where in the constitution does it say he has the right to earn a living any way he chooses? Go back to DU.

You are an idiot. I am not from DU, I have been here for years. The NFL has an age based rule that restricts a player eligibility. I personally think the rule will be found illegal. Do I want it to happen and ruin college/pro football? Hell no.

Now, lets take a look at your statement - "Where in the constitution does it say he has the right to earn a living any way he chooses? Go back to DU." I think that an arbitrary rule that a monopolistic organization(proven in court in the USFL lawsuit) enforces has a damn good chance of not hold up to scrutiny. You are looking at it from the "God's given right to do whatever we want" point of view, where I am looking at it from the "Our constitution that has been screwed up by liberal judges for decades". Just because I can look at something from a different point of view doesn't mean I'm a DU'er - So get bent dimwit.

"Where in the constitution does it say he has the right to earn a living any way he chooses? Go back to DU." I think that an arbitrary rule that a monopolistic organization(proven in court in the USFL lawsuit) enforces has a damn good chance of not hold up to scrutiny. You are looking at it from the "God's given right to do whatever we want" point of view, where I am looking at it from the "Our constitution that has been screwed up by liberal judges for decades". Just because I can look at something from a different point of view doesn't mean I'm a DU'er - So get bent dimwit.

You are the one who made the statment that he has the rightto earn a living. In the above paragraph, you apparently try to modify that statment, but you did say that he had the right to earn a living. To me, you were saying that he had the right to earn a living any way he chose. That is typical liberal socialist thinking. That is why I decided you must be from DU. Now, you try to modify your statment and call me a dimwit. Actually, I think you cannot defend your original statement and are using name calling to deflect criticism.

You are the one who started slinging mud by accusing me of being from DU. I can't think of a worse insult. My position is that the courts will say that Clarrett has the right to ATTEMPT to earn a living as a player in the NFL. He DOES NOT have an inalienable right to a position, but I believe he will be given a chance by order of the courts.

I believe the confusion lies in that I am assuming that he would make it on a team in the NFL. Many "pro" analysts believe he would be a first round selection(some say early first round) if he were available in next years draft. So given this assumption, he is being denied the right to work in the NFL. If you do not assume this(like you and others apparently are) then he is being denied the right to attempt to earn a position as a player in the NFL. Is this second statement make more, less, or no difference to your opposition?

Clarrett isn't allowed to seek a position as a player in the NFL. Why not? Safety concerns? No way. Is he too physically small for his own safety? I seem to recall a Cornerback(Mark McMillen??) who played for the Eagles and the Broncos who was something like 5'8" and 160 lbs. So physical size isn't an issue. OK, what about physical maturity? I used to(and would love to be again) study Brazilian Jujitsu. There were some physical conditions you had to meet in order to train. One of them was that you had to be 16 years old, because of the extreem pressure placed on the bodies bones while sparring - The thinking was that it was better to break the bone than to warp it out of shape(since yoounger bones are more malleable). So is Clarrett in undo danger becasue of his young age? Hardly. Mental maturity? Doesn't seem to be a problem for high school kids to walk right onto an NBA court. Didn't Kerry Wood tie the record for strikouts in a 9 inning game at the age of 20? The same age Clarrett would be playing if he were in the 2004 NFL draft? So what is the reason? The reason is that the NFL, NFLPA and NCAA have a nice ting going, and they don't want to give it up.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.