I have looked at your last few posts. I'm not sure how they relate to this case, since I have not seen any determination that Clarett's case against the NFL would be an "anti-trust" case as opposed to a simple "restraint of trade" case.
Clarett's injury history could actually end up being Exhibit #1 for the plaintiff in this case.
"Counsel for the plaintiff calls Mr. Travis McGahee, formerly of the University of Miami, to the stand . . ."
"Mr. McGahee, I will point out, suffered a serious knee injury in his last game at the University of Miami. This injury threatened his career and resulted in a dramatic decline in his marketability to the National Football League. Can there be any doubt that a player who is forced to play an additional season of collegiate football actually suffers from 'irreparable harm' due to the inherent risk of injury while he is not being insured or compensated for his work?"
McGahee is a non-issue. He took out a million dollar policy on his knees before the game.
He was smart, Clarett is just a punk.
Please explain to me how it could possibly be restraint of trade when he has not met the requirements needed to make him eligible AND he is free to go play in canada or the arena league.
It would be no different than if the NFL required an IQ test or in the case of the NHL a sigt test and someone failed it. The test is being three years out of high school and he fails that test.