Posted on 02/05/2004 10:11:42 AM PST by smith288
Maurice Clarett (Getty Images)
|
Judge Rules In Favor Of Clarett
By Bucknuts.com Staff
Date: Feb 5, 2004 U.S. District Judge Shira A. Scheindlin has ruled that the NFL Draft rule regarding early entry violates anti-trust laws and has ordered the NFL to allow Maurice Clarett into this year's NFL draft. |
|
The AP reports that U.S. District Judge Shira A. Scheindlin has ruled in favor of Maurice Clarett in his case against the NFL and that the NFL must allow him to enter this year's draft. Clarett brought a suit against the NFL, asking that its rule requiring a player to have spent three seasons out of high school before becoming eligible to enter the draft be overturned. U.S. District Judge Shira A. Scheindlin ruled in favor of Clarett, stating "The NFL has not justified Clarett's exclusion by demonstrating that the rule enhances competition. Indeed, Clarett has alleged the very type of injury -- a complete bar to entry into the market for this services -- that the antitrust laws are designed to prevent." The 20-year-old Clarett was the subject of an ESPN.com expose on Wednesday for his ties to a known gambler, Warren, Ohio, caterer Bobby Dellumuti, who also provided Clarett with illegal extra benefits. Those benefits, reportedly totaling $3,800, as well as his lies to NCAA investigators led Ohio State and the NCAA to suspend Clarett, a preseason Heisman Trophy favorite, for the 2003 season. He now faces a decision on whether to formally enter his name in the 2004 draft. All indications are he will do that, although he maintained several times during the legal process his desire to return to OSU this season. For him to return, OSU would need to petition the NCAA on his behalf. There are no certainties he would regain full eligibility, either. Clarett sued the NFL last summer to challenge a league rule that a player must be out of high school three years for draft eligibility. The judge's ruling, if it is not successfully appealed, could allow teen-age football stars to take advantage of the marketing and business opportunities available to young athletes in other sports. In trying to maintain the status quo, the NFL argued that Clarett should not be eligible because its rule resulted from a collective bargaining agreement with the players. Hence, the rule is immune from antitrust scrutiny, because Clarett cannot bring such a lawsuit and because its rule is reasonable. "While, ordinarily, the best offense is a good defense, none of these defenses hold the line," the judge opined in a 70-page ruling. Scheindlin sided with Clarett because he was fighting a policy that excludes all players in his position from selling their services to the only viable buyer, the NFL. The judge said that "age is obviously a poor proxy for NFL-readiness, as is restriction based solely on height or weight." The NFL was preparing a statement to respond to the ruling. It was unclear if and when the league would initiate appeals proceedings. It was also unclear what impact such appeals may have on Clarett's ability to enter this year's draft. John Langel, a lawyer for Clarett, told the AP he was "obvious pleased" and praised the ruling as "incredibly well written and thorough and touching on all issues the parties addressed." Clarett rushed for 1,237 yards and led Ohio State to a national championship as a freshman in 2002.
|
No there's not (unless you feel like naming them).
First, there haven't been too many players drafted out of high school into the NBA. Second, they presumably still need time to develop after being drafted which many of them do on an NBA bench instead of starting for a NCAA team. Third, drafting by a pro sports team is more of an art than a science -- with many players in all sports being draft busts regardless of whether they played only high school or completed all 4 years of college.
And every one of those players would've been even better if they had gone to school first.
And done what? Risked injury & their careers? Granted, I agree with the general premise that young players should stay in school for at least some time to gain experience.
But, if they actually are qualified - like everyone on my list is/was - why the heck would you stay in college when you could be making millions in the NBA??
I know I certainly wouldn't pass up that opportunity.
An interesting question I've thought about on occasion. As a practical matter, since the NBA went to just two rounds and the NFL cut way back on the number of rounds they have, players drafted are very likely to make the teams they are drafted by and undrafted players are free to pick teams and situations that they view as most beneficial to them.
Professional sports also enjoy some protections from the applications of anti-trust laws, but those laws really can't be used to prevent someone from making a living if they have the ability to compete at that level.
This is crucially important. Football is far more a team game than basketball is.
In Bball someone like Michael Jordan can dominate the opposing team almost by himself.
In football, Brett Favre, while being the best QB in the game ever (IMHO), is just one guy versus eleven. If he didn't have good team mates he'd get creamed. You can insert Barry Sanders or Randy Moss if you choose. Story remains the same. If you can't play as a team, you lose.
If no team wants to hire him, and there is no collusion involved, he wouldn't be qualified. In that case the NFL argument is moot. I say let the marketplace decide.
Businesses has a right to estabilish their own rule. In this case not to try to lure teenagers out of high school. For once the rule is changed by the court it can be changed again by a more lenient one and finnally dropped overall.
Thus it's just another liberal judge attacking our children. Impeach them!
My response to that would be that Dawkins was obviously qualified to be in the NBA. The proof -- he was in the NBA for years & was a starter for many of those years.
Now, whether or not he choked against the Lakers & in other games is a different story. That would only indicate that he's a choker or that he wasn't a superstar -- but was still certainly qualified to be in the NBA.
(putting on NFL General Manager hat and thinking)
(Scratching head)
What draft pick do I want to spend on a whiney, immature kid with an attitude problem who plays a position that has a career expectancy of 5 years who if he doesn't make it on my team will probably blame it on racism?
Um, Coach. I have a question. How are we fixed for placekick holders?
I assume you have seen some very 'mature' 15 year-old women, and other's who don't really mature until their early 20s. Same happens with men even if it may not be as obvious.
Ordinarily I would agree with your argument, but this is a case where a 7-foot center cannot utilize his physical presence to impose his will on a smaller 6'8" point guard who is also playing out of position. Teams drill constantly to achieve a mismatch like this and here the Lakers were handing it to the Sixers on a silver platter. It's not like Dawkins had to 'recognize' the mismatch -- he knew he had it all night long.
Not ready for Pime Time.
Of course, the anti-trust laws do not require any of the owners to actually hire him. Theoretically, as long as each owner independently made the decision not to hire him, that would not constitute an anti-trust violation. (Of course, proving that a non-hire occurred as a result of a series of independent decisions, instead of an agreement between the owners, might well be very difficult).
They don't!
In trying to maintain the status quo, the NFL argued that Clarett should not be eligible because its rule resulted from a collective bargaining agreement with the players.
The player's union wants the rule...less competition. I can live with this decision. Anything the unions don't like is fine with me!!!
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.