The NFL is clearly the top dog when it comes to pro sports enterprises in the US, but the NFL has suffered a pair of losses in courtrooms this week demonstrating that it is not nearly invincible. Since the following will deal with legal matters, I need to offer the standard disclaimer; I am not an attorney and my comments here are not to be taken as authoritative in any sense of the word.
Jon Gruden filed a lawsuit against the NFL several years ago claiming that the leaking of some of his emails with an NFL employee led to his being fired by the Las Vegas Raiders as their head coach. The NFL contends that such a dispute would be handled by the NFL’s closed arbitration process; Gruden wants it out in open court. The league had a ruling in its favor until this week when the Nevada Supreme Court heard the case en banc and ruled 5-2 that the case would not be heard in the NFL’s arbitration process but that it could proceed in open court. Even more interesting to me is the statement by the Court in its ruling that the NFL’s arbitration process is “unconscionable”; that statement cannot be welcome along Mahogany Row at NFL HQs.
I have been in favor of hearing this case in court since the filing because there are potentially some salacious details that could be exposed in such a proceeding. The NFL said it would appeal this ruling to the US Supreme Court and that leads to my uninformed misunderstandings on the matter:
- Many cases that are heard by the US Supreme Court deal with issues of constitutionality. I cannot point to a part of the US Constitution that favors arbitration over a trial in disputes involving a pro football league.
- Many cases that are heard by the US Supreme Court deal with issues of Federal Law and adherence with Federal Law. Once again, I cannot think of a Federal Law that may have been violated by the ruling in Nevada that will be appealed.
If the US Supreme Court refuses to take the Gruden case or if the ruling there goes against the NFL, the league would face a choice. It could reach a settlement with Jon Gruden, or it can go through a public trial – – with disclosure circumstances. At least for now, Gruden seems not to be particularly interested in a settlement. Earlier this week after winning in the Nevada court, he said:
“I’m looking forward to having the truth come out, and I want to make sure what happened to me doesn’t happen to anyone else.”
That does not sound like someone looking for a payday settlement. In fact, Gruden also said this week that he would really like to get back into coaching at the collegiate level. Speaking to the Georgia team – presumably at the invitation of Georgia coach, Kirby Smart – Gruden said he very much wanted to get back to coaching and would love to do so in the SEC. There are chapters yet unwritten in this matter …
The other setback for the NFL is in a similar vein. Brian Flores and co-plaintiffs have sued the NFL and three individual teams claiming racial discrimination in hiring. Again, the NFL claimed that this had to be adjudicated in its arbitration format; this week, a US Court of Appeals ruled that at least some of the claims made by the plaintiffs should move forward in the court system. That ruling by the Court of Appeals confirmed a ruling by a US District Judge about 2 years ago regarding the venue for settling this dispute.
Once again, the league must not be happy with commentary contained in the ruling of the court:
- The Court said that the NFL’s constitution which sets up the arbitration process “contractually provides for no independent arbitral forum, no bilateral dispute resolution, and no procedure.”
And …
- “ … it [the NFL’s arbitration process] offends basic presumptions of our arbitration jurisprudence” because the final decision is to be made by the NFL’s “principal executive officer.”
Here is my takeaway from the above. If this ruling is affirmed – or allowed to stand – by whatever appeal the NFL makes wherever it makes it, the entire legal foundation for the NFL’s arbitration process is called into question for just about any future confrontation. Once again, I doubt that anyone was popping champagne corks along Mahogany Row at NFL HQs when this news arrived.
Moving on … About a month ago, MLB Commish, Rob Manfred, said that he thought the Minnesota Twins would be sold and that the deal would close sometime later this season. I and some other commentators thought that the Twins’ housecleaning at the trade deadline – – trading away 10 players from their 26-man roster – – was a way to clear the books for the new owner(s). Not so …
Yesterday, the current owners of the Twins – – the Pohlad family – – announced that they would take on two limited partners but that the Pohlad family would retain control of the Twins’ franchise. As of yesterday, the two new limited partners were not identified and as of yesterday there is a segment of the Twins’ fanbase that is not happy. Some have suggested boycotting the team and that would not be good news for the Pohlad family or the new limited partners.
- Twins rank 23rd in home attendance in 2025 – – 22,721 fans per game
- MLB average attendance in 2025 is 29,301 fans per game
Finally, here is some food for thought from Mark Twain:
“God made the Idiot for practice, and then He made the School Board.”
But don’t get me wrong, I love sports ………