As Peepholegate rages, sports media misses ‘armageddon’
The Erin Andrews/Peepholegate saga has captivated sports fans in recent days like few other stories, with a number of high-profile blogs and media outlets devoting time, energy and resources to the sordid tale in near hanging-chad-like proportions (see here, here and here).
It should really come as no surprise then that the vast majority of sports media outlets have completely missed a story in the last week that could prove to be the industry’s most important one in two decades.
Stay classy, New York
It’s easy to see why. This story suffers from a decided lack of boobs, and features nary a whiff of hotel espionage. It does have lawyers, however. Lots and lots of them, actually, which may explain why most editors shunned the story in favor of fruitless online searches for grainy hotel video.
Hell, even ESPN has buried the story – despite the fact their own legal analyst has written the best synopsis of the issue thus far.
So what’s this big story that could permanently alter the landscape of professional sports? American Needle vs. the NFL.
Never heard of it, you say? Well, it’s a court case between a small merchandise company in Chicago and the country’s largest professional sports league, and it’s about to go before the U.S. Supreme Court. As for why the case could prove to be landmark, we turn to Lester Munson’s exhaustive analysis on ESPN.com:
“Experts agree that the case known as American Needle vs. NFL could easily be the most significant legal turning point in the history of American sports. If the high court rules in favor of the NFL, the development will be more important to the sports industry than Curt Flood’s battle against the reserve clause in the 1970s; than baseball’s collusion cases in the mid-’80s; than the NFL players union’s epic fight for free agency in a series of antitrust cases that stretched over a decade; and even than the enactment of the Sports Broadcasting Act in 1961, which is the legislation that is the foundation of the NFL’s television riches.”
In short, a legal victory for the NFL could lead to a rash of work stoppages in all the major professional leagues, and in the long run could signal the end of viability for player unions altogether. Think we’re overstating the levity of the case? Consider the fact that, according to Munson, leaders from all four of the major player unions (NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL) have been meeting weekly to work together to form a legal strategy. It’s not unheard of for the four entities to work together on an issue, but it certainly speaks to the level of collective concern among labor leaders.
At the core of the issue is whether the NFL can legally consider itself a “single entity”. The league’s attorneys will try to convince the Supreme Court that the NFL operates as one single unit competing against other entertainment avenues rather than 32 individual teams competing against one another. If they’re successful, the justices will essentially grant the NFL complete immunity from antitrust scrutiny. From there, the immunity would undoubtedly filter through the country’s other major professional leagues as well. A decision on the case could come as early as spring 2010.
So what would the ramifications be for sports fans if the NFL is successful in gutting the union? (For the record, many legal analysts are predicting the court will find in the league’s favor.) Salaries for players and coaches would drop significantly in all likelihood, but Munson warns fans not to expect a similar drop in ticket prices. After all, the NFL isn’t going to the lengths of arguing this case in front of the high court for us, they’re doing it for themselves. It’s about maximizing profits, pure and simple.
But enough doom and gloom. The NFL will still be on television every Sunday, and that’s all that matters … right?
Oy vey, it’s enough to give us a headache. Can’t we just talk about Erin Andrews’ hotel hooters again?
Related Posts:
3 Responses to “As Peepholegate rages, sports media misses ‘armageddon’”
Leave a Reply
 |
 |
Pooping all over the web …
Communication is the key to any relationship …
Doesn’t the MLB already have anti-trust exemption?
You are correct, J-Bone. The difference, IMO, is that baseball owners don’t trust each other any further than they can throw one another. They can’t work together. NFL owners have a proud history of solidarity. That’s why I think this case is worth watching.
“Think we’re overstating the levity of the case?”
You probably meant gravity, not levity. They’re opposites.