LOL @ PapaG for claiming that the UFL (which I'm sure none of us knew existed) is a viable competitor to the NFL. That's like saying that Microsoft Software Engineers (if Microsoft owned a 99.5% market share of the software business) who bitch about their working conditions and salary can go work at "Joe's Hack and Code Shack" in New Jersey because, hey, they do the same thing, right?
The legal experts I listened to said it was a 50/50 toss-up, and that the "need" portion of the decision was the most vulnerable component. I want football, the previous CBA seemed fine for the owners, so get it done! What I am interested in seeing regarding the NBA's lock-out is that a legitimate revenue option does exist for NBA players, and that is being paid well in a European League instead of in the NBA.
Only baseball has an anti-trust provision. Both the NFL and the NBA have seen rival leagues start up.
I agree with all of this. Repped! (You are now part of the rep circle jerk, so learn to love it even as you despise it.)
I never said that, chris. I said that another league existed, not that it was a viable competitor to the NFL. Stupid fucking post, as usual. All it is missing is you smearing me as a racist. A Microsoft engineer could always start their own software company. I know more than a few that have taken that route. Another dumb statement. You're on a roll!
The NFL has an antitrust exemption for negotiating TV rights as a league. You're right in that MLB is a true antitrust "monopoly", which is what I think Minstrel was getting at earlier.
I wasn't referring to an anti-trust provision in terms of prohibiting rival leagues. From what I've read, they (and the other sports leagues) are granted certain anti-trust protections allowing them to collectively bargain and negotiate deals as a single entity.
