Four weeks into pro football's landmark free-agency case, there is little to indicate that the NFL will win. And commissioner Paul Tagliabue, despite an early confidence in the league's case, would like to settle out of court.
Although the NFL has not yet had a chance to explain why its restrictions on free agency are needed to preserve "competitive balance," the players have run up some strong points:- Despite NFL attorney Frank Rothman's attempts to portray them as greedy young men, the eight plaintiffs came across in their testimony as sincere, hard-working players, equally interested in gaining a say over where they play as in how much money they make.
"I felt the (free-agency) restrictions placed on me as a player were degrading and unfair," said San Diego Chargers lineman David Richards. "I didn't feel like I should be bought and sold like a commodity without considering my wishes."
- NFL executives have been cast as bullying control freaks. Agent Tom Condon testified that Kansas City Chiefs general manager Carl Peterson vowed not to re-sign one of his clients, tackle Irv Eatman, until Eatman dropped out of this lawsuit. Peterson will not even be called to rebut Condon's words.
Last week, NFL Players Association chief Gene Upshaw testified that, during 1987 contract negotiations, Dallas Cowboys president Tex Schramm compared the players to cattle and the owners to ranchers. Schramm, according to Upshaw, said, "We can always get more cattle to replace you."
- Stanford University economist Roger Noll diffused the league's argument that players are already abundantly paid by revealing figures showing that owners, too, make great money.
Noll used the NFL's own records to embarrass such owners as the Eagles' Norman Braman - whose $34.3 million in operating profits from 1985 to 1989 topped everyone else's.
The cumulative result of this testimony had attorneys representing the players fairly giddy at the end of last week. If they win this case, the NFL's Plan B free-agent system is dead.
Plan B, which began in February 1989, allows each team to "protect," or retain limited rights to, 37 of its players each season. The unprotected players become free agents from Feb. 1 to April 1, after which their rights revert to their original team.
If the plaintiffs - all of whom were protected under Plan B and argue that it unfairly blocked them from negotiating with other teams - win their case, hundreds of players will file copycat suits, and the NFL could quickly become a league of much freer, and far wealthier, employees.
Harold Henderson, the NFL's vice president for labor affairs, noted last week that the first month of the trial allowed the players to make their case.
"They've had their turn at bat, and I think we played strong defense," Henderson said. "I'm sure that when we get up to the plate, we'll score some runs."
However, Henderson's side appears to have a large deficit to make up. And that might be why there is renewed talk of a settlement attempt by NFL owners.
Over the next two weeks, the case will be put on hold as U.S. District Judge David Doty attends to other matters. The break appears to present one more opportunity for the two sides to come to a compromise before the case goes to the jury in August.
"We've had indications from the other side that they want to make another attempt (at settling)," Jim Quinn, the players' lead attorney, said last week. "That's about all I can say on the issue."
After the trial's first day, Tagliabue declared: "There's no need for a settlement now. We're going to win." Now, Tagliabue, more than anyone else, is seeking a settlement.
But his challenge lies not just in persuading players, but also in convincing 21 of 28 owners that compromise is in their interest. Too many owners are still so intent on crushing the players that they refuse to listen to reason.
If the owners are to make a comeback in the second half of this trial, their hope lies in persuading the eight-member jury (all women, just one football fan), that the NFL's stranglehold on free agency is required to preserve economic sanity and competitive balance.
To that end, the league will call a who's who of football experts: Don Shula, Chuck Noll, Mean Joe Greene, Jim Finks, George Young and Bobby Beathard among them. All will testify that allowing players to move freely (as they do in baseball) would lead to the competitive collapse of the NFL - or, at least, its small-market franchises.
Indeed, even if the owners win this case, they have already been damaged. Historically, the league has hidden its financial records as well as the Pentagon hides missile sites. Now, those records are public, potentially causing the NFL to lose bargaining leverage with the television networks.
Typically, however, some of the owners acted with disdain at the release of the figures and still don't understand why fans would get worked up about the numbers. Braman, contacted in France, declined to discuss his luxuriant profits, saying, "I could care less about what's going on at that trial in Minneapolis."
If he didn't care before, he had better start now.