How was a lawyer who's never argued a case in court chosen to be the dean of Harvard Law School?

---

Most deans are academics who have moved over from professor land. Most of them have never had a real job.

(Oh, and many, if not most, lawyers ... the last time they were in court was when they were sworn into practice after passing the bar exam.)

---

Yeah only a small percentage of attorneys are trial attorneys.

---

I read the transcript of the oral arguments this morning.

What struck me was how incredibly ignorant (by their own admission) some of the justices are about the NFL. A couple of them resorted to baseball analogies, and it was all "New England-centric".

I suspect we should all be nervous about this. I didn't like some of the questions, but it's probably just me.

Ok, translate this stuff into layman's terms.. What is the Government want to do with the NFL that's wrong (in your opinion), Dave? I have a feeling clicking on the links in the original post will confuse and/or lose me.

---

i asked the same question formo - maybe you'll get an answer?!?

American Needle sued the NFL because the NFL will not allow individual teams to cut separate deals with different clothing manufacturers.

The NFL has won the right to do so in court, but American Needle has appealed all the way to the Supreme Court.

The reason that this is important to you as a fan:

The NFL says it is a single entity, comprised of the 32 teams. Their argument is akin to a single department store, with various departments serving the whole. (e.g. men's department, appliance dept. etc)

American needle, the solicitor general, and the union say that it is not. They say that each team should be able to act independently from the league.

Dependent upon what level of independence the Supreme Court were to grant to each team, it could literally destroy the league.

Don't think so?

One of the scenarios offered by one of the justices was this hypothetical...

...." So, if the Redskins and the Cowboys decided that it would be in their interests to schedule and play additional games against one another, this would be acceptable under (the doctrine proffered by one of the attorneys)-- ?

Again, it is all dependent upon the level of "independence" granted or not granted by the court to each team.

It gets complicated, but even if they totally avoid competition aspects, were they to "delve" into marketing aspects, they could easily endanger the shared TV revenue, where each team "cuts their own deal", if you will, with the networks. If this were to happen, you can bet that teams like Minnesota and Green Bay would be in serious jeopardy of being forced out of the league, or at a minimum, at a serious financial disadvantage to large market teams.

The meat of the matter is simple, as it applies to why we should care.

If the Supreme Court rules that the NFL is not a single entity, but rather 32 entities...it will boil down to "as it applies to what?"-- If it's just hats and shit...no real worries. Beyond that..to what degree?

I guess the Pack could play the Lions 16 times, if they wanted...

Thanks Foster. And great points.

---