Skip to content

NFL hasn’t decided whether to appeal supplemental revenue sharing ruling

Last Monday, a Special Master (not to be confused with an Ordinary Master, or a Jedi Master) ruled that the NFL cannot suspend its supplemental revenue sharing program.  The league has the right to appeal the ruling to Judge David S. Doty — and NFL spokesman Greg Aiello previously indicated that an appeal would indeed be filed.

But now it’s not so clear.

Daniel Kaplan of SportsBusiness Journal reports that Aiello has more recently said that a final decision has not been made regarding the requirement that the NFL continue to redistribute to qualifying small-market teams a portion of the money generated by large-market clubs.

“We indicated we would [appeal] but a final decision had not been made
at that point and certainly no appeal had been filed at that point and
still hasn’t.  Bottom line:  No decision has been made yet,” Aiello told Kaplan via e-mail.

Though we haven’t read the full text of the ruling (my insomnia has been under control lately), a league source tells us that, while the league’s intention was to ensure that supplemental revenue sharing would end with the removal of the salary cap and the salary floor, the documents led to a different outcome, due to a drafting error.

In other words, one of the lawyers screwed up.

So with the league already believing that Judge Doty favors the union, there’s simply no reason to push an issue that an objective assessment of the situation suggests the league will lose.

Permalink 7 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Legal, Rumor Mill, Top Stories, Union
7 Responses to “NFL hasn’t decided whether to appeal supplemental revenue sharing ruling”
  1. IAVikefan says: Feb 9, 2010 10:23 PM

    Awesome… between losing this case AND the Starcaps b.s. against the Williams Wall, maybe the NFL and Fuehrer Goodell will figure out their shizzer does, in fact, stink. Like everyone else’s.

  2. Bucforever says: Feb 9, 2010 10:38 PM

    Dose this mean the Bucs get more money to pay for some real talent?

  3. PurpleJeebus says: Feb 9, 2010 10:50 PM

    Wait a sec…after Jerruh Jones flapped his gums
    didn’t Goodell come out and say the league WOULDN’T end revenue sharing? But that would mean he was lying! *gasp*

  4. .VoxVeritas says: Feb 9, 2010 10:59 PM

    No, it means that Glaser gets more money to pay his bills.

  5. .VoxVeritas says: Feb 9, 2010 11:11 PM

    “Wait a sec…after Jerruh Jones flapped his gums
    didn’t Goodell come out and say the league WOULDN’T end revenue sharing? But that would mean he was lying!”
    You don’t even know what Jones said, do you? It’s never been about ending revenue sharing. It’s about dumping the fund for low-rent wannabes like the Vikings who can’t get any local support.

  6. smeghead says: Feb 9, 2010 11:38 PM

    So is Pete Rozelle’s grave spinning enough to power the east coast yet?

  7. WCRaider says: Feb 10, 2010 12:53 AM

    If the league appeals and wins this case, they would be setting precedent for the Players Association contention that the league is truly 32 separate businesses colluding to control players salaries.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!