[ad_1]
Jones is the most outspoken owner to oppose the protests, but he speaks for more than a few of his colleagues. He has also donated to President Trump, who has frequently attacked the owners for not firing players who protest and who publicly praised Jones for his hard-line stance.
Jones and the owners who stand with him do not appear willing to settle with Kaepernick, lest they look like they are backtracking, to say nothing of possibly giving him a job. They fear they would alienate the sizable subset of fans upset with the protesting players.
A settlement might also spark more attacks from the president, who has shown a proclivity to bludgeon companies he does not like, like technology corporations and news organizations. In theory, the president could lend support to a bill that surfaced in Congress that would prohibit public financing of sports stadiums.
“All of a sudden, the arms of politics could have a far longer reach, where the president can put his finger on the scale and influence how the N.F.L. and players resolve their conflicts,” said Charles Grantham, a former executive with the National Basketball Players Association who now teaches at the Center for Sport Management at Seton Hall University.
It is possible, Grantham said, that the arbitrator, in allowing the case to go forward, is in fact nudging the N.F.L. to settle. Like most judges, arbitrators prefer that the two sides come to their own conclusion. At the very least, “it does put pressure on the N.F.L. because it does allow Kaepernick to do more discovery, question witnesses and present this full case in front of the arbitrator,” said Gabe Feldman, who teaches sports law at Tulane University.
Then again, the N.F.L. could have settled the case months ago, but chose not to. Kaepernick, too, has shown no interest in that, and for now, at least, he appears to have won the right to continue his crusade.
[ad_2]
Source link
No comments:
Post a Comment