LEGAL LINE GOES AUDIO

Loyal readers and draftbible regulars,


This week I'd like to introduce you to my weekly podcast. In addition to my columns, I'll be posting a weekly podcast so you can learn a little more about the legalities in football and the interesting link between sports and the law. Click on the link below and enjoy.




http://web.mac.com/daniels3636/iWeb/Site/Podcast/Podcast.html

BLING BUSTED ONCE AGAIN

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

When will the NFL hopefuls learn? Clearly, they did not read my story a few months back informing them of the millions of dollars at stake when they become eligible for the NFL Draft.

Every team in the league in last year's draft used a two-prong test in deciding what players to select. Ability was first. If the player passed that part, the team then evaluated their "character." I've never heard so much talk about "character" in the draft until this year.

Stud players were literally dropping out of the first round because teams were afraid that their so called "bad character" issues would tarnish the team in some way.

Fast forward to this week. Roughly 23 Florida State Seminoles decided to cheat on an online exam. They were caught. Now they have been suspended from participating in the Gaylord Music City Bowl. The academic scandal is still under investigation and more players may be punished. That's the least of their problems.

For legal reasons, the names of the players were not released. Eventually, we will know who was nabbed in this scandal and as I said before, the players caught stand to lose millions on draft day.
A players' individual character has never been more prevalent today in the NFL. The league's image is struggling and college players today think only ability and skills are the sole factors in playing on Sundays.

They couldn't be more wrong. And if these players are lucky enough to play ball in the pros, they'll realize how wrong they were come payday.

BOBBY PETRINO: MERCENARY FOR HIRE

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

Treason. It's defined as a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state. It's also known as the betrayal of trust or confidence. It is an act of dishonor and is potentially the most shameful crime one can commit. Anyone who audaciously commits such a heinous act is deemed a traitor.

Bobby Petrino is a traitor.

Bobby Petrino was recently convicted for treason in the court of public opinion after his shameful resignation from the Atlanta Falcons. Earlier this week, Petrino abandoned his depleted Falcon team to become the head coach of the Arkansas Razorbacks. The move was not only classless, but many saw it as a disgrace to the coaching world.

In 2006, Petrino inked a five-year deal with the Falcons worth $24 million and left the University of Louisville to jump to the pros. With expectations of coaching the now incarcerated Michael Vick, Petrino was left to mold a scarred and somewhat dejected Atlanta Falcon team. Thirteen games into the current season, Petrino stepped down as head coach. Petrino's resignation not only surprised his players, but his owner, Arthur Blank, was under the impression that Petrino had no intentions of leaving the Falcon organization any time soon.

It's perfectly acceptable to portray Petrino as a traitor. The way he went about resigning as head coach of the Falcons was downright egregious. In fact, he even told his owner that he was remaining on board as the Falcon's head coach a day before Blank appeared on Monday Night Football. Petrino blatantly lied and misrepresented his intentions about carrying out his contractual duties as the head coach of the Falcons.

What makes this story even worse is that Petrino notified his players of his resignation by affixing a letter to their lockers. He didn't even have the dignity to face each player and tell them he wasn't happy with his current job.

In a league where the NFL is sometimes referred to as "Not For Long," coaches frequently jump at other opportunities because they know job security is a rarity. Unfortunately, loyalty in sports is virtually obsolete these days. However, this does not excuse Petrino's utter disregard for his team, his colleagues and the Falcon organization.

Petrino's act of betrayal will not land him in any prison. He will most likely avoid any civil liabilities as a result of his resignation. But in the eyes of the sports world, Bobby Petrino's unethical tactics have branded him as a traitor.

BCS ATROCITY

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

By now we have heard every argument on the planet that rationalizes the need for a playoff in college football. The BCS doesn't work. Nothing new. But after the BCS draw was announced last week, the formula should be illegal.

I'm not going to discuss Ohio State allegedly backing into the National Championship with a weak schedule. Nor will I discuss LSU getting a National Championship bid with two losses. The major atrocity with the BCS involves Missouri.

Missouri was number two in the BCS going into their showdown with Kansas a few weeks ago. Following their victory, Missouri found themselves number one in the BCS. While Missouri was headed to the Big 12 title game against Oklahoma, Kansas's regular season ended with a disappointing loss.

Missouri entered the Big 12 Title game knowing that a win would solidify their bid to play in the BCS National Championship. What ensued was downright disastrous.

Missouri was beaten convincingly by a determined Oklahoma Sooner squad. Unfortunately for Missouri, that wasn't the disastrous part. The next day, the BCS Bowl games were announced on national television.

Kansas - the team that was beaten by Missouri and denied a shot at the Big 12 Title - received a bid to the Orange Bowl. The Missouri Tigers - the team that beat Kansas two weeks earlier - was robbed of their BCS hopes. Missouri was essentially punished by the BCS gods for beating Kansas and losing in the Big 12 Title.

Missouri was a victim of first degree robbery. They were penalized for reaching the Big 12 title game. How could Kansas, a team that is third at best in the Big 12 conference, reach a BCS Bowl game over Missouri?

WANTED FOR CRIMES IN SEVERAL STATES: BCS Formula. It has robbed several colleges and universities of bowl bid appearances, committed fraud on each school's fan base and is alleged to be armed with horrific logic. If you have any information on this highly dangerous criminal, please contact your local authorities.

SEAN TAYLOR'S ASSAILANTS FACING MURDER

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

Sean Taylor may have been fatally shot by one of the four suspects arrested last week, but all four will face felony murder and burglary charges. The four men charged in the slaying of Taylor are alleged to have acted in concert and all four have a lengthy criminal history.

If all four acted in concert and had a role in the burglary, each of them will be held accountable for Taylor's death. One must only have the intent to steal to commit a burglary. You don't actually have to steal something from the dwelling.

As for the charge of felony murder, it is based on the premise of "transferred intent" and even though the four men may not have had intentions to kill Taylor, their intent to burglarize the home with a loaded weapon is enough to satisfy the elements of felony murder. Their intent to burglarize is "transferred" to the act of killing Taylor.

Miami police are continuing to investigate but they are sure that the four charged had no intentions to kill Taylor. Unfortunately for them, a murder conviction is not only likely, but imminent.

WHAT IF BARRY BONDS PLAYED PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL?

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

Barry Bonds has faced just about everything over the last few years. Criticism. Controversy. Joy. Humiliation. Congress. The end result? An indictment by a federal grand jury. I was looking over a timeline of Barry's legal troubles over the years and I began to ponder what his punishment would be if he played in the National Football League.

October 23, 2003
Barry Bonds testifies before a Grand Jury about his alleged knowledge and dealings with BALCO, a laboratory accused of distributing performance enhancing drugs to professional baseball players – especially Bonds. He states he received “cream” and “clear” substances from BALCO but was told they were not steroids.

MLB’s Reaction: nothing

Roger Goodell’s Action: Goodell would have immediately had Bonds come into his Manhattan office for a meeting. He would have most certainly reiterated the steroid policy in the NFL and warned Bonds that a suspension is imminent if further investigation revealed steroid use.

February 17, 2004
Greg Anderson, Bonds’ longtime friend and personal trainer, is heavily investigated in the BALCO scandal and tells federal agents he gave steroids to several baseball players.

March 2, 2004
A newspaper article reports that Bonds, along with Jason Giambi, Gary Sheffield, Marvin Benard, Benito Santiago, Randy Velarde and Bill Romonowski received steroids from BALCO.

MLB’s Reaction: Commissioner Bud Selig finally meets with Bonds in private before a game in April of 2004. No suspension.

Roger Goodell’s Reaction: At this point, evidence is piling up fast against Bonds. Goodell would have required a drug test once a week during the season and in the off-season. He might also secretly put pressure on Bonds’ team’s owner to sever ties with Bonds until any investigation on him comes to an end.

April 8, 2005
Bonds is reported to be continuing to work out with Greg Anderson – who is awaiting trial on charges of distributing performance enhancing drugs.

MLB’s Reaction: MLB implements new steroid policy: 50 game suspension for first time offenders; 100-game ban for second time offenders; and a lifetime ban for a third violation. Nothing is done to Bonds.

Roger Goodell’s Reaction: Goodell’s disgust with Bonds continuing to associate himself with poor character individuals leads him to require that Bonds submit to a drug test before every single game.

2006 MLB Season
Bonds fails a drug test (MLB’s amphetamine policy). Bonds blames it on a teammate.

MLB’s Reaction: Under MLB’s policy, players are not identified for a first positive test for amphetamines.

Roger Goodell’s Reaction: Immediate suspension for at least four games. (In the NFL, that is equivalent to 1/4 of your regular season games).

November 15, 2007
Bonds is indicted by a federal grand jury on four counts of perjury and one count obstruction of justice.

MLB’s Reaction: Nothing formal as of yet.

Roger Goodell’s Reaction: Indefinite suspension with a possible ban from the game.

THE "PLUS-ONE" PHENOMENON - WHEN WILL COLLEGE FOOTBALL IMPLEMENT A PLUS-ONE SCENARIO?

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

Every year around this time, college football enthusiasts unite to discuss why the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) is arguably the most flawed system since Major League Baseball's Drug Testing Policy. The BCS formula was instituted in 1998 and was supposed to dispose of all controversy surrounding an undisputed national champion in college football. Unfortunately, it has generated a swell of criticism and each year numerous teams voice their disgust over the BCS ranking system.

The BCS uses three components in figuring a team's ranking: (1) the USA Today Coaches Poll; (2) the Harris Interactive College Football Poll; and (3) an average of six computer rankings (Anderson & Hester, Richard Billingsly, Colley Matrix, Kenneth Massey, Jeff Sagarin and Peter Wolfe) - a list virtually unknown to the average college football fan.

The problem that continues to arise at the end of each season is that there are usually more than two teams that feel they deserve a shot at the National Championship. College football has been unable to truly solve this problem and the debate over whether or not a playoff system should be implemented pops up every year.

Regardless of whether or not a playoff scenario is the answer, there is a misconception that colleges and universities have too much money to lose if a playoff system replaces the current 100 year old bowl system. This is completely inaccurate.

College football would only increase revenue with a potential playoff system. In fact, following the 2004 regular season, undefeated Auburn was left out of the National Championship and the BCS was heavily criticized. Bodog.com, a sports gambling website, offered 50 million dollars to sponsor a "real" National Championship game. This offer was rejected but left many corporate giants seeing dollar signs.

First of all, a playoff system comparable to college basketball will never happen. The so-called sixteen-team-playoff scenario is unrealistic and regular season games would lose importance. College football has the most exciting regular season in sports because every game matters. A sixteen-team-playoff would diminish the regular season because teams will still have a shot at the national title with sub par seasons.

The "Plus-One" scenario is much more likely to occur. Under this system, two of the four major bowl games (Rose, Sugar, Orange and Fiesta) would operate as semi-final games where the two winners would move on to face each other in a National Championship. But before it does, there are few legal barriers preventing this type of playoff from happening.

The BCS is not an individual entity. It's a combination of the four major bowls plus the recently added fifth bowl game, also known as the National Championship, which is played at the same site as one of four major bowl games (It rotates every year). There are several contracts in play at the current moment that essentially dictate who plays in the major bowl games. Most notably, the Rose Bowl's 300 million dollar contract with ABC, serves as the biggest hurdle in moving towards a "Plus-One" scenario.

The Rose Bowl's contract with ABC runs through 2014 and allows the Rose Bowl to retain their longstanding Big Ten Pac Ten matchup. Significantly, the Rose Bowl will host the National Championship in 2010. Therefore, the Rose Bowl committee has no interest in having a potential playoff - or "Plus-One" scenario - until after the 2010 National Championship. Additionally, the Rose Bowl would have to ease off it's preference to continuously invite only Big Ten and Pac Ten teams.

The BCS also has an exclusive four-year deal with Fox Sports. Under this contract, Fox retains all broadcasting rights to the four major bowl games through 2010 and the National Championship game through 2009.

As a result of these contracts, the BCS is in no position to change their current format. They would have to break their contracts with ABC and FOX or, at the least, restructure them in a way so that the National Championship game would be played by the two teams who were victorious in the previous semi-final game the week before.

What sounds like an extremely complicated mess, a "Plus-One" scenario would leave less controversy over who the number one team is. With over 100 Division 1-A teams in college football, a perfect system is virtually impossible. However, a team outside of the top four will have little or no argument for a chance at the title.

We've seen just about everything this season in college football and the battle to play in this year's National Championship is far from over. Following Ohio State's collapse last week, there are several teams that have a real shot at glory. Unfortunately, only two teams - as opposed to four in a "Plus-One" scenario - will get that shot.

In the end, breaking a legal binding contract of this nature would cost millions. A "Plus-One" scenario, while likely to happen at some point, cannot occur before 2010 - and may not happen until a few years after that. Until then, college football teams are at the hands of formula that may or may not be fair, but certainly not perfect.

BELICHICK'S 500K FINE: A TAX WRITE OFF?

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

By now, NFL fans are well aware of Spygate. Bill Belichick's arrogance finally caught up with him and his inability to follow the rules were exploited in week one of this season. I don't want to dwell on on the specifics of the incident as the media world has already beaten this topic to death.

What I do want to dwell on is the rumor lurking that Belichick might try to "write off" the 500K fine levied by the NFL as a business expense. Would Belichick actually try to pull this off? More importantly, can he legally deduct this fine as a business expense on his tax return?

According to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), "to be deductible, a business expense must be both ordinary and necessary. An ordinary expense is one that is common and accepted in your industry. A necessary expense is one that is helpful and appropriate for your trade or business." Leave it to the IRS to be as vague as possible. You could justify anything as an ordinary and necessary expense under these rules.

It's not inconceivable that one could make the argument that fines are "common and accepted" and "helpful and appropriate" in the NLF. Players and coaches are practically fined on a weekly basis. A fine is the most common form of punishment in the league. They are certainly common and undoubtedly appropriate. If the IRS were to agree with this, Belichick could successfully classify his fine as a business expense.

Tax Attorney Michael Mandale, Managing Partner of the The Mandale Law Firm, a boutique tax controversy resolution firm based out of Philadelphia, feels that Belichick will have no problem writing off the fine. "In my opinion, Belichick's [possible] deduction of the fine is arguably proper in that both his actions and the fine imposed against him are an ordinary and necessary part of the business in the NFL," said Attorney Mandale.

He went on to rationalize his theory by saying; "The organization pays it's coaches with the expectation that they will strive to be the best they can be. Spying on opponents is a direct way for individual coaches to excel and gain the edge that all competitors in the league are aiming for. Not surprisingly, the imposition of fines in all professional sports is an almost everyday occurrence; this particular fine is no exception to the trend."


When I asked if the fine would pass muster under the "necessary" prong required by the IRS, Attorney Mandale said; "In the professional sports industry, spying on opponents is a sometimes necessary business tactic which enhances both the coach's and team's ability to perform. The imposition of fines is simply a method through which the NFL aims to discourage unsportsmanlike conduct by team leaders."

This would make for quite an interesting move by Belichick. The fine was levied on him to punish him for his actions. The rationale of all fines are based on the theory of retribution. But if Belichick is able to write off this fine, he loses nothing financially. Zero monetary loss.

But would the public even find out if Belichick wrote the fine off?

"Every one's tax returns, celebrity or not, are treated by the IRS as confidential," said Attorney Mandale. "If his deduction were to be ruled as unqualified after his initial filing and he chose to seek redress in the courts, eventually, it would become a public record," he said in response to whether the public would ever find out.

Attorney Mandale feels it is likely that the IRS will allow the write off. "The NFL hands out fines on a regular basis. There is no doubt the IRS will see a tax write off of this kind as an ordinary and necessary expense within the NFL," said Attorney Mandale.

Belichick and the Patriots will also lose a draft pick in next year's draft. A draft pick and a hefty fine - Was it enough? Not if Belichick is able to itemize the fine as a business expense on his tax return.

Will we ever find out the truth? Probably not.

But if Belichick's arrogance is any indication, the IRS may be the deciders of his punishment, or lack thereof.



Attorney Michael Mandale can be contacted at:

The Mandale Law Firm, P.C.
1310 Industrial Blvd., Ste. 200
Southampton, PA 18966
http://www.mandalelaw.com/
1-888-LIEN-FIX
(215)-355-1687

THE ART OF THE NFL DRUG TEST

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

Earlier this month, the NFL's already damaged image took another shot when Denver running back Travis Henry tested positive for a banned substance...again. In 2005, Henry, a Titan at the time, was suspended four games for violating the league's substance abuse policy for a second time. Following this infraction, Henry could face a one-year suspension.

When an NFL player tests positive for a banned substance, the general assumption is that the player was randomly selected to undergo a drug test consisting of the player giving up a urine sample. Sounds pretty simple right? Well, not quite.

After Travis Henry was exposed yet again for allegedly failing another drug test, the league's policy became an issue. Although it is clearly stated in the NFL collective bargaining agreement, most people have no idea what the league's policy consists of. One would think that a player is randomly selected to submit a urine sample and if it tests positive for a banned substance, then that player is dealt with appropriately. Once again, not quite.

When a player is tested for banned substances in the NFL, he gives two samples - an "A" and a "B" sample. If the "A" sample tests positive, then the "B" sample is used to confirm the "A" sample. When the league attempts to confirm the "A" sample, the NFL's collective bargaining agreement allows the player to have an independent expert present while the league analyzes the "B" sample. The only requirement is the player's expert is prohibited from being affiliated with a laboratory.

Apparently, Henry's chosen expert was affiliated with a laboratory. Henry's chances of a successful defense are looking bleak. For a player who has a history of violating the league's substance abuse policy, Henry shouldn't even be in the vicinity of those using banned substances.

Regardless of Henry's outcome, the NFL's drug testing policy is somewhat of a anomaly. Why is it that you need two samples to confirm that a player tests positive or not? Sample "A" contains the same urine as sample "B." It seems perfectly legitimate to use one sample and the NFL's current policy only opens the door for player challenges.

Henry is sticking to his story that it was second-hand smoke that caused his "A" sample to test positive. And chances are, if and when the NFL tests the "B" sample, the result will be the same. As for the NFL drug policy, change might be the way to go.

TO SCALP OR NOT TO SCALP? THAT IS THE LEGAL QUESTION

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

I just got back from overseas and I couldn't help myself from researching this topic that almost every sports fan can identify with. While in London, I went to an English football match and paid double the face-value for a ticket. Some would say that's ludicrous. Others would say I got a good deal.

Take the New England Patriots. They have developed into a dynasty and their domination does not seem like it's ending anytime soon. Getting a ticket to a Patriots home game is near impossible, but not impossible. That's where the wonderful world of ticket scalping comes into play. Brokers are well aware of current markets. They know a hot ticket when they see it. They also know that die-hard fans will pay any amount to see their team take the gridiron.

Unfair? Maybe. Others would disagree and say that this is a capitalistic society and if people are willing to pay top-dollar for a game ticket, than so be it. But is it legal?

New York is the biggest market in the country for ticket scalpers. It wasn't until earlier this year that New York Governor Eliot Spitzer signed a bill eliminating all pricing restrictions on the resale of tickets. While ticket brokers can now charge whatever they please, the law does bar scalpers from operating within 1,500 feet of a large stadium. Therefore, to stay legal, scalpers in New York must sell their merchandise outside the confines of the stadium. Enter Stubhub, EBay, Craigslist and a plethora of on-line ticket brokers.

Other states have began to lift their price restrictions as well. Florida used to prohibit scalpers from selling a ticket for more than $1 above face value. In fact, it was a second degree misdemeanor. In June of 2006, Jeb Bush signed a bill essentially creating a free market system allowing brokers to charge any price.

Under Pennsylvania's old state law, only "licensed" brokers could resell tickets for a maximum of twenty-five percent above face value. Earlier this year, Governor Rendell removed the cap and simply required the seller to give a refund if the event is cancelled or the ticket is not valid upon entry. Good luck locating your friendly broker for a refund if you are denied entry to a Cowboys Eagles Monday Night showdown.

In contrast, the state of Massachusetts, home of the Patriots, Celtics, Bruins and Red Sox, has an antiscalping law that dates back to 1924. Their law prohibits scalpers from reselling tickets for more than $2 above face value. While this seems like an archaic law, it is rarely enforced and practically ignored.

Due to the constant increase in ticket prices, more and more states are beginning to lift restrictions off scalping. The rationale is that if people are willing to pay an astronomical amount for tickets, why prevent the broker from making a profit? It's simple supply and demand. Whether or not you agree with it, it's the reality in today's sports world.

The scalper will always be there. He's been there even when state's had laws preventing them from selling above face-value. He can be a cruel individual who won't negotiate under any terms. He can also be your key to the game. It's a love-hate relationship with the scalper - and while you can't be sure which arm or which leg he will be charging for that ticket, you can be sure he will co-exist with professional football forever.

TOP 10 NFL PLAYER ARRESTS SINCE 2005

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible


10. Bryant McNeal

McNeal was arrested on July 5, 2007 for a routine traffic stop. Police discovered that he had an outstanding warrant in Florida for defrauding a pawn broker and writing a bad check for $1,500. To make matters worse, he was driving with a suspended license and a busted headlight. Case is pending.

9. Justin Miller

Miller was arrested and charged with Assault on May 20, 2007. Miller allegedly hit a woman after he took a swing at a man who ducked inside a New York Nightclub.

8. Lionel Gates

Gates punched a pregnant woman in the face and was initially charged with felony battery in March of 2007. That was later dropped and he paid a $3,200 fine and had to attend anger management.

7. Lawrence Tynes

Tynes was arrested and charged with felony battery after he allegedly broke a bouncer's nose in a bar fight in August of 2005. Who said kickers were soft?

6. David Boston

Boston was arrested in October of 2005 after he struck a gate agent at a Vermont Airport when he was not allowed to board a flight. Boston pleaded no contest and paid a $500 fine.

5. Tommy Hendricks

Hendricks was arrested and charged with violating a restraining order filed by his ex wife. Hendricks was cut shortly after this incident.

4. Quintin Williams

Williams was arrested in 2005 and charged with a DUI and dragracing near the Miami Dolphins training facility. Williams was clocked at 111 mph. He pleaded down to reckless driving and receivedsix months probation. He was also cut from the Dolphins a day later.

3. Daunte Culpepper, Fred Smoot, Bryant McKinnie, Moe Williams

Following a night partying on cruise boat in 2005, these four men were charged with indecent conduct, disorderly conduct and lewd or lascivious conduct. The complaint alleged, among others, sex toy usage, topless lap dancing, public sex, etc. McKinnie and Smoot pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct, fined one game check by the NFL and given 48 hours community service.

2. AJ Nicholson

In June of 2006, Nicholson was arrested for burglarizing the apartment of a former teammate at Florida State. Nicholson pleaded no contest and received two years probation.

1. Michael Vick

Dogfighting. Enough said.

THE FINE HEARD ROUND THE WORLD

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

During last year's Superbowl media frenzy, Brian Urlacher waltzed up to a podium for an ordinary press conference. Since Urlacher and his Chicago Bears team were practicing throughout media week at the Superbowl, it was only natural that he refresh himself with a cool beverage in between practices. Urlacher also exchanged that helmet of his for a cap he owned. The cap he donned was a Vitamin Water cap and the beverage was the same. This is what the NFL would call a "fashion no-no."

Unlike Gatorade, Burger King, Snickers, Pepsi, Samsung, Visa, etc., Vitamin Water is not an official sponsor of the NFL. Therefore, it has no place on the NFL stage and other corporate sponsors stand to lose millions when players sport other logos. OK, understandable. Players cannot wear unofficially licensed gear at NFL events. A simple warning sounds reasonable. Maybe a small fine would be legitimate.

The NFL took a slightly different route. Roger Goodell decided that Mr. Urlacher's actions were the equivalent of a hundred times the amount that Justin Smith, defensive end for the Cincinnati Bengals, received for pleading guilty to a DUI in 2004.

Urlacher was slammed with a $100,000 fine for wearing the Vitamin Water hat and players must now think twice before attending a certified NFL event in that Gucci leisure suit. From a logical standpoint, wearing an unofficially licensed article of clothing doesn't even compare to a criminal offense. Urlacher most likely wore the hat to freely advertise the drink during media week, but to fine him 100K - that's not justice, it's first degree robbery.

Seriously though, when a player acts outside of the interests of the league, or commits a crime that would tarnish the league's image, fines are an easy way to punish offenders. Everyone knows that most fines are insignificant to players that rake in millions each year, but the fine still has to be justified. How does the NFL justify a $100,000 fine on Urlacher for wearing an unofficially licensed hat? Simple. They can't.

Urlacher wore the hat in a press conference during media week of the Superbowl. So yes, the spotlight is a bit brighter during the Superbowl. However, by hitting Urlacher with a major fine that hit news wires immediately and become a relatively large story, Vitamin Water got an enormous amount of publicity. The NFL actually bolstered Urlacher's original intention - to get Vitamin Water some face-time during the Superbowl!

The NFL today is a business. Corporate sponsors run the show and money is the only thing that talks. Original named stadiums are almost extinct and have been replaced by the likes of Gillette Stadium, Lincoln Financial Field, Bank of America Stadium and Monster Park (this one sounds more like an amusement park than a stadium). The fine that Urlacher received was completely ridiculous. Players should be fined that amount when violating the law, not for violating some NFL bylaw inspired by huge conglomerates.

NFL players, I leave you with one piece of legal advice - to protect your hard earned assets, lose the Prada shades in the post game press conference. Start banking with Bank of America instead of Chase. Fly Southwest because we all know Delta isn't official. Trade in that LG for a Samsung and leave that American Express at home, the NFL only accepts VISA. If it's a Coke that you crave, make it a Pepsi and please, whatever you do, trade in that BMW for a General Motors vehicle, just to be safe.

LEGAL LINE VOL. IX

JET TICKET HOLDERS: YOU HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF GETTING STRUCK BY LIGHTNING THAN WINNING THIS LAWSUIT AGAINST THE PATRIOTS
By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

Bill Belichick and the New England Patriots cannot seem to shake their appalling actions revealed earlier this season. In what is now referred to as "SpyGate," the videotaping scandal that raised serious questions about Belichick's credibility has inspired two lawyers from New Jersey to bring a class action lawsuit on behalf of Jet ticket holders and against Belichick and the Patriots.

The suit seeks over $184 million in damages and allegedly dates back to 2000, Belichick's first year as head coach with the Patriots. The suit basically claims that Jet ticket holders should be compensated for all games played in Giants stadium between the Jets and the Patriots as a result of the Patriots' fraudulent actions.

The major issue in this case is whether or not the Patriots have done this before and if so, for how long? There are so many problems with this lawsuit and so many unanswered questions that there is no conceivable way that this suit will be successful.

Problem 1
Lack of evidence. The suit claims that the Patriots have performed acts of fraud against the Jets since 2000. In a civil case, "clear and convincing evidence" is necessary for a favorable verdict. Under this standard, you must convince the trier of fact that it is substantially more likely than not that the thing is in fact true.

Last week, the NFL requested, obtained and destroyed all videotapes stemming from the incident involving Belichick and the Patriots. The NFL's reasoning for the destruction of the tapes was so that no other team could in any way access what was on the tapes.

Apparently, the lawyers bringing this lawsuit feel that they can prove their case with testimony claiming that the Patriots have done this before. To win this case, they need evidence that the Patriots performed fraud against the Jets in the past. Assuming they are unable to obtain any hard evidence, this suit will fade quick.

Problem 2
Valid testimony. Even if these lawyers can find individuals that are willing to testify that the Patriots have done this before, it does not necessarily make it "more likely than not" that the Patriots did it against the Jets in the past. Mere testimony that the Patriots acted fraudulently in the past is too vague. Couple this with a lack of hard evidence and this case has DISMISSED written all over it.

Problem 3
Incorrect Damages. In claiming damages, the lawyers used the number $61.8 million as the amount that it cost fans to attend Patriots - Jets games at Giants Stadium since 2000. The suit claims fraud under federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO) and New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, which allows for triple damages, or $184 million.

Let's hypothetically say that the Patriots engaged in spying against the Jets in the previous eight matchups at Giants Stadium. In each of the Patriots' wins, a good lawyer might be able to argue that Jet fans were deceived - and damaged - through the suspect tactics of Belichick and the Patriots. But what if the Patriots didn't win? Were the fans still damaged?

The Jets defeated the Patriots in 2000, by a score of 20-19. The fans at that game were not damaged. The Patriots quite possibly could have been spying the whole game and certainly broke NFL rules, but Jet fans walked out of Giant Stadium with a victory.

Problem 4
Proving fraud is extremely difficult. Under common law, fraud requires three elements: (1) a material false statement; (2) reliance on that statement; and (3) damages. Although the context here is a little different because we are not dealing with a statement, but rather an action, fraud essentially requires a falsity, reliance on that falsity and a loss of some sort.

Proving damages here will be incredibly hard. The integrity of the game may have been tarnished by Belichick and the Patriots' actions, but to say that the fans were damaged in some way is a weak argument. The lawyers are seeking reimbursement for ticket prices over the years, so proving that damage was done to each ticket holder is a must - and a long-shot at best.


New Jersey lawyers Carl Mayer and Bruce Afran have their work cut out for them. A civil suit against Bill Belichick and the Patriots was most likely inevitable, but this case is certainly not a winner. Proof is a necessity in any case and unfortunately, Mayer and Afran have very little, if any at all.

LEGAL LINE VOL. VIII

LEGAL LOCKS FOR 2007
By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

The point spread. The over-under. The ten-point teaser. And how could I forget, the infamous parlay. To those of you who don't know what I'm referring to, you either live under a rock or you are completely unaware of the fact that sports gambling has fueled the overwhelming success and popularity of professional football.

You disagree? Why do you think Monday Night Football continues to thrive on prime time television? Simple. It's the last chance for gamblers across the world to make some of the money back they lost the day before. Predicting games and "chasing the action" has made the NFL the most popular sport in this country.

In order to prosper in the world of sports gambling, one must be able to predict the outcomes. Therefore, your bankroll, or lack thereof, depends on your ability to predict the future. This week, I've decided to lay out some spreads and give you my "Legal Locks" of the 2007 season.

MICHAEL VICK'S JAIL SENTENCE Over/Under 2 years

Vick was recently back in the news earlier this week when a Surry County Grand Jury indicted him on state charges of running a dogfighting ring out of his home. Apparently, the state charges, which consist of: (1) unlawfully torturing and killing dogs; and (2) promoting dog fights, each carry maximum prison terms of five years. To make matters worse, Vick just recently tested positive for marijuana.

Vick just can't seem to catch a break. My "Legal Lock of the Week" is to take the Over on his jail sentence line of two years. If these state charges do in fact pan out and Vick's lawyers are unable to dispose of them, his original sentence of 12 - 18 months for his federal charges will be significantly increased. Vick's sentencing is scheduled to take place on December 10.

NUMBER OF BILL BELICHICK FOLLOWERS Over/Under 10 teams

Bill Belichick and the New England Patriots certainly broke the rules. They committed a form of espionage and attempted to gain an advantage by videotaping their opponents' defensive signals. The issue is not whether or not Belichick was cheating. The issue now is whether or not he was the only coach in the league who engaged in this type of conduct.

Coaches are constantly trying to gain an edge. Belichick just so happened to get caught. With the technology we have today, I wouldn't be surprised if teams are coming up with new forms of espionage everyday. My Legal Lock on this line is Over 10 teams. After seeing Belichick's extremely lenient punishment of $500,000, NFL coaches will not be deterred from cheating.

LANCE BRIGGS' BLOOD ALCOHOL CONTENT Over/Under .18%

Briggs, a linebacker for the Chicago Bears, made headlines a few months ago after Illinois police discovered his crashed Lamborghini on a highway. Briggs initially told police that his car was stolen, but later changed his story and told police that he was alone when he crashed his car. Briggs was charged with leaving the scene of an accident, failure to give immediate notice of an accident and improper lane usage. It's not exactly clear when the accident took place, but police discovered the wrecked car at around 3:15am. Briggs was not tested for drugs or alcohol because too much time had passed when police interviewed him.

As lawyers, we are trained to take all the facts and analyze the situation as a whole. Here's what we have: (1) a smashed up vehicle worth about $350,000; (2) vehicle was discovered at around 3:15am; (3) no driver at the scene; (4) conflicting stories about the accident from the owner of the vehicle.

If Briggs wasn't drinking that night, then why flee the scene? The blood alcohol content (BAC) legal limit in Illinois is .08%. My prediction is that Briggs was definitely drinking that night, but the question is how much? My Legal Lock on the Briggs incident is a blood alcohol content Under .18%. Briggs would have had to consume over ten drinks in a relatively short period of time. While that is certainly possible, I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.

LEGAL LOCK OF THE YEAR - 2 TEAM PARLAY

1. Terrell Owens will be fined more money than Chad Johnson this year for his Touchdown celebrations.

2. Terry "Tank" Johnson will find trouble in Dallas and will eventually get suspended by the league before the end of this season.


Risk-takers are drawn towards the uncertainty that every Sunday brings. While there is never a sure-shot in the NFL, one thing is definitely certain - the legal drama in the NFL for players and coaches alike will go on for years to come.

LEGAL LINE VOL. VII

FROM GENIUS TO CHEAT - DID BILL GET WHAT HE DESERVED?
By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

He was considered one of the smartest coaches in the NFL. He led the New England Patriots to Superbowl victories in 2001, 2003 and 2004. He's at the helm of one of the greatest professional sports teams in the current decade. He's also at the center of a major controversy involving his team's alleged cheating tactics. Bill Belichick, a man once regarded as a football genius, will now be remembered as a cheat.

A few weeks ago, a Patriots video assistant was caught by NFL officials taping the New York Jets' defensive signals. Following the game, the Jets made formal complaints to the league and Belichick and the Patriots were exploited by the league and the media.

While Belichick caught an incredible amount of criticism and was penalized financially by the league, Roger Goodell's decision not to suspend Belichick is under a great deal of scrutiny. For starters, Belichick was at the forefront of a major operation that gave his club an overwhelming advantage in an otherwise pure game. This is a serious scandal that may very well be running rampant in the NFL. Goodell needed to send a message to all coaches that this type of conduct will not be tolerated. His failure to punish Belichick severely could lead other coaches towards a path of deceit.

Historically, cheating has long been a problem in the sports world. Let's take a look back at some infamous cheats and compare their penalties to the likes of Bill Belichick's.

SAMMY SOSA

Steroid allegations on Sosa are endless, but mere speculation at this point. What Sosa was caught with in 2003 was a corked bat. Umpires discovered his "juiced" bat during a game and Sosa claimed he grabbed the bat "by mistake."

Sosa gained an advantage by corking his bat. Belichick gained an advantage by videotaping his opponent's defensive coaches, a move strictly prohibited by the NFL. Difference between the two? Nothing. They are both cheaters.

DAVID ROBERTSON

During a 1985 British Open qualifier, Robertson was caught moving his ball on the green to a more favorable spot closer to the hole. Players in the tournament eventually realized what was happening and quickly notified officials.

Belichick's actions weren't exactly as obvious as Robertson's, but they still tainted the game.

McLAREN RACING TEAM

In a scandal that has shocked the Formula One Racing world, the McLaren Team was found to have used leaked secret documents belonging to Ferrari. On top of a hefty fine, McLaren may face more punishment if the World Motor Sport Council finds further fraudulent conduct.

Both Belichick and McLaren Racing participated in a form of espionage. Both broke the rules of their respective sports and used their opponents' secretive information to advance their own goals.

Comparison of Punishments

Bill Belichick and the New England Patriots - Belichick was personally fined $500,000. The Patriots were fined an additional $250,000. The Patriots will also lose their first round draft pick if they make the playoffs. If they do not make the playoffs, they will lose their second and third round draft picks.

Sammy Sosa - Suspended eight games (reduced to seven after appeal).

David Robertson - Fined 20,000 pounds (equivalent to around $30,000 at the time) and banned from the PGA European Tour for 20 years.

McLaren Racing Team - Fined $100 Million and stripped of it's points in the "constructors' standings." (Until this point, McLaren had the point lead).

It seems obvious that Belichick's punishment was by far the lightest. In a written statement by Belichick following his embarrassing incident, he stated: "My interpretation of a rule in the [NFL] Constitution and Bylaws was incorrect." Maybe Belichick and the Patriots didn't think they were acting outside the rules when they taped the Jets' defensive signals. In the court of law, ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Luckily for Belichick, his fate did not rest in the hands of a Judge or jury. However, in the public eye, Belichick will be remembered among sports' most infamous cheats.

LEGAL LINE VOL. VI

COULD THE LEAGUE BE LIABLE FOR EVERETT'S INJURY?
By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

This past Sunday, football fans rejoiced with the start of the NFL regular season. We saw Peyton Manning dazzle us with three touchdown passes against the Saints. We saw Tom Brady do the same against the Jets. While Eagle fans cringed at the sight of two botched punt returns that cost them the game, Cowboy fans watched in awe as their golden boy Tony Romo put on a show against the Giants.

Rookies were born into the league and veterans reunited for another exciting football season. For one player however, his Sunday took a turn for the worst.

Kevin Everett, a second year reserve Tight End for the Bills, was severely injured after an attempted tackle during a kickoff to start the second half against the Broncos. In what has been categorized as a "catastrophic" and "life-threatening" spinal cord injury, Everett's incident stunned the football world and sent a serious reality check to every player in the league.

This isn't the first time something like this has happened and unfortunately, it probably won't be the last.

Professional football is a dangerous game. Each play has the potential for a bone-crushing hit by an athletic specimen whose goal is to inflict pain on his opponent. Injuries are inevitable, but can the league do more to prevent an injury like the one suffered by Everett this past weekend? Is the NFL doing enough to protect it's players from spinal injuries? Finally, could the league be found liable for Everett's injury?

The NFL has seen it's fair share of serious spinal injuries in the past. In 1991, Dennis Byrd of the Jets was left partially paralyzed after colliding with his teammate. He was physically unable to play football again. That same year, Mike Utley, a guard for the Lions, fractured his spine during a game and was also left paralyzed.

Most notably is Daryl Stingley, former wide receiver for the Patriots. In a pre-season game in 1978, Stingley was violently hit by Jack Tatum of the Raiders while trying to make a catch. Stingley shattered his fourth and fifth vertebrae and became a quadriplegic. Stingley was only 55 when he passed earlier this year. His quadriplegia was said to have contributed to his death.

The NFL has long recognized that leading a tackle with your head up will effectively decrease your chances of injury. In every team locker room, a cautionary sign is posted instructing players to keep their heads up when making a tackle - similar to the sign you see in restaurants instructing patrons and employees on how to conduct the Heimlich maneuver. Is this the best the league can do?

In the legal system, you are negligent and liable to another if you fail to exercise the standard of care that a reasonably prudent person would have exercised in a similar situation. The elements that make up negligence include: 1.) a duty; 2.) breach of that duty; 3.) causation; 4.) damages.

Could the league be found negligent in a court of law?

The NFL certainly has a duty to protect it's players. In a league that is inherently violent in nature, the NFL has a responsibility to implement anything that can safeguard it's players against unwarranted injury. The NFL does not satisfy their duty by hanging a sign in a locker room. In an effort to curtail spinal injuries in the future, the NFL should be trying to come up new ways to prevent these incidents.

On whether or not the league breached their duty, one could argue that their inaction on creating preventative measures for these types of injuries is a breach of the league's duty to protect it's players. While it may be a weak argument, the NFL should be studying, analyzing and testing whatever it can to decrease spinal injuries. If the NFL has not studied these injuries to the fullest extent, they are doing a disservice to their players.

The issue of causation is always the toughest to prove. In this situation, it would be incredibly difficult to show that the league's breach of it's duty to protect it's players actually caused Everett's injury. Here, inaction by the league is a very weak causational link and there are other variables that very well may have led to Everett's injury.

The damages that Everett has - and will have in the future - are endless. Although reports now say he will probably regain the ability to walk, Everett will most likely never see the football field again. His livelihood stripped from him in one instance. Everett was one of the select few that was privileged to have the talent and ability required for the NFL. Now, Everett faces a struggle to regain something that most of us take for granted; walking.

Playing the blame game in a situation like this is useless. In the courtroom, blame is translated into liability. While the league would probably not be found liable for Everett's injuries in a court of law, they certainly owe it to Everett to do everything they can to prevent these injuries in the future.

It's just a shame that it takes an incident like Everett's to open up the eyes of the league.

LEGAL LINE VOL. V

HIDDEN GEMS IN THE NFL'S COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT
By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

In 1993, the NFL owners and The NFL Players Association collaborated to form the league's Collective Bargaining Agreement. It is essentially the governing by-laws of the NFL and covers everything from free agency to a team's salary cap.

The NFL's Collective Bargaining Agreement is an amazing document. It is crafted with detail and precision. It's a rather large document and unlike Roger Goodell's Conduct Policy, the Collective Bargaining Agreement is clear and unambiguous. After reading it in entirety, I found a few interesting clauses that I wanted to share.


PRACTICE SQUAD SALARIES

Here's something you probably didn't know. The minimum salary requirement for a practice squad player is $4,700 per week, which includes the playoffs, if applicable. Not bad for a player who rarely dresses for an actual game.

UNSIGNED ROOKIES

What would happen if Jamarcus Russell and the Oakland Raiders fail to come to an agreement on his contract and negotiations break down mid-season? Common knowledge would lead one to believe Russell's only options are to sign with Oakland or force a trade. While these options are certainly available, the NFL's Collective Bargaining Agreement allows for another very interesting scenario.

Under Article XVI, entitled "College Draft," a rookie who fails to sign a contract with the team that drafted him can actually enter the subsequent year's NFL Draft. A rookie can only sign with the team that drafted him up until the day of the following year's draft. On that day, the unsigned rookie becomes eligible to be drafted by any team except the team that initially drafted him.

Section 4(b)(ii) of Article XVI states: "If a Drafted Rookie has not signed a Player Contract during the period from the date of such Draft to the thirteenth day prior to the first Sunday of the regular season: the Club that drafted the player is the only Club with which the player may sign a Player Contract until the day of the Draft in the subsequent League Year, at which time such player is eligible to be drafted in the subsequent League Year's Draft by any Club except the Club that drafted him in the initial Draft."

Jamarcus Russell is supposed to be the face and future of the Oakland Raiders. Imagine if he holds out until next year's draft and declares himself eligible for the 2008 NFL Draft. Through this clause, rookies can hold out an entire year in the hopes that they are drafted to a better team. While I have never seen it done before, it's certainly a possibility.

PLAYER FINES

We all know that violent hits, rambunctious end zone celebrations and unsportsmanlike conduct are common acts that trigger player fines in the NFL. The league treats these violations very seriously and the Collective Bargaining Agreement has an entire section on Club Discipline. Here are some fines you may not have been aware of:

Overweight - Players can actually be fined up to $400 per pound for exceeding the weight limit agreed upon in the player's contract. This fine can be assessed by a team up to two times a week.

Throwing the Football into the Stands - maximum fine of $1,500.

Skipping Mini-Camp - As evidenced by Michael Strahan's recent holdout, a player may be fined up to $14,000 per day, plus one week's regular season salary for each pre-season game missed. Strahan, a veteran defensive end for the New York Giants, was fined over $500,000 for his holdout this season.

You can view the NFL's Collective Bargaining Agreement on the NFL Players Association website at www.nflpa.org.

LEGAL LINE VOL. IV

WHEN FANTASY BECOMES A REALITY
By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible


Fantasy Sports has evolved into a billion dollar industry and has become an addiction for sports fans across the globe. It is estimated that some 16 million people participated in fantasy sports in 2006. There's even a Fantasy Sports Trade Association that was set up to address various issues and concerns facing the fantasy sports world. With fantasy sports popularity at an all time high, it is fantasy football that has led the movement.

The concept of it all is brilliant. You, the fan, become General Manager of a team you select in a mock, or unrealistic, draft (Hence the name "fantasy"). You select your team based on statistical probabilities and projections and the end result looks like something similar to a starting offense for the probowl.

Since most leagues consist of friends, colleagues or family members, bragging rights are at stake and your knowledge as a fantasy expert depend on your success in the league.

Bragging rights and reputation are not the only thing up for grabs in most fantasy football leagues. League fees or "buy ins" remain a major part of fantasy football. The first question that a potential league participant will ask when invited into a league is, "How much is the buy in?" Why is that? Because at the end of the season, the league champion not only proclaims himself as the guru of fantasy football, but he or she takes home a sizable cash prize made up of each participant's league fee.

If fantasy football has become so popular among fans, just think how popular it is among players. It's not a secret either. Often times during interviews, players will joke about how they like to see their opponents put up big numbers because that specific player is on their fantasy team. Now, if the majority of these fantasy leagues require a league fee that goes to the winner of the league, just think how large these fees are when the league consists of NFL players. With the league minimum at a mere $285,000, NFL players are most likely buying in for more than a few hundred.

The issue is not how much money is allegedly spent on these leagues by NFL players. The issue is whether or not an NFL player's participation in a fantasy football league for money is gambling. If so, it clearly violates a longstanding NFL principle that carries a lifetime ban as a penalty. In fact, in every player contract, it is expressly stated that "association with gamblers or gambling activities in a manner tending to bring discredit to the NFL" is conduct detrimental to the league. The penalty, as stated in each player contract: "severe penalties up to and including a fine and or suspension from the NFL for life."

Gambling is the risking of money on an outcome that is uncertain. Wagering on the Eagles to beat the Giants by seven is gambling. Wagering on the point total to exceed 44 points in the Bears Redskins game is gambling.

But what about fantasy football? What about the fact that an NFL player might have serious financial implications with how an opposing player fares in the game?

Take this hypothetical scenario:

Week 16. Lions at the Broncos. Under two minutes to play in the 4th Quarter. Broncos lead 31 - 7. Broncos star cornerback Champ Bailey is still in the ballgame. Bailey is probably the best corner in the league and rarely gives up an easy reception. He finds himself covering Calvin Johnson, rookie wide receiver - and coincidentally, Bailey's number two receiver on his fantasy team. Bailey knows that it's Championship week in his fantasy league where the cash prize is $100,000. Lions go deep to Johnson and Bailey fortuitously slips and blows his coverage. Johnson waltzes into the end zone for a 50 yard touchdown. Six points for the Lions. Eleven points for Bailey in his fantasy football league (50 yard reception = 5 points; touchdown = 6 points).

The Broncos already won the game, but one can see how easy it is to draw a negative inference from this scenario. Roger Goodell and NFL feel that a player's participation in a fantasy football league - even if it's for money - is not gambling. Others would beg to differ.

Currently, NFL players are free to participate in fantasy football. For those of you that claim to be fantasy experts, put yourself in the shoes of an NFL player. Would you be enticed to lay down on one play if it translated into an extra $100,000?

NFL: YOU ARE ON THE CLOCK

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

To the hardcore football fan, the NFL Draft is one of the most exciting events, outside of the regular season. Each pick is carefully considered in what is known as a team's "war room" and the preparation for the draft never ends. When Draft Day does finally arrive, players are born into the world of professional football. Some fans rejoice in anticipation of what is to come of their team's future, while others mock their team's front office in frustration on what they believe is a busted pick. It's a day filled with emotions and it is also a day where no team is exactly sure if they won or lost.

Well, the 2007 NFL Draft has come and gone, and it is not a team that is currently on the clock.

It is Roger Goodell and the NFL that are officially on the clock.

Late yesterday, Michael Vick's lawyers announced that he would be pleading guilty to federal conspiracy and dogfighting charges. He is set to plead guilty on Monday, August 27 and the NFL will inevitably follow up with retribution.

The million dollar question is: What will be Vick's penalty from the NFL?

So far, NFL officials have refused to comment on the situation. Goodell's decision will certainly set a major precedent, and while a suspension is imminent, there is a real possibility that Vick may be banned from the league. Goodell also has the power to punish the Falcons organization if he so pleases. From a legal standpoint, Goodell virtually has the power to punish Vick indefinitely. His conduct policy is so vague that he reigns supreme in the NFL. Furthermore, Vick will be pleading guilty, so there is no question of whether or not he committed the crimes charged against him.

As important as a team's draft pick is every year, Goodell's decision on how he handles this situation will be monumental. A punishment too lenient will leave Goodell open to heavy criticism from all angles. If he bans Vick from the league, many will say it's too harsh. Either way, Goodell's decision will be carefully analyzed and critiqued by players, coaches, analysts and the media. With Vick already admitting his wrongdoing, things are only going to get worse.

Mr. Commissioner, you're on the clock.

LEGAL LINE: VOL III

YOU THINK YOU KNOW, BUT YOU HAVE NO IDEA
By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

His face can be seen in just about every newspaper across the country. His name is about as recognizable as Tiger Woods. He's been featured on CNN, Fox News, Court TV and ESPN on the daily. If you haven't guessed yet, I am talking about the infamous Michael Vick and the enormous amount of publicity that he has gotten as a result of his alleged involvement in a dogfighting operation that took place on property he owned in Virginia.

I know that all of you are familiar with this story and frankly, you're probably sick of hearing about it. Or maybe you are just sick to your stomach when you hear about how grotesque the charges are. But even if you think you are totally familiar with the Vick situation, I thought I would outline some of the specifics in his case and provide you with a few pieces of information that you might not have known.

THE CHARGES
Vick, along with three other individuals, was indicted by a federal grand jury for conspiracy to travel in interstate commerce in aid of unlawful activities AND to sponsor a dog in an animal fighting venture; both violations of federal law. If convicted of the first charge, which is a violation of the "Travel Act," Vick faces a maximum of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine. If Vick is convicted on the dogfighting charge, he faces a maximum of one year in prison or a $100,000 fine – or both. Together, Vick is looking down the barrel at six years imprisonment and up to a $350,000 fine.

THE PROSECUTION'S BURDEN
Conspiracy is defined as an agreement by two or more persons to commit an unlawful act. Basically, the prosecution must prove that Vick knowingly, willfully and voluntarily entered into an agreement with his alleged accomplices to participate in the alleged dog fighting venture. The prosecution in this case, as in every criminal case, must prove Vick's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The jurors will be instructed at trial that if they have even the slightest doubt that Vick is guilty, they must acquit.

THE INDICTMENT
Let's just say this was not your run-of-the-mill indictment. At this point, all of you know the severity of the charges and have heard some of the stomach-turning acts performed on these dogs, but I'd like to reiterate some of the particular allegations stated in the actual indictment.

You know that Vick owns the property where the dog fighting venture took place and you know that Vick is alleged to have bankrolled this entire operation.

But did you know that he is alleged to have started this dog fighting venture in 2001 -- the same year he was selected as the first pick in the NFL Draft? It seems as though Vick's financial advisor must have misinterpreted how to invest his money.

You know that Vick and his associates are alleged to have killed dogs that did not perform well in fights?

But did you know that the methods used to kill these dogs included execution with a pistol, hanging, drowning and slamming the dog's body to the ground? In one instance, one of Vick's associates is alleged to have wet a dog down with water and electrocuted the animal. In a dog ring that consisted of approximately 54 pit bull terriers, Vick and his associates are alleged to have executed as many as eight of them.

Did you know that in an effort to breed more dogs, Vick and his associates are alleged to have used what is known as a "rape stand," in which an overly aggressive female dog's head was strapped down so that forced breeding could take place?

By now, you know that Vick and associates allegedly used these dogs to participate in fighting competitions and you are well aware that they gambled on each fight.

But did you know that one dog fight purse is alleged to have been as much as $26,000? This particular fight involved two pit bulls weighing approximately 35 pounds each.

HOW DID VICK GET CAUGHT?
In April of this year, Davon Boddie, a cousin of Vick's, was arrested on drug charges in Hampton, Virginia. Boddie gave police his home address, which – coincidentally -- was the same house that Vick and associates conducted their dogfighting operation. Police obtained a warrant to search Boddie's home to look for more evidence. The initial search led to a large scale probe that uncovered a major dog fighting enterprise known as "Bad Newz Kennels." Whether or not this search was legal under the 4th Amendment (Search and Seizure) will be something for the Judge to decide.

CIVIL CHARGES?
Just when things couldn't get any worse for Vick, South Carolina inmate Jonathan Lee Riches filed a civil suit against him in U.S. District Court in Richmond, VA. The suit claims that Vick stole two pit bulls from Riches' home in Florida and used them for dogfighting.

In one of the most comical, handwritten complaints I have ever read, the suit alleges that Vick sold Riches' dogs on EBAY and "used the proceeds to purchase missiles from the Iran government." It goes on to say that Vick "pled allegiance to Al-Qaeda," and just to make sure Riches wasn't leaving anything out, he claims that Vick is in the business of illegal steroids. Surprisingly, Riches is only seeking a mere $63 billion, "backed by gold and silver, delivered via UPS," to the front of the prison where he currently resides. (A copy of the complaint can be seen at http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/riches_jonathan_file.pdf.

THE BOTTOM LINE
With his co-defendants already striking deals with the prosecution, Vick now faces the dilemma of whether or not to cop a plea himself. In a case where the evidence seems overwhelming, the prosecution is going to have to be extremely careful in the furtherance of their case. We all remember the Duke Lacrosse scandal. In the public eye, those boys were guilty almost immediately.

It's very easy for people to make assumptions before hearing all of the evidence. In law, we are taught to never assume. Therefore, I leave you with one thought: Michael Vick, a rare talent that struck fear into the eyes of opposing defenses, is now facing the real possibility that he may never play in the NFL again.

THE LEGAL LINE: VOL II

HOW MUCH FOR THAT MISDEMEANOR?
By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

We hear about it every year. Exceptional college players who are extremely gifted on the field but unable to stay out of trouble off the field. While these players may be athletic specimens and sure-shot top picks in the NFL Draft, a player's draft stock is no longer based solely on athletic ability alone. Teams are now placing heavy weight on taking solid, good character individuals. 40-yard dash times and performance in the combine are not the only factors going into a draft-day selection. Apparently, the Cincinnati Bengals didn't get the memo.

A player's criminal history can have a disastrous effect on where they are selected in the draft and the financial implications are mind-blowing. The difference between a top-five pick and late first-rounder is about $30-40 million in contract money. For instance, Mario Williams, the first player selected in the 2006 draft, received approximately $41 million for a six-year deal. Joseph Addai, selected 30th overall, received $7.5 million for a five-year deal. Its no secret that top-10 players make significantly more money than the rest of the draft pool.

To the college player, a misdemeanor possession of marijuana or the driving under the influence conviction may seem like nothing big, but if that player is highly touted as a top prospect for the NFL, these petty crimes cost them millions of dollars in contract money. Take Brandon Meriweather for example. A defensive back out of the University of Miami, Meriweather has exceptional speed and great vision. He is a physical hitter and is able to play cornerback as well as safety. His talent and versatility made him a potential top-10 pick.

While Meriweather's ability made him one of the most sought-after defensive backs on the draft board, his character issues damaged his draft stock. On October 14, 2006, Miami and Florida International engaged in a vicious fight during the game which resulted in 31 player suspensions. The fight was fully caught on camera and Meriweather was shown stomping on several FIU players. (The link is a clip of the fight, Meriweather is number 19 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jWWC_ozN7E).

That same year, Meriweather was involved in a gun-wielding incident in which he returned fire on assailants in what was dubbed as a botched robbery attempt. Although Miami police said Meriweather did nothing illegal, the combination of this incident and his violent stomping of several FIU players caused many teams to question Meriweather's character. Would he be able to stay out of trouble? Will he be able to control himself in the NFL? These kinds of questions led to Meriweather plummeting to the 24th pick in the first round.

Meriweather was recently signed by the Patriots and is slated to make about $8.8 million on a five-year deal. His contract's maximum value is worth $11.5 million with incentives. While this seems like a nice payday, if Meriweather was selected in the top-10 of this years draft, he probably could have signed for at least an additional $20 million.

Flashback to 1995. A player by the name of Warren Sapp was gaining the attention of just about every scout in the NFL. A nasty defensive end out of the University of Miami, Sapp was given the Lombardi Award as the nation's best lineman in 1994. Sapp was projected by some to be the 1st-overall-selection in the 1995 draft, but word soon got out that Sapp failed two drug tests at the NFL combine; one for marijuana and one for cocaine. The damage was catastrophic. Even though the NFL later stated that Sapp never tested positive for cocaine, the drug rumors surrounding him caused him to slip down to the 12th pick in the draft. Sapp lost out on top-five money, which was estimated at around a $4 million dollar contract. Even Kevin Carter was selected higher than Sapp. Who?

While these players still make ridiculous money playing in the NFL, the money they could have potentially made is astounding. Therefore, I have decided to come up with a simple formula that will show how much money each incident actually costs these players in terms of contract value. The final number has been deemed the "BLING BUSTER." The formula works like this:

(Average max contract value of top-10 draft picks) - (Actual player's max value contract) = BLING BUSTER; or

(Average max contract value of picks 11 through 32) - (Actual player's max value contract) = BLING BUSTER

This number reflects the amount of money they lost in contract value had they been selected in the first round of this year's draft. Basically, its the number that each incident / crime cost them. Keep in mind, some players in the 07' draft have yet to be signed and although it would affect the total difference, I did not want to speculate so I did not include their unknown contract values.

Average maximum contract value of 2007 top-10 draft picks: $40.64 Million
Average maximum contract value of 2007 draft picks 11 - 32: $13.25 Million

Brandon Meriweather S - University of Miami
Projected top-10 pick but slipped in the draft due to horrid sights of him stomping on FIU players during a regular season game and a gun wielding incident. New England eventually took him with the 24th pick in the first round, but Meriweather missed out on a boatload of cash. Meriweather signed a deal worth up to $11.5 million with incentives. Many scouts projected him as the best safety in the draft.

Bling Buster Formula: (40.64 million) - (11.5 million) = 29.14 million

I bet you Meriweather didn't realize that "stomping the yard" would cost him almost $30 million. He could have produced the entire film with that kind of money.

Tarrell Brown CB - University of Texas
Probably the most skilled corner on the team during his career at Texas. He started for three straight years and had the possibility of going in the first round were it not for his off the field problems. Brown was drafted by the 49ers in the 5th round, 147th overall. In 2006, Brown was arrested and charged with misdemeanor drug and weapon charges. The gun charge, a Class A misdemeanor, carried a maximum one year jail sentence and a $4,000 fine. The drug charge for possession of marijuana, a Class B misdemeanor, carried a maximum sentence of 180 days in jail and a $2,000 fine. That totals up to $6,000. But lets see how much money these misdemeanors actually cost him in contract dollars if he were selected in the back of the first round. (I was unable to obtain Brown's actual contract but I know he signed a four year deal with the 49ers. Based on previous years, I assumed his contract was worth around $2 million).

Bling Buster Formula: (13.25 million) - (2 million) = 11.25 million

This kid is supposed to be legit and many scouts believe he will be a star in this league. If he can stay out of trouble, look for Brown to see some serious money in a few years if he can lose the guns and kick the dope.

Marcus Thomas DT - University of Florida
At 6'3 and 296 pounds, Thomas was a beast for Florida logging 14 sacks in 41 games. His draft stock plummeted when he failed two marijuana tests. He was later kicked off the Gator squad for missing curfew. Thomas was selected by the Broncos with the 22nd pick in the 4th round. He has signed a four year deal with the Broncos worth a reported $3 million. If not for these incidents, Thomas was a sure-shot mid - to - late first rounder.

Bling Buster Formula: (13.25 million) - (3 million) = 10.25 million

Thomas may think he got away with failing a few drug tests, but according to my calculations, Thomas lost roughly $10 million. Rumor has it that Thomas has been taking voluntary drug tests weekly. We'll see how long that lasts.

A few notables I had to throw in.......

Ramonce Taylor RB - University of Texas
Taylor was a phenomenal offensive weapon for the Horns and logged 15 touchdowns last season. Taylor's story is one my favorites. In 2006, after a party in Belton, TX, a fight broke out involving about 100 people. That sounds more like a small battle to me. Anyway, after someone allegedly vandalized his car, Taylor phoned the police. When the police arrived, they asked if they could search Taylor's vehicle. Taylor gave them permission and the police found five pounds of marijuana in the car. Texas law states that possessing 5 - 50 pounds of marijuana carries a sentence of 2 to 10 years in prison and up to a $10,000 fine. Taylor was listed as a "sleeper" in this year's draft, but this incident hurt his stock badly and Taylor went undrafted.

Marcus Vick QB - Virginia Tech (2006 Draft Prospect - undrafted)
Where do I begin? With his brother becoming a $100 million man, Va Tech looked to Marcus Vick to live up to the Mike Vick legacy. Marcus was touted as a better passer than his older brother and his incredible athletic ability made him an immediate offensive threat. Unfortunately, Marcus had a knack for breaking the law and racked up an enormous amount of legal problems. Charges included supplying alcohol to minors, possession of marijuana and reckless driving, to name a few. Vick ended his collegiate career in the 2006 Gator Bowl when he stomped on the calf of a Louisville player after a play.

Following the game, Vick was immediately and permanently kicked off the team. He later signed with the Miami Dophins in 2006 and made $275,000 for the season. Not bad for a guy with a criminal record longer than Pacman Jones.

The lesson to be learned here: Screw up in college and it'll cost you in the draft. Dropping in the draft costs millions of dollars and although these players get a second chance, many of them succumb to the dark side of their pasts.

THE LEGAL LINE: VOL. I

LIVING IN ROGER'S WORLD
By Scott Daniels, NFL Draft Bible

In an image driven league, the NFL took major steps to clean up its act this year when Commissioner Roger Goodell announced his new Personal Conduct Policy in April. The Policy is a measure of deterrence against the appalling off the field conduct by players that has plagued the league of late. With the Policy, Goodell made it clear that detrimental conduct off the field will not be tolerated. After countless arrests and numerous off the field incidents in 2006, Goodell, who got his start as an administrative intern under then NFL Commissioner Pete Rozelle, is attempting to weather this storm by delivering harsh penalties and swift action. Just ask Pacman Jones and Chris Henry. A year long suspension for Jones and eight games for Henry sent shock waves throughout the league and Goodell's message was loud and clear: Tarnish my league and you'll suffer the consequences.

While Goodell's Policy sounds like an effective way to clean up the NFL's image problems, it raises numerous legal issues that have already spurned controversy throughout the league. I believe that a rigid conduct policy is necessary in a league that has seen its fair share of criminal activity off the field, but the legality of the policy is very suspect. Is Goodell's Policy legal? Does he have the right to suspend players before they are convicted in a court of law? The answer to both questions is Yes and players in the NFL are quickly realizing that their new Commissioner is not afraid to exercise his power.

I am not questioning the rationale behind the Policy. It's absolutely going to make players think twice before acting outside the law. But does it go too far? What happened to the notion of "Innocent until proven guilty?" What about a players' right to due process and his opportunity to defend himself in the court of law? Well, under this new conduct Policy, a player's innocence is no longer presumed.

The major issue I see with this Policy is that a player may lose his ability to be gainfully employed even before he is found guilty of anything. Under the new Policy, a player can be punished by the league before he is convicted of a crime. In fact, there is a clause entitled "Persons Charged with Criminal Activity." According to this section, if a player is simply charged with a criminal matter, he is required to undergo a clinical evaluation and possibly even counseling. During the player's evaluation and / or counseling, if that player is arrested for or charged with additional criminal activity, he has committed "conduct detrimental to the team" and can be suspended or fined at the discretion of the Commissioner.

Goodell has essentially tossed out the idea that some of these players might actually be innocent of the crimes they are charged with. A player who is arrested or charged several times certainly creates the inference that they might not be a model citizen, however, justice cannot be had without listening to all the facts. The presumption of innocence is a pillar of not only the American Legal system, but our society. To suspend or fine a player before he is convicted of a crime contradicts the longstanding idea that a man is always presumed innocent until proven otherwise.

As for the legality of the policy itself, since the NFL is a private entity, Goodell has complete autonomy to create such a policy. While Goodell did consult with Gene Upshaw, the head of the NFL Player's Association and established a six player advisory committee to discuss conduct and disciplinary measures, this Policy was not collectively bargained for, nor was it expressly agreed upon by the entire league. But it doesn't matter because the Policy didn't have to be.

Since the inception of Goodell's new Policy, 3 players have been suspended for off field incidents. The bottom line is, playing in the NFL is a privilege, not a right. Say goodbye to the days of twenty thousand dollar fines that mean nothing to the stud wide out who gets arrested, charged and convicted for driving under the influence. Say hello to Roger Goodell and an incredibly strict conduct policy that has the potential of damaging a truly innocent player's future in the NFL.

Scott Daniels is a NYC Attorney and Co-Founder of The Legal Line. Read about the legal perspective of football politics as one of New York’s premier lawyers provides you with insight and analysis that even Mike Vick would pay for.

Email: scott@nfldraftbible.com

WELCOME TO THE LEGAL LINE!

Scott Daniels and Rick Serritella have partnered up to deliver "The Legal Line", a unique perspective from NYC attorney Scott Daniels as he provides legal insight into the world of Law and Football.

Feel free to contact us and let us know how we are doing or any suggestions you may have.

-RIC
ric@nfldraftbible.com