Once again, i will be off social media today. I believe strongly in humanity and our ability to leave the world a better place than the one we entered. October 7, much like September 11, rebuts this worldview. I’ll leave this space for others’ reflections and not sports law.

1) Securing our Olympic pipeline does not require an NCAA antitrust exemption and limiting athletes’s rights; 2) If protecting women’s sports is truly important, enforce Title IX, do not further empower the entity the isn’t even subject to it.

You and me both, you and me both ;)

And this is the system that Congress is trying to ‘save,’ at the expense of revenue-generating athletes. 🤷‍♂️

To any journalist writing about how the #PCSA supposedly protects women’s and/or Olympic sports, you must talk to @DionneKoller. Years ago, Maria Cantwell handpicked Dionne as her choice to talk to Congress about college sports. I don’t think Dionne supports Cantwell’s new bill.

I know a lot about sports history. I did not know this:

And I would add that like you, @MarcEdelman, @McCannSportsLaw is one of the few commentators who is highly credible. You are both true academics who are disinterested and analytical, not simply advocates. A badly needed perspective in this policy process.

Excellent article by @McCannSportsLaw. Part of what makes Mike's work uniquely excellent on this topic is his institutional knowledge of both the history and case law involving Law v. NCAA.

The New York Knicks are NBA champions, which means increased sales for licensed Knicks apparel and other official merchandise. The team is now taking counterfeiters and pirates to court in a federal lawsuit. Details at @Sportico: sportico.com/law/analysis/20….

If you haven’t noticed, higher education is handling Trump II differently from Trump I. In Trump I, higher ed fought with Trump about moral values. In Trump II, they’ve traded in moral posturing for negotiating deals to their benefit and detriment of others. #PCSA is an example.

The Yankees logo is one of the strongest in the world, and Randy Levine sending out a letter endorsing the #PCSA on Yankees letterhead (as reported) implies team & league support. If you’re writing on the #PCSA and not probing why this happened, you’re not doing the job.

Back in the heyday of @nytimes, they’d be on top of this story. Murray Chass didn’t just accept on face value MLB’s “there is no collusion” claims. James Glanz didn’t just accept “DraftKings follows all laws.”Now, we need hard-investigative sports journalism more than ever.

If you are asking me whether baseball cutting its minor league system is a good thing for non-owner constituent groups, I’d say it’s about as good as tying out of market TV packages together, Internet blackouts, threats to contract the Twins. the 1994 work stoppage, early 1995 efforts to move all contracts to the league level, 1980s collusion, the split 1981 system, 1950s bans on players in the Mexican League, or the reserve system.

In early posts.

If you are a serious reporter covering the #PCSA, I think you need to ask Randy Levine: 1. Why are you involved; 2. Why are you writing memos on Yankees letterhead; and 3. Can you confirm point blank that if the #NCAA gets an exemption, #MLB will not contract minor league teams?

I would recommend you attend the Brooklyn Sports Law symposium on Friday November 6. The second panel is on antitrust, broadcasting and sports.

Doing some Sunday reading and getting ready to watch NFL football this afternoon. Also, I am thinking about how great of a job the #NFL and #NFLPA did negotiating their last CBA. Under the current agreement, so much of the past legal friction is gone. Good bargaining does that!

Very thoughtful list, and happy birthday. I knew you had a lot of career experience but had no idea you were anywhere close to 65. Must be the morning workouts!!!!

Finally, a decision in the PTPA's antitrust lawsuit against the worldwide tennis cartel, brought by players on the pro circuit who endure an 11-month season and are penalized for injuries. It's Ad Plaintiffs. The court denied motions to dismiss, motions to arbitrate, and jurisdictional challenges. This case has everything -- agreements to suppress prize money, restrictions on NIL deals, forced boycotts of competing tournaments, noncompetes, a healthy dose of retaliation at Wimbledon this summer. And the Australian Open already settled and agreed to cooperate with plaintiffs during discovery. The arbitration decision will bring controversy and probably be appealed within the month. Still a ways to go, but this is a big win. Full opinion in replies below. nytimes.com/athletic/7650744…

I’ve missed these two episodes, so thank you for sharing. I really enjoy listening to the podcast. Sherif and I were talking about it last week.