Report: NFLPA* will recommend no special treatment for named plaintiffs
After a hectic day of reports that had its roots in an ominous item on Sunday from Ron Borges of the Boston Herald, Borges now shovels dirt onto the storm of something other than dirt (but also brown) that he kicked up when suggesting that Patriots guard Logan Mankins would seek free agency or compensation in exchanging for agreeing to settle his portion of the Brady antitrust lawsuit.
Specifically, Borges reports that the NFLPA* has decided not to pursue special treatment for the named plaintiffs in the Brady case.
“After some debate over possible special relief for at least some of the 10 player-plaintiffs, it was determined it would be too cumbersome to try and work out individual deals,” Borges writes. “Since the bulk of plaintiffs were well-placed NFL veterans, the best way to go, it was decided, was to stick simply with the larger deal negotiated between the NFLPA and the league’s owners.”
The assertion comes after Borges, via Twitter, openly supported the ability of the 10 players to strike their own deal. Based on Borges’ latest, it’s a decision that actually has been made by the NFLPA* (a trade association that technically has no say in the matter), and not by the 10 named plaintiffs, who supposedly controlled the lawsuit.
The development represents the most graceful possible abandonment of efforts by the NFLPA* to get special treatment for four or more of the named plaintiffs. Whether due to the backlash from the 1,890 players who were listed on the complaint or the flat refusal of the league to do anything for men who, for the most part, did nothing to advance the case or negotiate the settlement, the issue -- the apparent brainchild of NFLPA* lawyer Jeffrey Kessler -- is now dead.