Speaker 1: Cu Boom. If you thought four hours a day, minutes
Speaker 1: a week was enough, think again. He's the last remnants
Speaker 1: of the old Republic, a sole fashion of fairness. He
Speaker 1: treats crackheads in the ghetto cutter the same as the
Speaker 1: rich pill poppers in the penthouse the clearing House of
Speaker 1: hot takes break free for something special. The Fifth Hour
Speaker 1: with Ben Maller starts right now in the air everywhere.
Speaker 1: We are back at it. Another weekend has kicked off.
Speaker 1: It is the Fifth Hour with Ben Maller and Danny
Speaker 1: g back again to save you from the boredom on
Speaker 1: the weekend. I know it can be tough, not a
Speaker 1: lot of options to choose from, so we are here
Speaker 1: for you and it is just I on the Friday podcast,
Speaker 1: Big Ben, and we thank you for supporting the radio show.
Speaker 1: And as you know by now, this podcast is a
Speaker 1: spin off of the Ben Maller radio show, which is
Speaker 1: available on terrestrial radio. This only available in the podcast format.
Speaker 1: As we begin to new this weekend and the biggest
Speaker 1: story in all of sports right now involves the Miami Dolphins,
Speaker 1: a former Dolphin coach, and a bunch of NFL teams
Speaker 1: that are scorming right now. A bunch of NFL owners
Speaker 1: that are scorming right now. This Brian Flores story is insane,
Speaker 1: and who better to talk about it than a guy
Speaker 1: by the name of Dan lust. Dan joins the series
Speaker 1: a practicing sports attorney. You've heard him on some Fox
Speaker 1: Sports radio shows. He's been all over the place, you
Speaker 1: name it, he's popped up. This has been a big
Speaker 1: week for him, as he has been on television and
Speaker 1: radio doing a number of interviews. Uh, he is a
Speaker 1: practicing attorney, as he said, but also he's a sports
Speaker 1: law profess Sir at New York Law School. He's got
Speaker 1: the gift for gab. I first heard of him with
Speaker 1: my friend Tony Bruno a couple of years back. I said,
Speaker 1: this guy is good, and I'm glad that finally we
Speaker 1: get to touch base and to have a conversation here,
Speaker 1: me and him. So let's give it up now to
Speaker 1: Dan Lusti also hosts a very popular sports law podcast,
Speaker 1: his own podcast, Conduct Detrimental. So Dan, let's get right
Speaker 1: into it, the story of the week involving Brian Flores.
Speaker 1: You've been all over it providing some great perspective on this.
Speaker 1: A lot of money involved, a lot of reputations involved
Speaker 1: in this depending on how far it goes, so on
Speaker 1: a scale of one to ten, with ten being as
Speaker 1: big as it possibly can get. Dan, how massive is
Speaker 1: this Brian Flores story? I think you gotta lean towards
Speaker 1: a ten. And right, Um, you know it's obviously there's
Speaker 1: always the possibility the case gets dismissed and you know
Speaker 1: you kind of lose on a procedural ground. But the allegations, right, Uh,
Speaker 1: it's somebody calling out the NFL, not not indirectly. Right. Um,
Speaker 1: you can talk about the Colin kaeperni case. Was it
Speaker 1: a case about race kind of you know, but it
Speaker 1: was really a case without kneeling. Um, it was not
Speaker 1: really a case that hit directly to the core. Um.
Speaker 1: And that's what Brian Flores is doing. And then, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, I'll give you one step further. You know,
Speaker 1: the Colin Kaepernick case, right was one person versus thirty
Speaker 1: two teams. Uh. The Kirk Flood case, another v case
Speaker 1: in our our sports little history books, was one guy
Speaker 1: versus the league. This is a class action lawsuit, which
Speaker 1: doesn't mean it's not just Ryan Flores. He's inviting coaches
Speaker 1: of the past, Right that maybe we're wrong. Be it
Speaker 1: Marvin Lewis, be it um you know through Jackson Vatube
Speaker 1: called blow some of those guys he explicitly references isn't complaint.
Speaker 1: So this is gonna be uh, you know, maybe tens,
Speaker 1: if not hundreds of people joining Brian Flores on the sideline,
Speaker 1: no fun attended and going after the NFL. From from
Speaker 1: an umbers perspective, this could be on you know, I
Speaker 1: don't I'm not wanting to give hyperbole, but from a
Speaker 1: numbers perspective, could be the biggest sports a case of
Speaker 1: all time. Wow. Yeah, And I trying to wrap my
Speaker 1: head around it. And you know, reading some of stuff
Speaker 1: and you have you have great information. I know you've
Speaker 1: got a podcast that will will plug as well when
Speaker 1: you took a deep dive in this. But how long
Speaker 1: as a lawyer and someone that teaches law, then this
Speaker 1: seemed to come together pretty quick? How long do you
Speaker 1: think that Brian Flores was working on this behind the
Speaker 1: scenes because the Giants hired a coach and within a
Speaker 1: couple of days boom this lawsuits out. So how fast
Speaker 1: do you think from the time that the lawyers contacted
Speaker 1: him or recontacted the lawyers that they were able to
Speaker 1: turn this thing around very quickly. Um, you know, we
Speaker 1: could talk about the timing. There was something intriguing to
Speaker 1: me about the timing element um independent of the substance.
Speaker 1: So they turned this around very quickly. Right, you know,
Speaker 1: it's less than a week they at this thing out. Now.
Speaker 1: The question that I have right, like, why would you
Speaker 1: have filed this lawsuit on you know, on this week? Right?
Speaker 1: The statue of limitations for something this is sometimes years,
Speaker 1: Like what was the benefit of doing that? Mind you Also,
Speaker 1: laws is in the middle of interviewing for the Saints
Speaker 1: head coaching position and the Texans head coaching musician. The
Speaker 1: day this lawsuit was filed and became public, he had
Speaker 1: an interview with the New Orleans Saints. So I'm like,
Speaker 1: you know, the lawyer in me because I don't know
Speaker 1: if it was my client, I'd say, hey, why don't
Speaker 1: you wait until you get those jobs? So you don't
Speaker 1: care if you get the Texans job at the Saints job,
Speaker 1: maybe you know, maybe you want to consider not doing right.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure you have to have that conversation, um,
Speaker 1: and then the other way around if you don't get
Speaker 1: those jobs, wouldn't that make your case even stronger. Right
Speaker 1: if you if you don't get the Texans job and
Speaker 1: you're not competing against Brian Table, there's no one you
Speaker 1: know of that name caliber and you don't get it,
Speaker 1: doesn't that say more? So? Then I thought about I
Speaker 1: had this epiphany, as you know, I've been kind of doing,
Speaker 1: you know, the media tour. I had this epiphany yesterday,
Speaker 1: and I'm like, that's why they did it, because right now,
Speaker 1: all eyes around the Houston Texans, you know, they you know,
Speaker 1: people have considered him the front under for the position,
Speaker 1: and I imagine to some except with the Saints as well.
Speaker 1: But now if he doesn't get it, we're going to
Speaker 1: see you play out in real time. Right whoever they
Speaker 1: announced for that job, be Flores or whoever else, it's
Speaker 1: gonna put exponentially more pressure and more attention on this lawsuit.
Speaker 1: That's why I thought that time it was interesting. It
Speaker 1: was kind of rushed, you know, by all means, no
Speaker 1: one files a lawsuit within like five days of the
Speaker 1: thing happening. It's kind of unheard of. Um, But that's
Speaker 1: why they did it. That's why two law firms around this,
Speaker 1: because it was a really unsure, intensive job to get
Speaker 1: this filed, have the media all lined up, uh, and
Speaker 1: now kind of sitting pretty as guys like Marvin Lewis
Speaker 1: speak out on your behalf and Hugh Jackson and you
Speaker 1: have a super Bowl two weeks away and you're in
Speaker 1: the middle of Black History Month. I think it was
Speaker 1: very well orchestrated from a PR perspective to get this filed. Um,
Speaker 1: you know when they did to two week lead up
Speaker 1: to the Super Bowl. Yeah, and with that, with that
Speaker 1: is the backup from the lawyer's perspective, because you're you
Speaker 1: know again, you're the lawyer. So how does this work financially?
Speaker 1: Is Brian Flores paying the lawyers? Is this just a
Speaker 1: case for publicity because it's a high profocus. I've read
Speaker 1: the law firm these guys. Uh. One of the main
Speaker 1: guys was tied to one of the Harvey Weinstein cases.
Speaker 1: So this is not, you know, some small potatoes operation.
Speaker 1: What do you where do you think the money is going?
Speaker 1: Do you think they're just gonna wait and see what
Speaker 1: the result is and get some of the money out
Speaker 1: of that. How's the financial part of this? So you know,
Speaker 1: I don't the charge is I don't think we know,
Speaker 1: But there's one of two ways the cases are normally
Speaker 1: retained it and you know, as you know, I'm a
Speaker 1: full time practicing attorney. So it's a conversation we have
Speaker 1: when a case walks in the door. Could be a
Speaker 1: good case, dead case. If it's not a great case, right,
Speaker 1: you're not you don't think there's a part of goal
Speaker 1: to be on the rainbow. You would normally do was
Speaker 1: charge something called like an hourly So any time on
Speaker 1: the phone call, I write a letter, I'm gonna charge
Speaker 1: you and you're gonna get an invoice for it, either
Speaker 1: at the end of the week or the end of
Speaker 1: the month, but some type of hourly charge and I'm
Speaker 1: gonna get paid that no matter if you win or lose.
Speaker 1: The other way that cases are sometimes handled. And if
Speaker 1: it's the case, it's very desirable that a lot of
Speaker 1: law firms want that case all of a sudden, that
Speaker 1: that client has a lot of leverage to say, you
Speaker 1: know what, I don't want to pay out like I
Speaker 1: don't want to do something called the contingency that you
Speaker 1: guys the law firm, you get paid zero, You get
Speaker 1: paid nothing until we win the case or there's some
Speaker 1: type of settlement and then you guys get a third
Speaker 1: of that, which is very common procedure. It's the same
Speaker 1: thing we saw St. Louis Rams recently. A St. Louis
Speaker 1: sued the NFL on behalf of you know, St. Louis
Speaker 1: Ram's contingency when they left UM and went to over
Speaker 1: to l A. That was a whopping seven ninety million
Speaker 1: dollar settlement the lawyers, if you can believe it, they
Speaker 1: got a third of that. It sounds like a crazy number,
Speaker 1: but then again, for four or five years, those guys
Speaker 1: didn't get paid and they were holding all the risk
Speaker 1: of putting all this work in and getting nothing. So
Speaker 1: he asked me, I'm leaning towards this case being taken
Speaker 1: on a contingency. I think Flora has probably had the
Speaker 1: leverage to ask for that. And if this firm really
Speaker 1: wanted the case and they thought it was going to
Speaker 1: be as big as I do, they'd be totally fine
Speaker 1: taking contingency on it. So the theory and Dan I've
Speaker 1: talked about us on my radio show this week and
Speaker 1: the overnight, is that there's no way anyone's gonna hire
Speaker 1: and floors that he's now toxic that you can't you know,
Speaker 1: you can't hire the guy. He turned over private messages
Speaker 1: with Belichick and he's kind of violated the bubble of trust.
Speaker 1: But the conspiracy part of me's like, well, what if
Speaker 1: the NFL said, hey, well, you know, you can get
Speaker 1: a job with the Saints or one of the one
Speaker 1: of these head coaching jobs and just dropped the lawsuit.
Speaker 1: Could they even do that? Were they get in trouble?
Speaker 1: Is that? Is that also illegal to make some kind
Speaker 1: of brokerage deal with Brian Floores at this point, kind
Speaker 1: of you now we're getting into the territory that happened
Speaker 1: with Kaepernick, right. Why the NFL was kind of you know,
Speaker 1: I imagine behind the scenes, we're not gonna know what
Speaker 1: was said in the compositions, but like, why was in
Speaker 1: Kaepernick getting signed at a certain point. Clearly the guy
Speaker 1: had taken his team, you know, to the verge of
Speaker 1: a Super Bowl. Clearly he was better than the backups
Speaker 1: that were being thrown out there left him right, But
Speaker 1: the NFL, I think, behind the scenes, were saying, we're
Speaker 1: not not signing him because of his views of and kneeling.
Speaker 1: We were not signing him because he's a distraction and
Speaker 1: there's a lot there's a lot to come with us,
Speaker 1: you know, being a distraction and not necessarily implicit purpose.
Speaker 1: Like you know, you can't discriminate against someone based on
Speaker 1: like rage, race, age, or sex, right, but not signing
Speaker 1: someone because they were a distraction. Yeah, it's I don't know,
Speaker 1: it's it's at least colorable that that's not some type
Speaker 1: of discrimination. I think now, um, you know, I wouldn't
Speaker 1: want to be detectives making that argument, certainly, but I
Speaker 1: think now you'd say the guy was the most qualified guy.
Speaker 1: But there's a lot of noise about hiring him, and
Speaker 1: we're trying to have a rebuild and they get ready
Speaker 1: have the Deshaun Watson situation on our hands. You know,
Speaker 1: we just can't can't afford a second you know hit
Speaker 1: like that. Pr I think people could understand that that's
Speaker 1: maybe not a discriminate where you purpose. Again, I don't
Speaker 1: want to be making that argument from the Texans. And
Speaker 1: that's why, you know, I mentioned so much more pressure
Speaker 1: placed than the Texans. You might have got the job.
Speaker 1: And I have people in my replies on Twitter it's
Speaker 1: Texas Scans that say they want him to get the job.
Speaker 1: Independent of all of this, he's the he's the most
Speaker 1: qualified guy for the job. He turned around the Miami
Speaker 1: Dolphins in one year. Maybe this is the right guy
Speaker 1: for the job. Um. But yeah, if he doesn't get
Speaker 1: it right, and uh, you know, I don't know, could
Speaker 1: they could they create some type of deal, Hey, we'll
Speaker 1: give you this job if you make the lawship go away. Maybe,
Speaker 1: but who's who's gonna cut that deal? The things are
Speaker 1: gonna cut that deal with textans are gonna cut that deal,
Speaker 1: um and make their games kind of this media frenzy.
Speaker 1: I don't I don't know if the team is willing
Speaker 1: to sign up to that. Yeah, it is. It is interesting.
Speaker 1: I mean, obviously this whole thing. And I read some
Speaker 1: of the documents online, the fifty eight pages uh that
Speaker 1: were out there with some of those who just you know,
Speaker 1: signed legal documents and whatnot. But uh, the question how
Speaker 1: much of this is actually meaty so far? You know,
Speaker 1: early on could have more stuff added to it. But
Speaker 1: it seems like a lot of the word you lawyers
Speaker 1: uses hearsay. Uh, is there a lot there? You know?
Speaker 1: And I like to pretend like I'm a lawyer, I'm not.
Speaker 1: But the way I read it, I said, well that
Speaker 1: these points can be argued by the NFL, and they
Speaker 1: could probably get out of most of this stuff, if
Speaker 1: not all this off. How did you read it when
Speaker 1: you talk about the actual rather than just hearsay stuff
Speaker 1: that actually is gonna stick here. That's that's really at
Speaker 1: the crux of the case, right. Um, you know, even
Speaker 1: even Stephen Ross stuff, I don't know what evidence he
Speaker 1: has to shupport that Stephen Ross offered him a bribe
Speaker 1: to lose James. I imagine Ross would have been smart enough,
Speaker 1: if indeed this is true, not put it in a
Speaker 1: text or an email. Um. And I'll go one step
Speaker 1: further seeing how they put the Bill Belichick text in
Speaker 1: the complaint. Uh, that's a you know, a creative move
Speaker 1: by the lawyer's about They didn't have to do that.
Speaker 1: They could have saved that for later and getting exchanged it. Um.
Speaker 1: I think they would have put a Stephen Ross text
Speaker 1: or an email like that directly in the complaints. So
Speaker 1: I'm not sure what they have by way of physical evidence. UM. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, certainly that's going to be very important. Otherwise,
Speaker 1: as you mentioned here saying he said, she said, who's
Speaker 1: more credible? Even having now what's coming out with the
Speaker 1: Denver Broncos. They're completely refuting his report. Um, you know
Speaker 1: that the Broncos and Elway showed up late to their
Speaker 1: meeting and they say they have documentary evidence to back
Speaker 1: that up. So when you bring a case like this, uh,
Speaker 1: it's not just you know, oh I believe the NFL more,
Speaker 1: I believe Flooras more. It's really all eyes are on
Speaker 1: Flora's and the plaintiffs. They they are the burden of proof.
Speaker 1: They have to prove their case. They have to come
Speaker 1: forward with the evidence. The court will allow you to
Speaker 1: get in if you kind of have a colorable or
Speaker 1: good faith basis to believe something, but you're gonna have
Speaker 1: to find that during discovery, Um you know, the depositions, emails,
Speaker 1: whatnot or else the case gets dismissed. Um. So yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean that's that's this next period of the case,
Speaker 1: assuming it gets the discovery, is gonna be really crucial, right.
Speaker 1: Bill Belichick is gonna have to answer the tough questions,
Speaker 1: always gonna have to answer the question Stephen Ross and
Speaker 1: so who's who of of NFL personnel? Um? You know,
Speaker 1: So yeah, you can't just have a case on here set.
Speaker 1: I mean sometimes you can but it needs something that
Speaker 1: the jury can really put weight into a look at,
Speaker 1: and you can hold up in front of the jury
Speaker 1: they say, here's this email. Here's this email from the Giants, right,
Speaker 1: here's this email from the Broncos. So yeah, this stage,
Speaker 1: if anybody tells you, you know, Florida's is definitely gonna
Speaker 1: win or he's not gonna win, no one has any
Speaker 1: clue because no one has seen the emails. Right. So
Speaker 1: that's that's really where this case is gonna be one
Speaker 1: of the most well. Absolutely then, and that's you know,
Speaker 1: you follow all these legal stories. Are great on social
Speaker 1: media and whatnot. I know, you do a lot of
Speaker 1: radio stuff and TV and whatnot. But the the email
Speaker 1: and with what we learned from the Washington I guess
Speaker 1: the Redskins now they're the commanders or whatever. But the
Speaker 1: the John Gruden story that came out of that, and
Speaker 1: you know, that was just an email. He I'm sure
Speaker 1: he never imagined crudent that that would ever come back
Speaker 1: to bite him, and it did. And so you know,
Speaker 1: the the owners, I mean, you follow these things a
Speaker 1: long time. They're not going to allow this to get
Speaker 1: the discovery, are they? Because imagine the skeletons they've got
Speaker 1: in those those emails. Although some of these guys are
Speaker 1: so old, I don't know if they even email, but
Speaker 1: there's there's gotta be stuff out there, right, I mean,
Speaker 1: I would think right, just I mean, if you ask
Speaker 1: me this question maybe like two or three months ago,
Speaker 1: I would say, I'm not sure. You know, these are
Speaker 1: billion dollar teams. They probably are very smart. They probably
Speaker 1: you know what I'm saying, smart, like I don't know, sneaky, right,
Speaker 1: they don't put anything in writing. Let's just talk about it,
Speaker 1: assuming that's what's going on here. Um. But was so
Speaker 1: with John Gruden saga that at a very fundamental level,
Speaker 1: those emails were horrendous. Those emails existed on the server
Speaker 1: for years and no one said anything about him. So
Speaker 1: I think the grouting case kind of pulled the curtain
Speaker 1: back a little bit and tells you that maybe there's
Speaker 1: more behind the scenes than we've ever really, you know,
Speaker 1: thought about. John Gruden made it to the highest level
Speaker 1: of the NFL head coach, right, and he was, you know,
Speaker 1: his head coach for different teams over the course of
Speaker 1: you know, more than a decade, So you don't really
Speaker 1: know what's behind the curtain. You asked me whether the
Speaker 1: NFL is going to pay to make this go away.
Speaker 1: I think they'd love to, but that always depends on
Speaker 1: the plaintiff in the case. Um. You know, another case
Speaker 1: that you know I've been doing a lot of a
Speaker 1: lot of coverage on is the DeShawn Watson case. There's
Speaker 1: twenty two individuals who assuming DeShawn Watson in civil court.
Speaker 1: It's been reported that some of those individuals want to
Speaker 1: settle the case. They want to get other ones are
Speaker 1: more concerned about the message it sense and really sticking
Speaker 1: into Deshaun Watson and keeping this case in court, keeping
Speaker 1: it in the public realm. Se get the case of settled.
Speaker 1: No one's gonna talk about the case anymore. Maybe they
Speaker 1: will for a week or two, but this narrative of
Speaker 1: Watson has now gone on for a year because there
Speaker 1: are certain plates that don't want to settle. If he
Speaker 1: asked me, you know, I'm getting the vibes that Floors
Speaker 1: doesn't want to settle. He didn't put an amount of
Speaker 1: money that he was seeking in the complaint, which is
Speaker 1: number one side number two. Is the kind of shock
Speaker 1: and all value that he put into this complaint. He's
Speaker 1: got the quote. You know, the first sentence of the
Speaker 1: complaint is the Bill Belichick text. The second sentence of
Speaker 1: the complaint is a quote from Martin Luther King, and
Speaker 1: then he gets into the actual normal legal stuff. So
Speaker 1: you know, all the optics to me point out, this
Speaker 1: is someone that wants to send a method. It's not
Speaker 1: someone that wants to settle. It's not someone that's gonna
Speaker 1: go away so quickly. Um, And if you're the NFL,
Speaker 1: it's gonna get a lot worse before it gets better
Speaker 1: because you have now again, like the Hugh Jackson's coming
Speaker 1: out that Marvin Lewis is coming out, Hugh Jackson has
Speaker 1: his own allegations that he says the Browns paid him
Speaker 1: to lose. Is another African American coach who has kind
Speaker 1: of you know, let go from his team and now
Speaker 1: can't find another head coaching gig. So yeah, I don't
Speaker 1: I think the NFL would love to settle it. I
Speaker 1: just don't think it's their call. Yeah. And as far
Speaker 1: as Brian Floores doing all the the interviews and from
Speaker 1: the legal perspective, like the advantage you have right as
Speaker 1: a lawyer when you have a lawsuit like this is
Speaker 1: I'm pretty confident in the NFL did not know this
Speaker 1: was coming. Right, This is not normal that you blow
Speaker 1: the whistle when you're still trying to get a job.
Speaker 1: That's this. This is an unorthodox way of doing things.
Speaker 1: So doing all the TV, if he's going on CNN
Speaker 1: and CBS in all these places, he's doing that for
Speaker 1: the court of a public opinion. Right, This is this
Speaker 1: is to try to tug at the heart strings and
Speaker 1: that that's the message. Right. You have the advantage that
Speaker 1: you're trying to get your message out before the NFL
Speaker 1: can counter am. I correct in that. Yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: I guess, I guess you have to think. Right, he
Speaker 1: could file a laws doctor any media. Um, the media
Speaker 1: is set up, and it wasn't just you know, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, podcasts and radios. He went to the two
Speaker 1: biggest shots where he went to CBS, he went to
Speaker 1: ESPN back to back, and he had his lawyers on
Speaker 1: the stage. You know. Um, I don't know about the
Speaker 1: wisdom of this, but comparing him, you know, and they
Speaker 1: wanted this lawsuit to Rosa Parks, which I think is
Speaker 1: a creative decision. I who am I to say whether
Speaker 1: or not he's the Rosa Parks in the NFL office
Speaker 1: early stage, but that was a calculated move that his
Speaker 1: attorney planned to say. So, I don't know. Anyway, I
Speaker 1: think to your point, the message it's sending is that
Speaker 1: this is not a guy that's gonna settle and walk away.
Speaker 1: If if Ryan Floores accepted a check tomorrow for a
Speaker 1: hundred million dollars and walked away, it sends a really
Speaker 1: bad message, right, Um, it sends a message of someone
Speaker 1: that literally built up all the teams you just get paid,
Speaker 1: and to walk away again, it seems like someone that's
Speaker 1: giving up for a long protracted fight, similar to kaepernet
Speaker 1: in case took you know, years to develop. Um. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so I don't it's your earlier point. I think it
Speaker 1: sends the message that if you hire are employers for
Speaker 1: better for worse, there's gonna be a lot of attention
Speaker 1: on your team and not necessarily on the field results,
Speaker 1: which I'm not sure if the team is gonna willingly
Speaker 1: sound up for that. And Dan, if you were advising
Speaker 1: with your your legal mind there, if you were advising
Speaker 1: the wonderful world of the NFL there, I don't really
Speaker 1: have plenty of lawyers themselves, but what what should the
Speaker 1: NFL do now? Because this is the ultimate hot potato no,
Speaker 1: And you know, it's like a lot of guys don't
Speaker 1: want to talk about it because they're still employed by
Speaker 1: the NFL and everyone's very uncomfortable walking on eggshells. So
Speaker 1: what what would you do if you're the NFL? How
Speaker 1: would you handle this with grace? If you will? Um? Well,
Speaker 1: I take damage control the two words that come to mind, right,
Speaker 1: um And I think at a fundamental level that kind
Speaker 1: of I don't know that. I don't know what the
Speaker 1: right expression is. I think they kind of blew it
Speaker 1: with their initial statement. They said, you know, you can
Speaker 1: read the whole statement. You know, they put US statements,
Speaker 1: Giants for US statement, Proco's browns Um, all the teams
Speaker 1: associated the one that's getting a lot of flak at
Speaker 1: the NFL statement because it was done, you know, pretty crudely.
Speaker 1: It was sent out about an hour after the text
Speaker 1: the lawsuit was filed, and it ends with Brian Flores'
Speaker 1: claims are without merit. So you know, you can convince
Speaker 1: me that the claim his legal cases have got married.
Speaker 1: You're not really going to convince me that his claim
Speaker 1: that the NFL has a real diversity problem. That that's
Speaker 1: without Marrit That's pretty clear, right, Mike Tomlin is the
Speaker 1: only uh you know blackhead coach's only six general managers
Speaker 1: that are black and I have no owners. So yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean it's subjective. Um. And then the other part
Speaker 1: is like, I don't know Stephen Ross this allegation that
Speaker 1: he paid uh you know Flora's a hundred thousands to
Speaker 1: tank games. I don't know how you say that without merit,
Speaker 1: without conducting a full blown investigation. So my advice to
Speaker 1: the NFL would have been, let's let you have your statement,
Speaker 1: not emphatically say that Flora's is one percent raw. That
Speaker 1: doesn't make any sense. Um, it should be re launching
Speaker 1: a full and unfettered investigation. We're prepared to defend this,
Speaker 1: but you know, we take these claims very seriously. We
Speaker 1: were launching a full investigation. We'll have more on this
Speaker 1: at a later point in time. Without the statement, that
Speaker 1: don't completely pro proved. Brian Flores, who's I think whether
Speaker 1: he wins to loses his case, I think he's right
Speaker 1: that there is a diversity problem and something needs to
Speaker 1: be done about it. If the NFL doesn't want to
Speaker 1: I don't know. I mean that's kind of what their
Speaker 1: message said, that there's nothing here and we're gonna swiftly
Speaker 1: move and we're gonna get this case dismissed. Nothing to
Speaker 1: see here onto the Super Bowl. Let's talk about Brady's retirement. Um,
Speaker 1: that's how I read it, which I think was was
Speaker 1: definitely inappropriate. Yeah, And based on what you've said here
Speaker 1: and kind of reading, reading the room and hearing things,
Speaker 1: and does your gut tell you that if we have
Speaker 1: this conversation in February of three, that this thing is
Speaker 1: still out there or does this end up vanishing by
Speaker 1: next NFL season, which is in September. What's what is
Speaker 1: more likely to happen? What do you think we're gonna know?
Speaker 1: I want to say in about days. If so, the
Speaker 1: NFL is gonna move to dismiss, which they always do.
Speaker 1: They moved to do it in the Grooting case. They
Speaker 1: always moved to dismiss, we'll know. And if that says
Speaker 1: right around and maybe a little bit longer, if the
Speaker 1: judge agrees with that, kind of the case would be
Speaker 1: kicked out of court. And if it's not kicked out
Speaker 1: of court, because when you entered discovery, so I don't
Speaker 1: discovery takes years, right, I mean it's it's a long process.
Speaker 1: So we'll know and you know, again at six and
Speaker 1: ninety period, if this case is going to go a year,
Speaker 1: two years, three years, um, because that's how long takes
Speaker 1: to depose all these people, to depose all thirty two teams.
Speaker 1: It took that St. Louis Ram's case that was, you know,
Speaker 1: alleging that the NFL committed a fraud by moving the
Speaker 1: team from St. Louis Los Angeles. You know, it legitimately
Speaker 1: took that case four years to get ready for trial. Um.
Speaker 1: And it didn't have the same type of sensitive undertones
Speaker 1: that this case does. And that this case will be
Speaker 1: playing out very publicly. So yeah, I you know, asked
Speaker 1: me to bet on it right now. Uh, And I think,
Speaker 1: as you know, I'm a I'm a betting guy. I'd
Speaker 1: say I'd say be minus two that this case is
Speaker 1: around a year from today. Bet the over. You gotta
Speaker 1: bet the over on this is what you gotta do. Yeah.
Speaker 1: And the John Gruden's story, now this is kind of
Speaker 1: off the radar, is not getting that much attention. Uh legally,
Speaker 1: you know, does does Gruden have a leg to stand on.
Speaker 1: I know that there was a suit file as you
Speaker 1: you talked about the NFL im mediately tried to dismiss
Speaker 1: it and all this stuff. But we're Gruden's at right now.
Speaker 1: He's also probably not gonna work in the NFL game.
Speaker 1: But is there any kind of way that he can
Speaker 1: get some money out of the NFL and actually win this? Um?
Speaker 1: I mean it's another case kind of what we're talking
Speaker 1: about with for It's like, I don't really think really
Speaker 1: cares about the money. UM. I think Gruden losing his
Speaker 1: job with the with the Raiders and whatever endorsements. I
Speaker 1: think he had a sketcher's deal. How much money was
Speaker 1: that really work? Uh? He had signed a ten year
Speaker 1: I think a hundred million dollar contract. I think he
Speaker 1: was a couple years in. It is at fifty million,
Speaker 1: you know at most, um, you know, maybe a little
Speaker 1: bit more for the endorsements. UM, I don't. I don't
Speaker 1: really think he was entitled to that number one is
Speaker 1: that canna be titled to the whole amount? Because it's
Speaker 1: you know, will you have kept his job anyway? You know,
Speaker 1: the Raiders were kind of a middling team, right, Um,
Speaker 1: But I don't, I don't think it's a guy that
Speaker 1: cares about money. I think that the guy that cares
Speaker 1: about his reputation being destroyed, uh and wants to see
Speaker 1: why they leave the emails? Who else was in it? Um? Whatnot?
Speaker 1: If you asked me, I actually I actually think that
Speaker 1: Gruden's cases and hopefully old takes exposes and find me
Speaker 1: on this. But like, I think there's some credibility there
Speaker 1: to the to the gruten case. Maybe it's an easier
Speaker 1: case to prove than the Florida's case because, like I
Speaker 1: don't know, there's hundreds of thousands of emails, and only
Speaker 1: the emails that are leaked belonged to John Gruden, So
Speaker 1: that seems to be someone selectively doing it. And then
Speaker 1: only three people had the emails, the lawyers for Washington
Speaker 1: Football team, Washington Football team. I guess now the commanders
Speaker 1: will call them in the NFL that was it. So
Speaker 1: someone like the emails, and I think everyone can agree
Speaker 1: whoever leaked probably committed some type of you know, some
Speaker 1: type of tortious element, some type of that has some
Speaker 1: type of legal liability. So it was either Washington Football team,
Speaker 1: the lawyers, or the NFL. Right, it's you've just gotta
Speaker 1: take your poison here, whereas you know in the Floor's case,
Speaker 1: you's gonna prove this. It's thirty two teams, gotta prove
Speaker 1: some collective elements. It's certainly a much tougher sell well.
Speaker 1: And also Gruden was not an employee of the NFL
Speaker 1: right at the time, so when when those emails were sent, Uh,
Speaker 1: he was not working for the NFL. And it is interesting.
Speaker 1: I remember we were talking about that on the radio show,
Speaker 1: and those emails were all leaked to like major newspapers
Speaker 1: in New York, which I know the lawyer, a lot
Speaker 1: of lawyers in New York and when you're in New York,
Speaker 1: but it just seemed like it's right near the NFL offices,
Speaker 1: Like it was just too too convenient that that took place.
Speaker 1: But moving on from that, though, Dan, the Commanders, you've
Speaker 1: had some great stuff on social media, and I know
Speaker 1: you've got the podcast as well, The Commanders the Ultimate
Speaker 1: Bland nickname and uh, it's just just generic. I guess
Speaker 1: we're in the age now where you can't have anything fun.
Speaker 1: But you brought up a great point on on social
Speaker 1: media that one of the reasons that we have this
Speaker 1: not only because everyone gets offended by everything these days.
Speaker 1: But also there was some random guy, right I guess
Speaker 1: in Virginia who has been waiting for this name change
Speaker 1: and it had been hoarding different names. Explain kind of
Speaker 1: walked me through what this guy was able to pull
Speaker 1: off and apparently successfully pull off and stonewall a billion
Speaker 1: four billion dollar NFL team. I'm so hoping you bring
Speaker 1: this up like the sports laws now in the last
Speaker 1: you know, you're so getting a nice platform. I've been
Speaker 1: aware of all these like little niche stories for years,
Speaker 1: and it's nice that they're coming out. There's a random
Speaker 1: actuary from Virginia. He has no time to the NFL.
Speaker 1: He has He's just a random guy. If you looked
Speaker 1: at him on the street, you wouldn't look twice. Just
Speaker 1: some random dude. And a couple of years ago he goes,
Speaker 1: you know what, I think the name Redskins is probably
Speaker 1: going to get in trouble with Maybe this guy was
Speaker 1: like maybe, like, um, you know, an early investor in crypto,
Speaker 1: he saw the trend happening before it really came to be,
Speaker 1: and he said, you know, it would be fun if
Speaker 1: I just started trademarking all these names. Uh, Washington Presidents,
Speaker 1: Washington Monuments, Washington Justice, Washington Red Tails, which I guess
Speaker 1: is a very popular name. Washington read Wolves, you know,
Speaker 1: another popular name that I guess people Washington really wanted.
Speaker 1: So while he's doing this, Dan Stider is being interviews,
Speaker 1: you know, very public interviews and saying we will never
Speaker 1: change the name. Never you could print that, um. And
Speaker 1: this guy's just sitting here, you know, a lot of
Speaker 1: the trademarking about thirty names of pretty you know good,
Speaker 1: you know good. I don't know solid names that I
Speaker 1: would think are better than commanders. So this guy does it.
Speaker 1: He starts opening up an online store with mugs and
Speaker 1: hats and T shirts. And for trademark law, you need
Speaker 1: to just prove you had a good faith basis for
Speaker 1: using the name you were putting into commercial use. So
Speaker 1: he's selling like two mugs a T shirt with the
Speaker 1: Washington Monuments on it, and and that you know was
Speaker 1: viewed by some as being legitimate. So fast forward and
Speaker 1: obviously we know what happened. Washington announces the name change
Speaker 1: and Jason write the team president I thought had the
Speaker 1: most telling interview. He goes, well, there were other names
Speaker 1: we wanted, but you know, there was kind there was
Speaker 1: some trademark issues and we kind of had to go
Speaker 1: a different route. And I'm sitting there, you know, like
Speaker 1: that Leonardo DiCaprio meme when he's like spitting up his
Speaker 1: beer and pointing at the television, I'm like, that's my guy,
Speaker 1: Martin McAuley. You know, you just stone wall the billion
Speaker 1: dollar team into submission. So if you're unhappy with the
Speaker 1: commander's name, Um, there's a there's a there's a world
Speaker 1: where you should be chuckling a little bit that this
Speaker 1: one guy was able to disrupt the whole NFL momentum.
Speaker 1: And it's really a crazy story. Maybe a movie someday, Yeah,
Speaker 1: that definitely has You could see that on the big screen.
Speaker 1: Like had just selling your kind of disheveled guy and
Speaker 1: he's just because it doesn't cost that much, my my
Speaker 1: correct name, like the way to get something copyrighted or
Speaker 1: trademark or whatever. It's not it's not that expensive, right,
Speaker 1: Like he didn't How much do you think the guy
Speaker 1: was spending to trademark all these different names. It must
Speaker 1: not have been that much. I would think probably for
Speaker 1: four figures, you know, maybe low five figures. It's not
Speaker 1: going to be that much, but we're the critical flow
Speaker 1: was for Washington. Um, as far as I know when
Speaker 1: when Dantonner said we're never changing the name, I imagine right,
Speaker 1: if I'm a lawyer, I would probably have said, well, Dan,
Speaker 1: I know you never change the name. You know, if
Speaker 1: you do change it, shouldn't we get back up? It's
Speaker 1: hoping it cost us like a thousand bucks. You know,
Speaker 1: what do you think? And UM, I don't think they
Speaker 1: did that. That was the mistake from the legal perspective, Like,
Speaker 1: I don't know, you don't You can say you're never
Speaker 1: changing the name, but you know, um, at least spending
Speaker 1: thousand bucks. You guys are worth a billion dollars, so
Speaker 1: bi in and tickets every year. Get a backup name
Speaker 1: so you don't look really stupid and you have some
Speaker 1: random Virginia actually talking on you and making you look
Speaker 1: incredibly incompetent. Absolutely, Uh A little time left. I wanted
Speaker 1: to talk about Deshaun Watson. You mentioned you referenced in earlier.
Speaker 1: This is also a fascinating, you know, sports law case
Speaker 1: that he's missed an entire season. This thing is still
Speaker 1: dragging on and on and on. I know we're after
Speaker 1: the Super Bowl here, there's supposed to be some new
Speaker 1: revelations that are gonna come out here, and you mentioned
Speaker 1: the publicity part of it, but he's already missed a year.
Speaker 1: Nobody wants to trade for Watson because this is still
Speaker 1: hanging around with these different women. And I'll ask you
Speaker 1: a question I asked earlier about the NFL case with
Speaker 1: with Flores. Uh. We have this conversation, we have you
Speaker 1: backed in in September, the NFL is about to start
Speaker 1: another season. Is Deshaun Watson's legal trouble over or is
Speaker 1: this thing continuing? What do you think happens with Watson?
Speaker 1: We're about to hit an interesting point with Watson. Um,
Speaker 1: whether or not you want to believe before it said
Speaker 1: they've been wrong before. There's reportedly a grand jury that
Speaker 1: is in the process of convening. You know, it's almost
Speaker 1: upends depends what the deal is, but the grand jury
Speaker 1: will announce whether or not there's criminal charges. Um. The
Speaker 1: d A could have made that decision on their own,
Speaker 1: but they wanted to give it to the grand jury,
Speaker 1: probably because you know, it's a high profile guy, pretty
Speaker 1: popular in Houston, and maybe the d A did we
Speaker 1: wanted to put the blame on on the jury or
Speaker 1: the grand jury. If they, you know, indicted him on
Speaker 1: criminal charges, that's gonna happen. I mean people have saying
Speaker 1: it's gonna happen any minute. It's been eleven months and
Speaker 1: we haven't had it. I imagine, you know, we're getting
Speaker 1: closer there. Um, if there are criminal charges, I don't
Speaker 1: think Watson is ready. I think Watson gets kind of,
Speaker 1: you know, the Michael Vick treatment, and he just put
Speaker 1: put in the background for years. I don't know. Michael
Speaker 1: Vick was legitimately sent to prison, Um, you know, and
Speaker 1: that happened fairly quickly. I don't. I think it's two
Speaker 1: premature say that with Watson. But I think if you're
Speaker 1: a betting man again as as I am, Um, I
Speaker 1: think that maybe it's less than it's certainly less. It's
Speaker 1: closer to even money. But I think you'd predict that
Speaker 1: there'd be some form of criminal charges that the a's
Speaker 1: officers circling this. They sent out subpoenas for his social
Speaker 1: media accounts. They put a lot of time into this case.
Speaker 1: It would be odd for them to walk away with nothing. Um.
Speaker 1: I heard the same reports, which I'm sure you did that.
Speaker 1: The Carolina Panthers were considering potentially trading for him, even
Speaker 1: though this was hanging over his head, and ultimately they
Speaker 1: did not. Um that the Dolphins, you know, speaking of
Speaker 1: Brian Flores, that those guys were thinking of trading criminal
Speaker 1: ultimately did not. The trade window opens back up on
Speaker 1: March sixteen, so pretty soon. Um, if there are no
Speaker 1: criminal charges by that time, it's possible a team takes
Speaker 1: a chance. Um, but again, my my gut, I'll take
Speaker 1: whatever the over is. I'll certainly go with it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so that's the case. Then even on a civil thing,
Speaker 1: if it doesn't become criminal and he ends up having
Speaker 1: you know, he loses, then he's going to be suspended.
Speaker 1: I think he's suspended either way, which is weird because
Speaker 1: he's aready missed a season. So anyway, listen, I I
Speaker 1: love you on on Twitter, falling you from afar there
Speaker 1: and you're you've got your podcast. How can people keep
Speaker 1: in contact, get caught up on all the sports law
Speaker 1: and you're blowing up here, You're on TV radio, you're everywhere.
Speaker 1: You're You're a one man machine over there. Dan. It's
Speaker 1: it's very impressive. Um, I appreciate it um and uh, yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean we're getting lucky with a couple of big stories.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I'm on social media at sports law Lust
Speaker 1: on Twitter and Instagram. Uh. And then our podcast called
Speaker 1: Conduct Detrimental. Obviously we dedicated a full episode to the
Speaker 1: Brian Floyd stuff. We've done Washington football team, DeShawn Watson. Um.
Speaker 1: But yeah, the Conduct Detrimental is uh the top sports
Speaker 1: lave podcast in the world. I'm not sure that's saying
Speaker 1: much because there's only like three of us, but people
Speaker 1: say top sports lave podcast in the history of humanity.
Speaker 1: I think that's even better. Well, I want you to
Speaker 1: know Dan, I you know, I love I'm fascinated. I'm
Speaker 1: jealous that you get to work in that world because
Speaker 1: I every time I'm doing sports radio and it's pretty
Speaker 1: standard fair, but anytime one of these stories comes up,
Speaker 1: I imagine myself as a lawyer, and I try to
Speaker 1: think like a lawyer, and it's a I always have
Speaker 1: a lot of fun with these things. So I appreciate
Speaker 1: your expertise, and thank you. We'll have you on again,
Speaker 1: and good luck, thank you, my pleasure you tom me
Speaker 1: when