Boston Bruins Hire Sports Lawyer Peter Chiarelli as General Manager

The Boston Bruins are set to hire Attorney Peter Chiarelli as their new general manager. Chiarelli, 41, has been assistant general manager of the Ottawa Senators. He has an interesting background for those who aspire to front office jobs. In 1987, he received a B.A. in economics from Harvard, where he was captain of the Crimson hockey team. After college, he played pro hockey in Europe and then returned to become a law student at the University of Ottawa Law School, from where he graduated in 1993. After law school, he was a player agent, and he represented a number of hockey players in contract negotiations.

In 1999, he shifted over to management, and was hired by the Senators as their director of legal relations. Over the next five years, he impressed the Senators with his hockey insight, and was promoted to assistant general manager in 2004. As assistant G.M., he worked on contract negotiations, salary arbitration, player transactions, and personnel matters. In other words, he took a "legal job" with the Senators and morphed it into a player personnel job, and he's now the G.M. of the Boston Bruins. Granted, Chiarelli had a distinguished collegiate career in his sport and he played it professionally, but perhaps his story is an example of how one can use a law degree to become a player agent and also to get into a front office and from there develop an expertise in player personnel matters.

For Bruins fans' reaction to the hiring, check out HFBoards.

Read More

Do Colleges Need “Pregnant Athlete” Policies?

For anyone with an interest in college athletics, Amy Rainey’s “What Athletes Can Expect When They’re Expecting: Many colleges are ill prepared for pregnant athletes—and some players suffer as a result,” in this week’s Chronicle of Higher Education (May 26, 2006) is worth a read.

The story highlights the potential legal exposure for schools that don’t have pregnancy policies for athletes. One story is that of Tara Brady, a student at Sacred Heart University in Connecticut, who sued her former basketball coach for discrimination, claiming that she was told to “go home . . . because her pregnancy would be a ‘distraction’ to the team.” As Rainey’s article reports: “According to the lawsuit, Ms. Brady had requested a ‘medical redshirt,’ a status like that given to injured athletes, to allow her an additional year of eligibility. But she claimed that her coach never redshirted her, and that the university revoked her scholarship.” The University settled with Ms. Brady for an unspecified sum. This type of claim is likely the most common schools without pregnancy policies would face – but the article hints at what could be an even more disastrous result for a university (from a damages perspective): pregnant athletes who are unaware of the effect their status will have on their scholarships who as a result hide their pregnancies (and fail to seek prenatal care), or seek abortions.

Elizabeth Sorenson, Faculty Athletics Representative (FAR) at Wright State University in Dayton, has proposed the NCAA develop a pregnancy policy. Professor Sorenson hosted an on-line discussion on the issue yesterday, which can be found here. In a nutshell the WSU policy calls on athletes to notify their coaches of pregnancy status, to refrain from withdrawing from their sport, and establishes a support group to counsel a pregnant athlete and oversee continued participation (I’ve e-mailed Professor Sorenson for a copy of the policy and will update this post once I’ve had a chance to look at it). The NCAA has not acted on her proposal, according to the Chronicle.

Such a policy seems like a good short term legal strategy to avoid potential liabilities. In the long run, however, might adopting a “maternity-leave”-like policy for pregnant college athletes start to make it difficult to argue that the “economic realities” of college athletics are not those of an employer-employee relationship? As a result, might college athletes be able to demand the right to unionize, and / or get paid? Of course, that might be a good thing, as Greg argues here.

Read More

Indiana Basketball Embraces Recruiting Hurdles

The NCAA Committee on Infractions yesterday issued a ruling that: (1) bans new Indiana coach Kelvin Sampson from calling recruits and visiting them off-campus for one year, (2) requires Indiana to adopt the restrictions Oklahoma placed on Sampson, where he coached before Indiana hired him earlier this year, and (3) disciplined Oklahoma by adopting its self-imposed sanctions.

Sampson was identified as making 233 of 577 "impermissible" phone calls while at Oklahoma from 2000-04, in which the NCAA concluded those calls constituted a recruiting advantage. Of 17 recruits who received impermissible calls, five enrolled at Oklahoma and another signed a National Letter of Intent to attend the school. The infractions committee chair, Tom Yeager, noting that some of the violations were committed while Sampson was president of the National Association of Basketball Coaches (NABC) and presided over an Ethics Summit, had some harsh things to say about Sampson:

"The former head coach created and encouraged an atmosphere among his staff of deliberate non-compliance, rationalizing the violations as being a result of 'prioritizing' rules. The former head coach [who, it is reported, acknowledged the violations but did not take them seriously compared with material inducements to recruits] preferred to think of what he and his staff were doing as 'hard work' rather than cheating. At a time when the NABC identified impermissible phone contact as a serious issue and the organization was calling on its membership to be accountable, the former head coach and his staff were engaged in a pattern of willful and significant recruiting violations."

Last week on the Blog, I discussed a provision in Sampson's new contract that permits IU to fire him with no financial obligations if the NCAA "imposes more significant penalties or sanctions than the University of Oklahoma's self-imposed sanctions." Apparently, IU is not going to terminate Sampson under this clause, as athletics director Rick Greenspan publicly stated: "We felt the self-imposed penalties were significant, but we knew that there could be further sanctions and we accept them. . . . While these sanctions do present an immediate challenge, we are excited about the future with coach Sampson at the helm of the Indiana basketball program." Despite the "willful" violations committed at Oklahoma by its new basketball coach, Indiana President Adam Herbert and Greenspan went even further and stated that Sampson is a man of "highest integrity" who simply made an error in judgment.

Jeff Rabjohns of the Indianapolis Star summarized the penalties imposed on Sampson ("IU's recruiting faces hurdles"):

Things he can't do:
• Call recruits on the phone.
• Attend summer recruiting camps such as Nike's in Indianapolis or tournaments such as Reebok's in Las Vegas that typically feature hundreds of top prospects in one place.
• Attend a recruit's game.
• Make a home visit to a recruit.

Things he can do:
• Take phone calls from recruits.
• Initiate text messages, instant messages, e-mails or letters with recruits.
• Talk with players during on-campus recruiting visits.

In today's highly competitive recruiting environment, being visible and seen is extremely important. According to Rabjohn, "The biggest practical impact of the NCAA penalties announced Thursday against the Indiana University men's basketball coach is that Sampson won't be able to personally show recruits how interested the Hoosiers are." Electronic messaging is simply not a replacement for in-person appearances.

Is IU underestimating the impact of yesterday's ruling? But aside from the practical impact on Sampson's ability to effectively recruit, which Indiana is willing to accept, does it seem odd that IU would hire a coach knowing at the time that he willfully violated NCAA recruiting rules and knowing that NCAA sanctions would soon be imposed, and also tell the world that he's a man of "highest integrity"?

Read More

Linking Casinos to Olympic Bids

Chicago attorney Tim Epstein, who in January blogged here on Chicago's Olympic bid, had a related letter to the editor published by Crain's Chicago Business this week. Crain's shortened it quite a bit, but here is the original:

Could Gaming Help Chicago become an "Olympic" Kind of Town?

Is 2016 Chicago’s best chance at getting the Olympics since 1904? The 1904 games were given to Chicago, then taken away and given to St. Louis to coincide with the World’s Fair. While the U.S. Olympic Committee has yet to make any decisions on whether an American city will even be nominated to host the 2016 Games, Jim Scherr, CEO of the U.S. Olympic Committee, stated in a press conference in Chicago that “[Chicago would] not only be an excellent host for an Olympic Games, but would have an opportunity to be a successful bidder if it chose to bid and if we chose to run.”

The biggest impediment to the Windy City’s bid: not having an appropriate venue for Opening and Closing Ceremonies (labeled as a “non-starter” by U.S. Olympic Committee Chairman, Peter Uberroth). Hosting the Olympics requires a venue that would seat at least 80,000 people (the recently renovated Soldier Field only holds 61,500). While the Mayor’s exploratory committee would seek out both financial and physical aid in hosting the Summer Games from other cities, states and universities, the “gem” of the ceremonies would most certainly be in Chicago.

The idea has been circulated of possibly bringing in a second NFL franchise to Chicago that would play in a venue constructed for said team’s home games as well as for use in the hosting of the 2016 Games. While the idea of Chicago supporting a second NFL team seems daunting, there is precedent (the Cardinals played in Chicago and the greater metropolitan area until 1960). However, with the Saints staying in New Orleans and Los Angeles next in line for a franchise, maybe City Hall should look to the Steel City for inspiration.

Mellon Arena, home to the Pittsburgh Penguins, is run down as is the surrounding neighborhood, which has great accessibility to downtown Pittsburgh. Mario Lemieux and the rest of the ownership group had threatened to leave the area, but recently announced partnering up with Isle of Capri casinos. If Isle of Capri, which owns fifteen casinos throughout the US, Europe, and the Bahamas, secures the state license to operate a Pittsburgh casino, it would build the casino in the lower Hill District, with a new facility for the Penguins in the same complex (Isle of Capri along with the Penguins is pledging $290 million for the arena). Along with this is a plan for redevelopment of the area. Of note, the Penguins CEO, Ken Sawyer, recently stated that the only way that the Penguins would certainly stay in the area is if “Isle of Capri wins [the license].”

Along with Isle of Capri, two other groups have entered into the bidding process for the Pittsburgh license, PITG Gaming LLC (headed by Don Barden, and supported by Smokey Robinson and Jerome Bettis) and Forest City Enterprises (Harrah’s). PITG has committed $7.5 million a year for 30 years under the alternative plan submitted by Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell. Forest City, supported by Franco Harris, is committed to the Governor’s plan only if the Penguins promise to stay in Pittsburgh.

Could the Pittsburgh proposals not be models for Chicago? It is no secret that Mayor Daley wants a casino in Chicago, so why not combine the ambitions for gaming with The Games? If the facility had a retractable dome, such a venture would not only provide Chicago with a venue necessary for host city consideration, but a site to host events like the Super Bowl, the Final Four, and a college bowl game, all consistent with the Olympic spirit for use after the games (a factor the International Olympic Committee looks to in choosing a host city), not to mention convention space. As to the presence of a casino being anathema to the Olympic spirit, London, which recently won its bid to the host the 2012 Olympic Games over New York City and Paris, has twenty-five casinos.

Timothy Liam Epstein is an attorney with O’Hagan, Smith & Amundsen in Chicago. He is a regular contributor to the national Sports Law Blog. He recently authored, “Splinters from the Bench: Feasibility of Lawsuits by Athletes Against Coaches and Schools for Lack of Playing Time,” published by the University of Virginia School of Law. He is currently working on an article regarding the effects of multipliers and other measures in high school sports.

Tim raises a good point about the presence of casinos in London, and how those casinos did not preclude London from obtaining the 2012 Olympic Games. As to his proposal for a retractable dome in Chicago, it is interesting and doubtlessly controversial. But as he notes, perhaps it could have important future uses, such as in trying to attract another NFL franchise to Chicago or hosting a super bowl.

Read More

How 'Bout Them Tigers!

What's going on with the Detroit Tigers this year? It's not very often that you see a team go from "worst to first". As of right now, they have the best record in all of baseball (32-14). They also currently rank 1st in team ERA, 2nd in team slugging percentage, and 7th in team batting avg.

I'm a Detroit native and, up until two and a half years ago when I moved to sunny Florida, I lived there my entire life. Living in Florida, I'm sort of out of the loop and unable to closely follow and watch the Tigers. I know we're only about 1/3 of the way through the season, but after a string of many consecutive losing seasons, Detroiters definitely have something to get excited about. So all of you Tigers fans, I'm curious to know WHY they have the best record right now and are among the league leaders in pitching and hitting.

Which of the following is/are contributing to the Tigers' success this year?

• The players had a meeting in spring training and decided that they would prefer to play like the '97 Marlins instead of the '84 Tigers
• The draft has finally produced some talent this year at the major league level
• Releasing Carlos Pena
• Signing Kenny Rogers
• Kenny Rogers decided that it's better to strike out batters than camera men
• It's that extra $13,520,866 in payroll this year
• The batters are on steroids this year
• The pitchers are on steroids this year
• GM Dave Dombrowski is on steroids this year
• Only Brandon Inge is on steroids this year (he has 11 home runs!)

Read More

Could the NBA Ban Timeouts?

At Slate, "Sports Nut" Josh Levin argues that the NBA should ban time outs. According to the Nut, timeouts are "despicable," "indefensible" and a "buzzkill." I'm not particularly concerned with the merits of this proposal (which, other than employing more coarse language, is not terribly original, see here and here) Instead, I'm interested in its legal feasibility. Particularly, would the NBA have to bargain with the players' association before reducing or eliminating timeouts? Are timeouts "wages, hours, and working conditions", and therefore a mandatory item of collective bargaining? These are questions Rick posed here about the dress code. (The distinction between mandatory, permissive, and illegal subjects of collective bargaining also matters in jurisdictions that follow the Mackey case regarding the scope of the non-statutory labor exemption from antitrust law, as Rick explains here).

The interplay between collective bargaining and “rules of the game” is a complicated one. Timeouts, of course, seem a bit like "hours." Of course, banning time outs might actually reduce the hours that an NBA player spends “in the building.” Still, something that decreases hours at work would seem to "concern" hours. Similarly, to the extent that eliminating timeouts changed the “conditions” under which NBA games were played (by making the end-game a more continuous, high-paced experience) such a move would seem to fall into the mandatory category. I imagine that many of the more hulking and less limber NBA players would be concerned that a timeoutless 4th quarter would involve a higher risk of injury, since play would necessarily become more chaotic and unpredictable.

The leading sports law casebooks pose some interesting hypotheticals about the mandatory vs. permissive distinction in connection with rules and conditions of play. For example, the Mitten/Davis/Smith/Berry book Sports Law and Regulation: Cases, Materials & Problems offers: the placement of the 3-point line in basketball; the height of the pitcher’s mound in baseball; the dimensions of a hockey rink or baseball field; and the status of the DH rule in baseball (page 576). The Weiler/Roberts book Sports and the Law: Text, Cases & Problems offers: the DH rule; institution (or elimination) of overtime to break ties in hockey or football; installation of artificial turn in football or baseball parks; hockey’s rule about wearing helmets during games; and the use of instant replay (page 327).

Read More

Jeb, Not Condi, as NFL Commish?

Last week, I reported on speculation that Secretary of State Condi Rice was closer to the NFL Commish's office. Now, it seems, no-longer "private conversations" have been afoot involving Florida's Governor Jeb Bush. Apparently, Steelers Owner Dan Rooney is conducting the search.

UPDATE: According to an AP wire story from yesterday, which the NFL put on its own web site, "The leading candidates for Tagliabue's job, which must be approved by 22 of the 32 teams, continue to be Roger Goodell, the NFL's chief operating officer; Atlanta general manager Rich McKay and Baltimore president Dick Cass. One outside name that has cropped up recently has been Michael Powell, former chairman of the Federal Communication Commission and the son of Colin Powell, the former secretary of state. Also on the list are league officials Jeff Pash, Eric Grubman and Joe Browne, as well as several club officials and an unknown number of potential candidates from outside the NFL." The NFL also appears to confirm the pursuit of Bush.

Read More