Professor Charles Grantham, director of the Center for Sport Management in the Stillman School of Business, was featured in an article in The New York Times and interviewed by The Real News Network. Both media appearances were in reference to the recent ruling that Colin Kaepernick may proceed with his suit against the N.F.L. for colluding to "blackball" him from the league because of his National Anthem protests.
The N.F.L. had sought to have Kaepernick's suit dismissed through "summary judgment," essentially a legal ruling which determines that a suit cannot go forward to a full hearing because it lacks merit and/or a chance of winning.
The New York Times writes:
On Thursday, the arbitrator hearing Kaepernick's grievance dismissed the N.F.L.'s bid to throw out the case. He determined that Kaepernick's lawyers had unearthed enough credible evidence during the first stages of discovery to allow the case to go forward.
This sets the stage for owners and league executives to be questioned in a trial-like setting. Kaepernick faces an uphill legal battle, but even proceeding to a full hearing amounts to a victory because it allows his lawyers to continue to search for evidence of collusion, while keeping Kaepernick's name in the news during the N.F.L. season, when attention on football is at its peak.
A number of experts, including Charles Grantham, have said that they believe this ruling and the structure of the process (an arbitrator paid by both parties, not a judge) could lead toward settlement. In The Real News Network interview, Professor Grantham said:
But one thing is for certain: That Colin Kaepernick, the fact that they said we are not going to dismiss the charge, that we are now going to present it for a full blown hearing, and there will be far more and many more depositions, far more facts that come out, I’m of the belief at some point there’s a settlement here. Because I don’t believe in the end the NFL would like to hear, or have some of those things become public.
The New York Times also noted, however, that:
A settlement might also spark more attacks from the president, who has shown a proclivity to bludgeon companies he does not like, like technology corporations and news organizations. In theory, the president could lend support to a bill that surfaced in Congress that would prohibit public financing of sports stadiums.
"All of a sudden, the arms of politics could have a far longer reach, where the president can put his finger on the scale and influence how the N.F.L. and players resolve their conflicts," said Charles Grantham, a former executive with the National Basketball Players Association who now teaches at the Center for Sport Management at Seton Hall University.
It is possible, Grantham said, that the arbitrator, in allowing the case to go forward, is in fact nudging the N.F.L. to settle. Like most judges, arbitrators prefer that the two sides come to their own conclusion.
The New York Times, "Colin Kaepernick Is Not Going Away"
The Real News Network, "Kaepernick NFL Collusion Case Moving Ahead; Trump at the Center"