There was a lot going on last night during the Super Bowl. But caught up in the hysteria–somewhere between people pointing out the game’s eery similarities to this past year’s election, the Tom Brady roasting, the Tom Brady adoration, the Lady Gaga jumping gifs, and the commercials that every American loves to hate or hates to love–a ton of people donated a ton of money to various organizations and charities around the country.

Using the hashtag #AGoodGame, people took to Twitter to pledge to donate a certain amount of money every time their team scored a touchdown or a field goal.

Watching #SuperBowl w/ democracy, civil rights, & environment in mind. #AGoodGame for @ACLU @PPact @splcenter @AWIOnline @NatlParkService pic.twitter.com/SZBYScSnah

— Amber Baillon (@Vambaillon) February 5, 2017

$100 to ACLU, $50 to Planned Parenthood and $50 to Standing Rock Sioux. #AGoodGame #SuperBowl @joshgondelman Thanks for the inspiration!

— Kristen Callisto (@HaleiwaHoney) February 6, 2017

5 Brady sacks = $100 to @splcenter, & $100 to @AlbanySAFEProj to help support survivors of sexual assault and DV #AGoodGame @joshgondelman https://t.co/9Ud0OdEtAn

— Bear Brian (@Brian___H) February 6, 2017

I have paid off my #AGoodGame promise to @SavetheChildren. My math looks like this: pic.twitter.com/komMvvdQ3h

— Owen King (@OwenKingwriter) February 6, 2017

#AGoodGame Donating to Boston area women’s shelter @RosiesPlace pic.twitter.com/09WfXr8T94

— Estelle Nickleby (@estenickleby) February 6, 2017

#AGoodGame was started by comedian Josh Gondelman, a writer for “Last Week Tonight” and a lifelong Patriots fan, who, on Thursday, tweeted his intention to support his team while rejecting the politics of some of the organization’s members.

I’ve been a Patriots fan for my whole life but I am way off on the political spectrum from much of the organization. https://t.co/3p3oVKzwkW

— Josh Gondelman (@joshgondelman) February 3, 2017

I’d like to be able to cheer for the team I grew up loving without cheerleading the Trump administration. Is this anyone else?

— Josh Gondelman (@joshgondelman) February 3, 2017

My friend @emma_sandoe and I thought that maybe people who feel ambivalent could donate to a good cause for every Pats FG or TD.

— Josh Gondelman (@joshgondelman) February 3, 2017

It seems like a practical way to do a little good without staging a (small and ineffective) boycott of the Super Bowl.

— Josh Gondelman (@joshgondelman) February 3, 2017

If you have political Patriots fan ambivalence, maybe pledge a little money to a good cause when they score using the hashtag: #AGoodGame

— Josh Gondelman (@joshgondelman) February 3, 2017

Because of Tom Brady’s garbage politics, I’m donating $100 for every Patriots TD and $50 for every FG to the @NAACP_LDF. #AGoodGame

— Josh Gondelman (@joshgondelman) February 3, 2017

The politics of some of the members of the Patriots organization has been a running sub-plot in the NFL this season. In September, a “Make America Great Again” hat was seen in the Patriots’ superstar quarterback Tom Brady’s locker. Brady has also made comments that have quietly alluded to his support of  President Donald Trump.

In November, Patriots coach Bill Belichick was criticized for sending a letter to Trump congratulating him on a “tremendous campaign” and touting him “the ultimate competitor and fighter.”  Additionally, Patriots owner Robert Kraft has described Trump as a “a very close friend” and was seen at Trump Tower a week after the election ended.

In an interview with Esquire, Gondelman said he would have felt “weird” not acknowledging the relationship these members of the Patriots have with Trump. “I have this large social media reach, and fortunately a little money I could donate to a good cause,” Gondelman said, “So it just felt like to do that would be putting my money where my mouth is.”

While donation totals from #AGoodGame have not been collected yet, last night’s surge of generosity follows a trend that has sprung up in response to some of Trump’s policies. At the end of the weekend Trump’s polarizing travel ban took effect, CNN’s Brian Stelter reported that the ACLU had received 356,306 donations totaling over $24.1 million–five times more than the organization usually receives in a whole year. Planned Parenthood also has seen a rise in donations. According to The Atlantic, Planned Parenthood received 80,000 donations in the three days after the election.

Austin Elias-De Jesus

Austin is an editorial intern at Law Street Media. He is a junior at The George Washington University majoring in Political Communication. You can usually find him reading somewhere. If you can’t find him reading, he’s probably taking a walk. Contact Austin at Staff@Lawstreetmedia.com.

The post Anti-Trump Super Bowl Donation Campaign Raises Money for Various Organizations appeared first on Law Street.

“Deflategate” is easily one of the biggest scandals to ever rock the NFL, continuously generating headlines a year and a half later. The intricacies of the controversy have become so complex, that coming this fall the University of New Hampshire’s Law School will offer a class that focuses specifically on the scandal. A legal expert for Sports Illustrated and a nationally prominent UNH law faculty professor, Michael McCann, will lead the course.

According to the class description,

The nationally publicized “Deflategate” case illustrates the power struggle that results when sports and law collide. [The course] will introduce [students] to the role the legal system plays in sports, relevant practices and applications in the field, and the journalistic methods used to fuel a scandal that has dominated the professional sports landscape since January of 2015.

It’s been 544 days since the scandal began with the New England Patriots and the Indianapolis Colts’ AFC Championship Game. On Wednesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rejected a request from Patriots quarterback Tom Brady to avoid a four-game suspension for his role in deflating footballs to make them easier to catch during rainy games. For now, it looks like the New England QB will be watching the games from the sidelines.

Why is this still a thing? #Deflategatepic.twitter.com/gLWWtwxGc1

— Ships Have Sailed (@ShipsHaveSailed) July 13, 2016

Click here to read Law Street Media’s previous coverage on “Deflategate.”

The federal appeals court’s decision could finally be the end to a long and embarrassing string of violations, but Brady can still ask the Supreme Court to overrule his suspension. The odds of that happening are slim though, because the Patriot’s first game takes place in less than two months.

“That would be an extremely long shot, and, of course, could not be finally resolved soon, even were the justices to hear the appeal,” said Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond.

The NFL Players Association issued a statement regarding the court’s ruling to deny Brady’s request. The statement reads:

We are disappointed with the decision denying a rehearing, as there were clear violations of our collective bargaining agreement by the NFL and Commissioner Roger Goodell. Despite today’s result, the track record of this League office when it comes to matters of player discipline is bad for our business and bad for our game. We have a broken system that must be fixed. We will review all of our options carefully on behalf of Tom Brady and all NFL players.

Tom Brady when he heard his 4-Game Suspension was being upheld. #Deflatriots #DeflateGate https://t.co/l9b3S4hscM

— SteelersNation (@TheSteelZone) July 14, 2016

The transformation and complications of the scandal will make the law course on the topic an intriguing option for students. The scandal has transformed from cheating accusations over the air pressure in footballs, to a multi-million dollar legal battle involving the nation’s top lawyers. It has also raised questions about the powers of the commissioner and unionized employees’ right to due process in a disciplinary hearing.

“When deflated footballs dominate national headlines, it’s clear that sports have become much more than just a casual pastime in the United States,” reads the class description. “Often the real game takes place on a playing field where legal, regulatory, and journalistic systems converge on the governance of professional sports.”

The Patriots’ backup quarterback, Jimmy Garoppolo, is expected to fill in for Brady in games against the Arizona Cardinals, Miami Dolphins, Houston Texans, and Buffalo Bills. Brady would be eligible to make his regular-season debut in Week 5 against the Cleveland Browns.

Despite the team playing with a second-string player, the Patriots are still predicted to perform well this upcoming season. But during those four games, Brady is set to lose approximately $235,294 in salary.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post UNH School of Law Offers Course on “Deflategate” appeared first on Law Street.

Monday saw a new wrinkle in the low level scandal that seemingly won’t disappear: Deflategate. New England Patriots’ quarterback Tom Brady will indeed serve a four game suspension for the upcoming NFL season, due to his still unclear role in using deflated footballs during the AFC Championship game in 2014, when the Patriots defeated the Indianapolis Colts 28-0.

A federal court of appeals concluded on Monday morning that NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell’s actions last September in suspending Brady for four games was in fact within his powers, even given the collective bargaining agreement he signed with the NFL Player’s Association (NFLPA) which appealed his original dictum last September.

The latest developments drew praise from the NFL and disappointment from the NFLPA.

After Monday’s ruling, the league posted this official statement:

We are pleased the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled today that the Commissioner properly exercised his authority under the collective bargaining agreement to act in cases involving the integrity of the game. That authority has been recognized by many courts and has been expressly incorporated into every collective bargaining agreement between the NFL and NFLPA for the past 40 years.

The NFLPA was less enthusiastic with the ruling, which involved a three judge panel led by U.S. Circuit Judge Barrington Parker, and stated:

“Our Union will carefully review the decision, consider all of our options and continue to fight for players’ rights and for the integrity of the game.”

The judges cited Brady’s decision to destroy his cell phone the day he was set to have an interview with an investigative team as a leading factor in their ruling.

Even Donald Trump weighed in. At his campaign rally in New Hampshire yesterday morning, he had this to say about the four time Super Bowl champ (and his frequent golf partner): “Leave Tom Brady alone!“

And although this decision can be appealed by Brady and the NFLPA, it looks like the prospect of that long and arduous process will result in a Brady-less Patriots for the first four games of the 2016 season. At least that should leave Brady with plenty of time to sneak in a few more rounds of golf with his buddy Trump.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Deflategate Returns: Tom Brady to Serve Four Game Suspension to Start 2016 Season appeared first on Law Street.

Because “deflategate” can apparently never die for Boston sports fans, Patriots fans are now suing the NFL to block one of the penalties that the league handed down. Seven irate fans want the team’s draft picks reinstated, and have filed a lawsuit in federal court to that effect.

The penalties for deflategate were highly contested from the beginning–the original decision by the league to suspend quarterback Tom Brady for four games was been put on hold by a judge and appeals are still ongoing. One of the other penalties levied by the NFL, however, was the loss of two draft picks for the Massachusetts-based team–this year’s first round draft pick, as well as 2017’s fourth round draft pick.

The suit, Orsatti v. NFL, is filed against the NFL, Roger Goddell, the NFL commissioner who has already received plenty of flak over his handling of deflategate, as well as the owner of the Patriots, Robert Kraft. While it could seem weird to sue Kraft, the man whose team is actually negatively affected by the penalty, the lawsuit claims that he didn’t do enough to fight against the revocation of the Patriots’ draft picks. It states:

Defendant Robert Kraft had remedies to attempt to get plaintiffs’ draft pick back, but he chose his fellow billionaire owners above the plaintiffs and fellow fans.

The lawsuit claims that Goddell, Kraft, and the NFL as a whole have broken a number of laws ranging from consumer protection issues to racketeering. As a result, the fans who filed the suit allege that they have experienced: “embarrassment, ridicule and depression due to the rest of the country who is jealous of the Patriots ‘piling on’ and criticizing the Patriots and their fans for being ‘cheaters.'”

However, legal experts are saying that this lawsuit probably won’t go too far. ESPN talked to Michael McCann, a sports law professor at the University of New Hampshire Law School, who pointed out that the fans bringing the suit don’t really have standing. He stated: “paying for a ticket to watch the Patriots play isn’t interfered with by the team losing a draft pick or two.” While it seems likely that we’ll continue to hear about deflategate as the legal side of the controversy continues to make its way through court, this particular case appears to be dead on arrival.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Controversy That Will Never Die: Patriots Fans Sue NFL Over “Deflategate” appeared first on Law Street.

Tom  Brady is officially a free man–free to play in the first four games of this year’s season, that is. Earlier today, Judge Richard M. Berman nullified the punishment that the NFL levied against Brady for his role in the famed deflategate scandal of last year’s playoffs.

Berman’s ruling was based mainly on procedural concerns. According to the decision:

The Award is premised upon several significant legal deficiencies, including (A) inadequate notice to Brady of both his potential discipline (four-game suspension) and his alleged misconduct; (B) denial of the opportunity for Brady to examine one of two lead investigators, namely NFL Executive Vice President and General Counsel Jeff Pash; and (C) denial of equal access to investigative files, including witness interview notes.

Berman’s decision could have brought finality after a drawn out back-and-forth battle between the star Patriots’ quarterback, represented by the NFLPA, and the NFL. However the NFL is going to continue to appeal it–the case will now make its way to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. NFL Commissioner Roger Goddell elaborated in a written statement today:

We are grateful to Judge Berman for hearing this matter, but respectfully disagree with today’s decision. We will appeal today’s ruling in order to uphold the collectively bargained responsibility to protect the integrity of the game. The commissioner’s responsibility to secure the competitive fairness of our game is a paramount principle, and the league and our 32 clubs will continue to pursue a path to that end. While the legal phase of this process continues, we look forward to focusing on football and the opening of the regular season.

So, the NFL has now signed itself up for an even lengthier court process than it probably originally bargained for. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit will assign a panel of three judges chosen from a pool of 23 once the appeal is filed. The NFL will then have to convince two or more of the three that Berman was wrong in the way that he applied the law. While that seems simple enough, it’s the waiting game that dominates appeals cases that is at issue here. A case can take up to a year to appear in front of an appeals court, which means that this whole controversy will be hanging over the NFL, the NFLPA, and Brady for quite a bit longer. If the appeal does go through, it’s unclear how Brady could actually be punished, although a suspension appears to be a possibility.

Brady will play in the first regular season game next Thursday against the Pittsburgh Steelers. So why is the NFL even bothering to appeal?  One big issue is that this ruling could set a dangerous precedent for how the NFL handles suspension–the door has now been opened for another round of scrutiny in the appeals process by the courts. That could get expensive, and mean that the threat of NFL punishment holds less weight for players because there’s a new avenue for an appeal. For example, Cowboys player Greg Hardy is apparently looking to appeal his four-game suspension for domestic violence. At the end of the day, this entire debacle doesn’t look great for the NFL, regardless of whether or not Brady was actually in the wrong and aware of the under-inflated balls.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post How is DeflateGate Still Not Over?: The Next Steps for the Belabored NFL Controversy appeared first on Law Street.

“Deflategate” seems to have become the NFL scandal that won’t go away. In fact, deflategate has made it all the way to federal court. Patriots superstar quarterback Tom Brady appeared in court on Wednesday to appeal the four-game suspension the NFL deemed appropriate for his role in the scandal; now a judge is involved in the legal scuffle that has mainly been conducted behind closed doors.

Brady was suspended for four games, which was deemed an appropriate punishment for his role in the controversy involving the deflated balls used by the Patriots in the January 18 playoff game against the Indianapolis Colts. The suspension was appealed to Roger Goodell, the NFL Commissioner, who declined to amend it. After a lot of back-and-forth the case has made it to federal court in New York–the NFL is asking the court to uphold the suspension sentence, and the NFL Player’s Association (NFLPA) is working with Brady to ask that the suspension is vacated. The case is being overseen by U.S. District Judge Richard Berman, who publicly questioned both sides yesterday.

Berman appeared to doubt the NFL’s evidence that Brady was involved with the under-inflated balls–pointing out that it lacked a “smoking gun” tying the quarterback to the scandal. During Berman’s questioning to that effect, the NFL representatives did admit that they were missing direct evidence tying Brady to the deflated balls, but instead relied on circumstantial evidence mostly in the form of rather vague text messages. Berman also pointed out that the balls in question didn’t appear to give Brady any competitive advantage, given that he played better with the untouched balls in the later half of the game.

However, Berman did have some concerns about the way that Brady handled the investigation into his actions–particularly the fact that he destroyed his phone. While Brady’s team claimed that he did so in order to protect his privacy, the timing seemed a bit suspect. Brady’s lawyer acknowledged that he could have dealt with privacy concerns in a more prudent way given the circumstances. After Berman questioned both sides, there was a long, private discussion; it’s unclear how much progress was made.

At the end of the day, it does seem like timeliness will be a strong motivation for whatever deal ends up being made between Brady, the NFLPA, and the NFL. There is definitely some pressure to finish this up soon, given that regular season play, and Brady’s suspension, will begin in September. In fact, Berman himself is encouraging them to settle this quickly–if no settlement is reached, both sides will have to appear again in court. As the regular season–and the publicity and profits that go with it loom–it’s in everyone’s best interests to reach a settlement quickly.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Deflategate: NFL Scandal Makes it to Federal Court appeared first on Law Street.

In January, New England Patriots’ quarterback Tom Brady attempted to laugh off “deflategate” rumors that alleged that the balls provided by the Patriots during the AFC Championship Game against the Indianapolis Colts were intentionally under inflated. Now, following the release of an official report  investigating the incident, the Super Bowl-winning QB could be facing a suspension, thanks to several incriminating text messages sent by him and two low-level Patriots employees.

In the official 243-page report investigating the potential ball tampering, investigators overseen by attorney Ted Wells concluded that:

It is more probable than not that Jim McNally (the Officials Locker Room attendant for the Patriots) and John Jastremski (an equipment assistant for the Patriots) participated in a deliberate effort to release air from Patriots game balls after the balls were examined by the referee. Based on the evidence, it also is our view that it is more probable than not that Tom Brady (the quarterback for the Patriots) was at least generally aware of the inappropriate activities of McNally and Jastremski involving the release of air from Patriots game balls.

Investigators also notably found no evidence of wrongdoing on behalf of the Patriots’ ownership or any coaches. That includes Head Coach Bill Belichick, who was previously suspected of being complicit in the deflating scandal.

The most damning evidence from the report came in the form of text messages between Patriots employees McNally and Jastremski that allude to potential ball tampering. In one message McNally even goes as far as to refer to himself as “the deflator.”

The NFL #DeflateGate report revealed a text exchange between Jim McNally and John Jastremski http://t.co/rZ4Mx6LGOTpic.twitter.com/DDQvxEIrZa

— Newsweek (@Newsweek) May 6, 2015

In another string of messages sent between Brady and McNally after the deflategate scandal broke, Brady appears to check up on McNally and attempts to put him at ease.

Brady: You good Jonny boy?

McNally: Still nervous; so far so good though. I‟ll be alright

Brady: You didn’t do anything wrong bud.

McNally: I know; I‟ll be all good

When asked about the guilty-looking messages, both parties claimed they were discussing something else entirely, but it appears that investigators weren’t convinced by their justifications.

Now the question that’s on everyone’s mind is what will happen to Brady as a result of these findings. Sports experts have already begun to speculate that Brady will most likely be issued a two game suspension from the league, which was the same punishment initially issued last summer to Ray Rice after punching his girlfriend, now wife, in a casino elevator. However some are speculating that Brady’s suspension could end up being as much as the entire 2015 season.

According to the New York Daily News, the Patriots could also be fined, as they were following the 2007 SpyGate scandal. After those revelations, Roger Goodell, the Commissioner of the National Football League, fined them $250,000, took away a first-round draft pick, and hit Belichick with his own hefty fine for running the spying operation.

Ultimately making an example out of Brady by handing out a tougher suspension would show a strong message that the league doesn’t condone cheating of any sort. The deflategate scandal not only tainted the AFC championships, but also called into question the legitimacy of the Patriots’ presence in Super Bowl XLIX and their win against the Seattle Seahawks. However, suspending Brady for an entire season might not be entirely feasible for Goodell given Brady’s popularity amongst fans and his status as one of the NFL’s greatest quarterbacks. This may end up being one of those cases where a potential loss in profits might outweigh doing what is right.

Featured image courtesy of [Keith Allison via Flickr]

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Deflategate: How Will Tom Brady Fare? appeared first on Law Street.

Looks like Patriots’ Coach Bill Belichick has found himself at the center of yet another cheating scandal, this time over his balls. The NFL has found that 11 out of 12 of the New England Patriots’ game balls were under-inflated during their 45-7 victory over the Indianapolis Colts in the AFC Championship game on Sunday.

According to ESPN, the NFL’s subsequent investigation found that the footballs were inflated two pounds per square inch below what is required by NFL regulations. This apparently went unnoticed by the referee, Walt Anderson, who checked and approved both team’s footballs a little over two hours before kickoff.

So how do under-inflated footballs provide a competitive advantage? In an interview with NPR, scientist Ainissa Ramirez, author of “Newton’s Football,” explained that it helps improve the grip. She stated:

Particularly during that game which was very rainy, it’s hard to hold the ball, it’s hard to catch the ball. So by making it a little softer, it’s easier to catch the ball.

Patriots’ Quarterback Tom Brady tried laughing off the ball-tampering allegations Monday saying, “I think I’ve heard it all at this point,” but I doubt he’s laughing now. In fact, he’s probably putting his head under the covers after a 2011 radio interview surfaced in which Brady admitted he likes deflated balls. I find it highly unlikely that Brady would not have noticed that the balls were lighter throughout the game, but there’s no way he would ever admit it.

This isn’t the first time that Belichick’s coaching methods have been under fire. In 2007 he was disciplined by the NFL for a videotaping controversy dubbed “Spygate.” He was caught recording the New York Jets’ sideline coaches’ signals during a September 9, 2007 game. He was fined the largest fine ever imposed on a coach in NFL history–a total of $500,000. The Patriots were also fined $250,000 and stripped of their 2008 first round draft picks.

The NFL is choosing not to comment at this time, so it’s yet to be determined what penalties might be imposed. It’s highly likely that the Patriots will end up being fined and lose their draft picks as well, but that will have to be determined by the NFL. So far, the Patriots are still scheduled to play the Seattle Seahawks in the Super Bowl XLIX on February 1st.

The league should be taking this scandal very seriously. Personally, I think the Patriots should be disqualified from playing in the Super Bowl game. Even though they defeated the Colts by a landslide, cheating is cheating and this scandal threatens the integrity of the game. More fines and lost draft picks are going to be just another slap on the wrist, but taking away the chance at a championship ring will really hurt. Fans and players alike on Twitter seem just as outraged.

11 of 12 balls under-inflated can anyone spell cheating!!! #Just Saying

— Jerry Rice (@JerryRice) January 21, 2015

If you get 100% on a test and only cheat on half of it… It’s still cheating. It doesn’t matter what the score was. #Patriots

— James Rapien (@JamesRapien) January 21, 2015

Breakfast of cheating champions. #patriots cheaters pic.twitter.com/3FFAzLpw0j

— merlisa (@merlisa) January 21, 2015

However, no matter what happens, in an effort to make light of the situation we can always rely on the internet to quickly add some well-timed “balls” jokes. So before you go, enjoy this wonderful Patriots-Cialis parody video.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Deflategate: Patriots Caught Deflating AFC Championship Game Footballs appeared first on Law Street.

The NFL regular season is coming to a close, and with it, a plethora of fantasy-football dreams. Typically, friends draft a team of their favorite stars before the start of the season and depending on their team’s performance, a fantasy dueler can win bragging rights or bets made within the group. Except today, what started as a competition among friends has evolved into a multi-million dollar enterprise. Websites like DraftKings and FanDuel have capitalized on this competition by changing the fantasy landscape. These sites hold weekly competitions allowing users to choose players weekly for a fee. Although this option bypasses the heartache of seeing a number one draft pick go down with a season-ending injury, this type of competition raises some interesting concerns. Instead of bragging rights, friends can compete for millions of dollars against thousands of players across the globe by depositing cash for a particular contest. This sounds wonderful on paper, except it also sounds like gambling, too. Read on and find out whether you should cosign your fantasy involvement.

 What’s the latest news in the fantasy world?

Like the fantasy pro, I’ve endured the pleasure and heartbreak that fantasy football conjures. For instance, two weeks ago week I won $500. Nevertheless, the excitement that a touchdown catch enlivens is comparable to blackjack. The rush in seeing the craps table explode with shouts of hope and trembles of fear is similar to the anxiety of watching the player that you almost drafted “go-off” for three touchdowns. Although there are plenty of gambling outlets for duelers like myself to feast on, discouragement kicked in after reading this article about the Denver Broncos signing a partnership with Draftkings. Let’s face it, it wouldn’t be fair if the number one offense was in cahoots with the fantasy source. Although it’s doubtful that Peyton Manning gets a call during the game to throw an interception, these competitions craft an accessible outlet for fantasy football, which inadvertently targets kids and young adults to compete/bet/win. That worry grew after researching the inner-workings of these one-day fantasy events.

As my fellow New York Law School alum Andrew Blancato correctly noted in his article about fantasy sports gambling, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) outlaws online sports gambling. The fine distinction is based on skill and chance. But when did this all begin? Years ago, fantasy sports was limited to drafting teams before the season and hoping your team excelled in their respective positions. Today a user can bet online anywhere from 25 cents to upward of a thousand dollars on his team’s weekly performance. When did Football Sunday transform into caring more about the points a player scored, rather than the outcome of the game itself?

Image courtesy of Evangelos Siozos

When did fantasy become financial?

In July 2009, Nigel Eccles and Tom Griffiths altered the fantasy sports arena by launching their newly minted one-day fantasy competitions. Eccles, the CEO of FanDuel, based his idea on a simple premise: Letting people pick professional athletes daily and bypassing the debilitating effects of injury risks associated with season-long tournaments. Instead of one bite at the apple, these businesses capitalize on multiple game-day bites.

In 2010, Allen Tippy explained the phenomena that recently started interrupting your favorite TV or radio show with a 30 second advertisement.  “Fantasy is the steak,” Mr. Lowitz says. “We just want to be the mashed potatoes on the side.” After gorging on the traditional fantasy platter, Tippy made the change to one-day fantasy competitions.

I search out the weak players…I played in the same traditional fantasy baseball league with a group of lawyers from Mobile, Alabama for about 15 years.

That’s right. The success of one-day fantasy sports is semi-driven by the fantasy fanatics, those who play and switch their line-ups with 30 seconds to spare before the game begins. In fact, by employing these modern tactics, a one-a-day dueler can exploit an opponent’s weakness by staying alert of all injuries and penalties that keep a player sidelined. Interestingly, this awareness sounds just like skill, except in one-a-days there are a few caveats.

For example, unlike traditional gambling site, there is a higher commission taken out by the one-day fantasy servicer. Further, what separates a winner from the host of losers requires beating 60 percent of them to make a profit. Eccles calls it “fantasy for the ADD generation.” Mr. Eccles hits it on the nose, considering FanDuel paid out roughly $500 million this year alone.

After FanDuel captured 70 percent of the daily fantasy sports market, DraftKings snatched the remaining 25-30 percent. Fast forward four years: these simple startups have catapulted to infamy and success. In fact, the Fantasy Sports Trade Association acknowledged that about $1.7 billion is spent each year on fantasy sports in the U.S. and Canada. Couple this with an infinite pool of investors and big-name endorsers and one is left to wonder if any regulatory measures have been taken to ensure fair play.

So…is this even legal?

In 2006, Congress passed the UIGEA, which basically outlawed any online sports gambling that relied strictly on chance instead of skill. Whether or not fantasy sports are chance- or skill-related is a question for Socrates; however, what has been done since 2006 is quite startling, especially considering the mammoth explosion of this business. Vice Sports explained it best:

The debate over the legality of DFS revolves around the definition of skill versus chance. DFS games fall somewhere in between pure games of skill (chess, checkers) and pure games of chance (lottery, bingo). Picking a winning lineup involves a level of skill, intelligence, and talent that can be improved but also, Peyton Manning could tear his ACL in warm-ups and sorry, bro, your lineup is done.

Great, so playing fantasy sports involves both a touch of skill and a dash of luck. Easy, done. But some questions still linger. For example, since 2006, the marketing landscape changed, technology evolved, and fifth graders were given cell phones. So, what exactly is going on?

On December 2, 2014, lawyers lodged formal complaints against FanDuel in Florida Federal Court. The allegations included claims of deceptive practices by misleading customers, which tiptoes the line into fraudulent territory. Basically, FanDuel targeted customers through its promise to double any money deposited into its website. Yet, its “double your deposit” promotion didn’t double its customers’ deposits upon joining. Instead, if a user deposited $200, her money was entered into a formula, which requires a contestant to spend $5,000 in order to receive the initial $200 promised payback. This wasn’t the only lawsuit targeting the fantasy giants.

That’s when I was introduced to Christopher Langone, who filed pleadings in Illinois Federal Court to challenge the winnings of Patrick Kaiser, a FanDuel enthusiast. Months later, Langone filed another action against DraftDay.com and bypassed any jurisdiction issues by filing in San Antonio, Texas, DraftDay’s state of incorporation. What initially seemed like a theoretical query based on whether fantasy sports involved more skill than chance, created a battle of mythical proportions, perfect for the great professors who teach me.

What is being done?

In short, nothing yet. Some Federal Courts have reacted, using the judiciary power bestowed upon them to influence states to strike down fantasy football in Montana, Louisiana, Washington, Iowa, Arizona, and Puerto Rico. Or take Florida for example, where state law technically bans the “fantasy phenomenon,” and makes playing it a misdemeanor. But other than political riffraff and textualist toils over what chance and skill really are, the main concern for fantasy-player welfare has dissipated. As Mike Florio puts it,

In what would be a bizarre twist on point shaving, coaches and players could in theory be bribed to ensure that certain players will generate significant production, or that certain players will be shut down. Getting to coaches and assistant coaches who control the offensive game plan would be the most efficient approach. It also would help to grease defenders who would be inclined to slip on an invisible banana peel, springing a specific player for a touchdown or two. Or four.

Florio’s concerns express the same disbelief I have. Further, his article was written in July, way before Peyton endorsed Draftkings and Tom Brady joined DailyMVP.

Fanduel pays out 1 million dollars in prizes per day. Join my 1-day league http://t.co/oTvV4dzNZE

— Vince Wilfork (@wilfork75) August 23, 2014

With more and more players signing onto these fantasy startups, maybe it’s time to start paying attention to the inconspicuous tweets of NFL players. It’s not that Wilfork would miss a tackle to spring a runner 50 yards, it’s that he might be tempted to do so in order to capitalize on the same organization paying him to tweet.

Conclusion

Greed takes many forms. After witnessing the fall of the real estate market, we all saw the destructive nature of our fellow man. Like much of the law, Congress has slowly reacted to recent changes in technology. Today, kids and adults have online access at their fingertips. Although this doesn’t fit the bill as a pressing concern, it could become so. Anyone can click to verify that they are 18 years old in order to play on these sites. Further, not an iota of regulatory action has been taken since 2006. Although it is too early for the unforeseen consequences to materialize, it might already be too late to ensure that they don’t. Alas, chance and skill can only get a fantasy dueler so far. My hope is that there’s no one whispering in the players’ ears to strike that balance.

Resources

Primary

 Denver Broncos: Draft Kings, Broncos, Sign Partnership

Additional 

Law Street Media: Fantasy Sports: Good Fun or Illegal Gambling?

Wall Street Journal: Everyday fantasies

Boston: Single-Day Fantasy Sports

Vice Sports: The Daily Fantasy Sports Takeover

Forbes: Fanduel sued in court

Fox News; Gaming laws could pose risk for fantasy football craze

NBC: NFL Paying attention to Influence of high-stakes fantasy football leagues 

Evangelos Siozios

Evangelos Siozios is a student at New York Law School focusing on family law and real estate transactions. He is a 2012 Baruch Honors College Graduate whose interests include writing, exercising, and solving TV mysteries. Contact Evangelos at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Fantasy Sports: Ready…Set…Bet! appeared first on Law Street.