NASL Files Federal Antitrust Lawsuit Against US Soccer

Hard to play with no teams. Maybe they could bring back a fake Cosmos team for a one off friendly like they did in 2011 against Man United.

 

It costs $550 mil for an MLS expansion feee and I think the only reason they began the NASL was because they didn't want to have any part of the USL so where would they play?

Will Rocco B. Commisso use the money to buy a few good players for his 4th place Serie A , Fiorentina side?

 

Any money Rocco wins is going straight to his wallet or to Fiorentina. I don’t see him ever bring the Cosmos back. He seems done with American soccer.

 

They love Rocco in Florence.

 

USL at the time was a shit show. The bigger clubs wanted something else so they built a bigger shit show.

The $500 million is just a number. I think their biggest gambit is persuading the court that MLS and the USSF actively encouraged the likes of North Carolina and Tampa Bay to leave NASL to protect MLS.

The rest is undermined by their own actions. NASL agreed to the PLS, if they had met the PLS they could have achieved D1 status as proven by the USL W-League but despite repeated waivers they couldn't even meet D2 standards.

Unless they have Jake Edwards and Steve Malik as star witnesses I don't think they are going to get much even if they win.

 

I never understood on what the big deal is or was if the NASL were to achieve D1 or even D2 status or not.

I mean what will change exactly if and when they are granted this title?

If the owners have enough money and want to compete with MLS, how can anyone legally stop them?

 

Nothing can stop someone doing as you said. The problem is finding enough like minded people. This honestly is just an excuse put up by the people who ran the NASL into the ground as to why it failed. "Oh we didn't have D1 status so we failed" meanwhile the USL is growing and building up infrastructure significantly since this lawsuit was started. The only person really winning out of this is Kessler (the lawyer for the NASL) he keeps getting money for a case he pretty much knows is frivolous.

 

Would be trebled, I believe. But it would be appealed. I would not anticipate anyone receiving $1.5B, though if they did, resuming play would be the quickest way to lose all of it.

 

First of all, even if they win the case they would have to prove actual damages. How did it cost them $500 million?

Secondly, why/how would it be trebled? Any punitive damages would be at the discretion of the judge or jury.

 

They NASL owners could prove that they missed out on getting a piece of the WC 2026 excitement, action and money that could be made.

Thinking back 30 years ago, I recall a similar issue involving an amateur pub team, the San Jose Oaks in 1992 coached by Chris Dangerfield of the old NASL.

The team was owned by Englishman Andy Hewitt, and he also owned a SJ restaurant/bar called the Britania Arms.

There was a 1992-93 CONCACAF Cup Winners Cup game between the Oaks and Monterrey of Mexico played on November 18, 1992, at Spartan Stadium at San Jose State University.

https://ng.soccerway.com/matches/19...an-jose-oaks/club-de-futbol-monterrey/903200/

The Oaks lost 1-4 but what happened was the San Francisco Bay Blackhawks tried to block the game because they thought they were the flagship pro team in the area and this amateur pub team shouldn't be in the tournament.

I was sitting in the booth right next to Blackhawks owner Dan VanVoorhis and future MLS San Jose Clash coach Laurie Calloway and I could tell how mad and jealous they both were that the Oaks were playing.

As I recall there was only something like 4,000 mostly Mexican fans who showed up because the Blackhawks derailed the Oaks from selling tickets and advertising for the game.

What followed was Hewitt suing the Blackhawks and VanVoorhis stating with WC 1994 on tap, they could stand to gain a lot more and were prevented from doing so.

Dangerfield told me that the Oaks eventually won the lawsuit and were awarded $500,000 which would amount to $1.1 million by today's currency.

That doesn't sound like much but for an amateur team in 1993-94, that was quite a lot of money.

After that, with WC 94 and the MLS startup, no one cared too much about amateur soccer anymore, but the Oaks still won the case and got the money I think in 1995.

Hewitt then bought another Britania Arms Pub in Santa Cruz near the beach after getting the money.

The NASL could use the same or similar case law arguments.

Whether or not they win is another story.

 

How much money considering the league failed in 2018 with 8 or 9 teams?

If they are claiming damages they have to be specific.

 

I don’t know which owners are involved or what actual amount they are asking for.

Is it really $500 million or is it more?

Also, are they suing both the USSF and MLS?

 

Here's the amended complaint

https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:VA6C2:c0adcb4f-2a7f-4329-826d-2d9451b6fcb2

 

If I remember correctly it was Rocco and Silva (Miami FC) that started this lawsuit but Silva dropped out when he joined up the USL. I believe they're asking for $500 million. IF they win it's up to the judge to decide how much they're getting. It could be like the USFL that "won" it's lawsuit against the NFL but the NFL proved that they went out of business more with their incompetence then what the NFL was doing and awarded them $1.i honestly think they're going to lose as the USSF can show how time and time again they gave the NASL waivers and the last time they wanted them it amounted to Rocco saying he'd prop up 3 or 4 NPSL teams to join NASL until they "figure things out". Surprisingly the USSF wasn't on board with that.

 

I never quite understood that USFL v. NFL lawsuit.

I just recall the league was awarded $3.00 and then never cashed the check.

I just looked up an old interview from Rocco Commisso in Italy and he defended himself to his Fiorentina fans last year when they complained he wasn't spending enough on the team and he stated he had already spent $400 million on the club in a short period of time.

I agree he will in the end most likely use the money for his Serie A team if he wins the NASL case.

 

So um NASL announced the have a new commissioner.

http://www.nasl.com/news/2024/12/16/victoria-l-anderson-new-nasl-commissioner

 

I would imagine that would be part of the argument.

Under federal antitrust law, persons and companies harmed by anticompetitive conduct may seek an award of triple their damages, an injunction, and costs of the action (including attorney fees) against a party that violates federal antitrust laws.

Did you not remember the USFL verdict? That's probably where the average person learned about the (nearly) automatic trebling of antitrust damages. It's not like other damage cases.

 

"...only the second African American to serve as Commissioner of a US professional sports league."

Either Terdema Ussery or Michael Huyghue would like a word.

 

In a nutshell, the USFL claimed the NFL conspired with the networks and municipalities and partners to block off avenues for the USFL to get on TV, get into markets/stadiums and, basically, do business.

They were hoping to achieve through the courts what they could not achieve through the marketplace. The USFL was super fun and I loved it, but it lost scads of money because of its own hubris and mismanagement. That was the finding, largely - that the NFL was a monopoly, but they were a monopoly because their competitor was a basket case.

If that sounds familiar, it ought to.

 

She worked at Medicom for Rocco........ also graduated from Columbia....... Is a trial lawyer by trade........

 

In other news, Enron announced their new CEO.

 

Electing a new commissioner with no league or teams?

Do you think it is because they have a good idea, they will win their lawsuit?

 

What exactly is the commissioner's job description supposed to be at this point?

 

Effective September 1, 2024, according to the news release published on December 16. Makes sense for a league without teams or players.

 

No this is just a smoke screen. She's apparently an employee of Rocco's Mediacom corporation. So I wouldn't be surprised if this is just a tack on title with minimal pay. It's pretty much a no show job. I can only think this is being done for the upcoming trial for some reason.