Quarterhack Sack

At TNR.com, Gregg Easterhack gripes about how District Court Judge Shira Sheindlin's decision in the Maurice Clarrett case will "harm pro football," and raves about how great the NFL is. (Especially compared to the sucky NBA.) He doesn't mention, however, that he's an employee of the NFL. TNR doesn't mention it either.

Undoubtedly many people know Easterbrook's connection to the NFL; maybe even most of the people who bother to read an item about the NFL. But surely many people don't know it. So why hide the conflict of interest?

Easterbrook claims to write as a champion of young athletes, "most of them African American," who he thinks will be harmed by the decision. He says high school athletes who go directly to the pros will make big money, but won't learn the fundamentals, as they would in college. But you'd think that if the pros are paying large sums for winning athletes, they might actually want to maximize the return on their investment by teaching their highly-paid players the fundamentals. For that matter, if 19-year-olds are inherently inferior to college-trained players, why does Easterbrook fear that the 32 "divisions" of his employer -- all of whom purportedly "hav[e] a shared interest in keeping product quality high" -- will irrationally opt to throw money at the less-qualified youngsters?

Easterbrook also worries that high schoolers who go pro might lose out on their one chance for a free higher education. Well, maybe so, but those educations will go to other student-athletes, including some who might want them a little more. (And the ones who go pro will earn enough to cover tuition if they want a higher education later. You can still get through four years of Stanford on $11.9 million, right?)

It's a complex issue, and I'm sure there are some athletes who would benefit more in the long-term by deferring entry into the pros. But Easterbrook doesn't offer a particularly nuanced -- or objective -- look at the matter.