"The Big O" Part III
Oscar Robertson’ s class action suit was filed against the NBA in 1970- it never made it to trial. The case was settled the day before the trial was to begin in April of 1976. Oscar Robertson had retired from the NBA two years prior to that. Curt Flood, on the other hand, had taken his case all the way to the Supreme Court in 1972 after losing lower court decisions. The Supreme Court rejected Flood’s arguments for doing away with the reserve clause. But by the middle of the decade the baseball players' union was able to effect major changes through the "Catfish" Hunter ruling and the Andy Messersmith and Dave McNally arbitration decision. The Oscar Robertson settlement allowed for the end of option clause in the standard NBA contract, thus setting the stage for free-agency in the NBA. Furthermore, with the Robertson settlement in place, the NBA brought four ABA teams into the NBA fold and disbanded the other ABA teams. This set the stage for the continued growth of the NBA.
But what about Robertson and Flood, how were they viewed after the risked their careers to sue their employers? Robertson, after his retirement, did color commentary for the CBS game of the week during the 1974-75 season with Brent Musberger. One cannot be too much of a pariah if the NBA and CBS allow you to handle a high profile broadcasting job. Flood on the other hand, dealt with much more in the way of pain and depression after going through with his suit against Baseball. Flood spent much of the 1970’s in exile in Spain, and battled alcoholism for much of the time. Brad Snyder, whose biography of Curt Flood, titled A Well Paid Slave, speaks of Marvin Miller warning Flood before he went ahead with his suit of what he risked,
They met in New York, where Marvin proceeded to tell Curt every horrible thing that was going to happen to him if he did this, that he wouldn't ever get another job, that he would be black-balled from the game, that he will never get a job coaching, and that his association with major league baseball will be over forever. He then told Curt that, given the Supreme Court decisions of 1922 and 1953, his lawsuit was a million-to-one shot, and that even if here were to win the case, he would never see a dime because the court would not give him retroactive damages for all the contracts he signed under the reserve clause. But Curt felt that this lawsuit would benefit future players, and that was good enough for him. So, even though he knew he would lose his career over this, the inspiration he got from watching Dr. King, from the events of the civil rights movement, and from everything he experienced both in and out of the game, made him want to do go forward with the lawsuit.
Is it a coincidence that Flood and Robertson’s suits were both brought at the same time? Probably not- the late 1960’s and early 1970’s in the United States were an era of change and dissent. Pro Sports at that time wasn't isolated from the rest of the country, and the restrictive covenants that were part of standard player contracts at that time were bound to come under attack. The changes brought about by these suits, the eventual erosion of the reserve clause, and free agency, that owners thought would hurt the game, turned out to do just the opposite. Both the NBA and Major League Baseball reached new levels of prosperity over the coming decades.
Flood during his
short stint as a Washington Senator
Comments