A football fan is suing the NFL for $100 million over the “severe emotional distress and trauma” that he suffered when former Colorado quarterback Shedeur Sanders unexpectedly dropped to the fifth round of last month’s draft.
In a lawsuit filed May 1 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Buffaloes fan Eric Jackson alleged the NFL had violated the Sherman Antitrust Act for collusion and possibly violated the Civil Rights Act for race discrimination, as well as consumer protection laws for “misrepresenting the nature of the drafting process and the qualifications of players.”
Jackson filed the case as a John Doe but revealed his identity by indicating he was representing himself. He describes himself in the lawsuit as “a dedicated fan of Colorado football” who “has closely followed Shedeur Sanders throughout the 2023 and 2024 seasons.” He included a request to file the complaint “in forma pauperis,” meaning he is unable to pay the filing fees.
Sanders, the son of Hall of Fame NFL player and Colorado coach Deion Sanders, was considered by some to be a potential first-round pick. Instead, he was bypassed until the Cleveland Browns claimed him at No. 144 overall, after they had already picked another quarterback, Oregon’s Dillon Gabriel, in the third round.
“Reports and leaked statements suggested that Sanders ‘tanked interviews,’ ‘wasn’t prepared,’ and ‘was too cocky,’ which contributed to a narrative that has unjustly harmed his reputation and potential as a player,” the lawsuit reads. “These slanderous statements reflect biases that influenced the NFL’s decision-making process, causing emotional distress and trauma to the Plaintiff as a fan and consumer.”
Jackson is also seeking “a formal acknowledgment from the NFL regarding the emotional distress caused by their actions and statements,” “a retraction of the slanderous statements made about Shedeur Sanders, along with an apology for any harm caused to his reputation,” and “implementation of fairer practices in the drafting process to ensure that talented players are recognized and given opportunities based on merit.”
The NFL did not immediately respond to The Times’ request for comment. Asked if the league had any reason to be concerned over the lawsuit, USC professor of law Clare Pastore told The Times, “Nope.”
She said the NFL’s lawyers will likely file a motion to dismiss the lawsuit for failure to sustain a claim, and that will likely be the end of the matter.
“This is ridiculous in many ways, but the biggest thing that I believe will immediately leap out at a judge is the concept of standing,” said Pastore, a former litigator whose specialties include civil rights law. “A supposed harm someone suffers in combination with some vast number of other people is not something that, that one person has standing to contest. … It’s what the courts call a generalized grievance. And a generalized grievance does not provide standing in federal court.”
She added: “It’s a little hard for me to see how anything about the Sanders situation could make out a race discrimination claim. I believe there may be race discrimination in certain aspects of the NFL. You look around the coaching ranks, the ownership ranks, they’re not very integrated. But in terms of players, it’s difficult to see how a claim could be made out that a player wasn’t drafted on race discrimination grounds.”
As for the $100 million in damages Jackson is seeking, Pastore called it “absurd.”
“That’s another aspect — it’s not quantifiable,” she said. “Like, how much is a fan harmed by a player that they want to see play not playing for their team, not playing for the team they want, not playing at all? It’s just not the stuff of which lawsuits are made.”