You are another one claiming this. Where do you guys get this idea? Where in the constitution does it say he has the right to earn a living any way he chooses? Go back to DU.
You are an idiot. I am not from DU, I have been here for years. The NFL has an age based rule that restricts a player eligibility. I personally think the rule will be found illegal. Do I want it to happen and ruin college/pro football? Hell no.
Now, lets take a look at your statement - "Where in the constitution does it say he has the right to earn a living any way he chooses? Go back to DU." I think that an arbitrary rule that a monopolistic organization(proven in court in the USFL lawsuit) enforces has a damn good chance of not hold up to scrutiny. You are looking at it from the "God's given right to do whatever we want" point of view, where I am looking at it from the "Our constitution that has been screwed up by liberal judges for decades". Just because I can look at something from a different point of view doesn't mean I'm a DU'er - So get bent dimwit.
You are the one who made the statment that he has the rightto earn a living. In the above paragraph, you apparently try to modify that statment, but you did say that he had the right to earn a living. To me, you were saying that he had the right to earn a living any way he chose. That is typical liberal socialist thinking. That is why I decided you must be from DU. Now, you try to modify your statment and call me a dimwit. Actually, I think you cannot defend your original statement and are using name calling to deflect criticism.