A previously undisclosed legal document is raising serious questions about the integrity of contract negotiations in the National Football League, suggesting collusion among team owners—even as the league formally denies it. While an independent arbitrator ruled that evidence of collusion did not meet the legal threshold for enforcement, the document details a coordinated effort encouraged by the league’s leadership to suppress guaranteed money in player contracts.
The 61-page arbitration ruling, first released by journalist and podcaster Pablo Torre on June 24, outlines what some are calling the most explosive finding in professional sports labor disputes in decades. “It’s almost like the holy grail for the union,” one source told Torre, referring to the NFL Players Association’s long-running concerns about suppressed wages and unspoken agreements between teams.
At the heart of the dispute is the fallout from quarterback Deshaun Watson’s unprecedented five-year, $230 million fully guaranteed contract with the Cleveland Browns in March 2022. That deal shocked league insiders and sparked expectations that other high-profile quarterbacks would soon secure similar agreements. Instead, no comparable deals followed.
In response, the NFL Players Association (NFLPA) filed a lawsuit in 2022, alleging collusion among league owners to prevent fully guaranteed contracts from becoming the new standard. The league, represented by then-general counsel Jeff Pash, dismissed the accusations, stating, “We are aware of no evidence supporting these collusion claims, which we will vigorously oppose.”
Though the arbitrator formally sided with the league—concluding that the NFLPA failed to meet the burden of proof—the written ruling provides a revealing account of how NFL leadership responded to the Watson contract. It reads, in part: “There is little question that the NFL Management Council, with the blessing of the Commissioner, encouraged the 32 NFL Clubs to reduce guarantees in veteran’s contracts at the March 2022 annual owner’s meeting.”
The arbitrator added that although encouragement was present, evidence fell short of proving that all teams actively participated in an illegal agreement. “The evidence did not establish a clear preponderance that the Clubs agreed to do that or participated in such a scheme,” the ruling said.
Still, critics argue the document lays out a framework of soft collusion—where a signal is sent from league leadership, but explicit coordination remains elusive enough to avoid legal consequences. The document includes testimonies from a range of NFL figures, including Commissioner Roger Goodell, several team owners, and star quarterbacks Lamar Jackson, Kyler Murray, and Russell Wilson.
Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk had been calling for the document’s release for weeks, arguing that transparency was being intentionally avoided. “The league and the union are obviously hiding something,” he wrote in mid-June. “The silence is quite possibly aimed at protecting one or more people from embarrassment, scrutiny, and/or consequences regarding specific contents of the ruling.”
According to Torre, the document shows a detailed account of closed-door meetings, including a private session with all 32 team owners shortly after Watson’s contract was finalized. He described the ruling as a “map” to the league’s internal operation when it comes to suppressing guaranteed pay—a strategy that, while perhaps not illegal by legal standards, may violate the spirit of fair labor negotiations.
Florio didn’t mince words in assessing its significance. “Even though the NFL won, it was caught with its hand in the collusion cookie jar,” he wrote. “The league was saved only by the fact that [the arbitrator] believed no cookies were consumed. Despite the pervasive crumbs.”
As of now, the NFL has not issued a formal response to the full contents of the leaked ruling. But with growing public attention and increasing calls for accountability, the league may find it harder to maintain its current posture of denial.
