Buyer and Seller hypos don't really hold water here, in no small part because there is the UCC that provides for things like course of performance and usage of trade and the like. That is: if Goodell tried to pull analogous shit in the context of buying or selling widgets (say, by saying the deal was cancelled because the other party forgot to send an invoice by fax or something, despite never caring in the past), there would be contract law and UCC provisions to fall back on to say "That's absurd, and you can't do that because that's not how these things work in the real world, and we know that because similar transactions occur millions of times a day, and you should know that too."
This is more akin to a contract for services between a principal and subcontractor where both parties are of equal sophistication and bargaining power, and where each situation is inherently unique and there's no presumption of underlying expectations.
As to how the NFL should treat the NFLPA, well, that's customer relations, not contract law.
This is more akin to a contract for services between a principal and subcontractor where both parties are of equal sophistication and bargaining power, and where each situation is inherently unique and there's no presumption of underlying expectations.
As to how the NFL should treat the NFLPA, well, that's customer relations, not contract law.