This was inevitable.
Despite word of progress being made in talks, the NFLPA decertified at 5:00 pm yesterday. As a result, the owners and Roger Goodell got exactly what they were aiming for, a lockout. Since 2008, when the owners opted out of the collective bargaining agreement, this has been the plan.
This is part of the three year plan they had. Everything since the point that they opted out of the CBA has led to this. The contract they had with the television networks where they were guaranteed $4 billion, regardless of whether or not football was played, just furthers the point.
The NFL is used to being able to trample the players union, since they always had in the past. This time, the union has made their own demands, which they have not backed down on. The primary demand - for the owners to open up their financial records to prove that the teams are losing as much money as they claim. The owners are refusing to provide anything beyond profitability statements, which are essentially useless without the rest of the financial information. Just because Team A claims they only made $5 million in 2010, down from $7 in 2009, doesn't mean anything. How did they get to that number?
In the end, this is about money. This is the fruition of shortsighted greed. This is the result of demanding an 18 game schedule without any further compensation for the players. This is about the owners wanting more of a $9 billion dollar pie, and refusing to compromise whatsoever.
If any games are lost, which is what seems the most likely outcome, the NFL will have shot itself in the foot. What league in it's right mind would stage a lockout at the apex of it's popularity? Why risk alienating a fanbase that is growing exponentially each year? And over what - an extra $137.5 million dollars, which is the amount that is being reported as the cause of the stalemate. Dumb. Just inexplicably dumb.
Hopefully the NFL remembers what happened to Major League Baseball when they had their lockout in 1994, and how long it took for the game to become popular again. But nothing about the owner's stance leads for anyone to hope that they will have learned from those who went before.
Showing posts with label NFLPA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NFLPA. Show all posts
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Best sign yet for football in 2011
In a ruling that signaled a major blow to the NFL, US District Judge David Doty agreed with the NFLPA in regards to the NFL receiving $4billion in television revenue, regardless of whether or not football was played this upcoming season. In his decision, Doty stated that the NFL violated it's agreement with the NFLPA, stating that "The record shows that the NFL undertook contract renegotiations to advance its own interests and harm the interests of the players."
By having the television contracts set up in such a way where the NFL, and the various teams, would be paid whether or not a football game was played, the owners guaranteed that a lockout would happen, especially when they had an out clause in the previous collective bargaining agreement. After all, why would someone pay the players to perform when they can just shut the gates and turn a profit?
Lost in all of this is that the players WANT to be playing football in 2011. The biggest issues are that the owners want a bigger piece of the revenue pie, and they want 18 games so that they can 'give the fans what the fans want'. However, amongst people that identify themselves as NFL fans, only 45% are even slightly in favor of the change, and a mere 18% strongly favor it. So, in other words, 82% of NFL fans don't want it, or are lukewarm at best to the concept.
Furthermore, expanding the NFL season to 18 games will further decrease the future health, and length of career, for the players. However, this does not seem to matter to a commissioner and a league that continually talks about 'player safety'. If they are so concerned with the future health of the players, why are they trying to expand the season under a flimsy excuse to disguise their profit motives? Why do they continue to promote and market DVDs of defenseless players getting blown up? Hypocrites.
Hopefully this ruling will force the hand of the NFL and the commissioner, so that there will be a season in 2011. With the NFL being at the apex of it's popularity, why risk a disruption over a few million dollars? It's short sighted, reckless, and hazardous to a sport that has become the most watched in the nation. Should a lockout actually occur, it will be interesting to see how the league recovers - if it does at all.
By having the television contracts set up in such a way where the NFL, and the various teams, would be paid whether or not a football game was played, the owners guaranteed that a lockout would happen, especially when they had an out clause in the previous collective bargaining agreement. After all, why would someone pay the players to perform when they can just shut the gates and turn a profit?
Lost in all of this is that the players WANT to be playing football in 2011. The biggest issues are that the owners want a bigger piece of the revenue pie, and they want 18 games so that they can 'give the fans what the fans want'. However, amongst people that identify themselves as NFL fans, only 45% are even slightly in favor of the change, and a mere 18% strongly favor it. So, in other words, 82% of NFL fans don't want it, or are lukewarm at best to the concept.
Furthermore, expanding the NFL season to 18 games will further decrease the future health, and length of career, for the players. However, this does not seem to matter to a commissioner and a league that continually talks about 'player safety'. If they are so concerned with the future health of the players, why are they trying to expand the season under a flimsy excuse to disguise their profit motives? Why do they continue to promote and market DVDs of defenseless players getting blown up? Hypocrites.
Hopefully this ruling will force the hand of the NFL and the commissioner, so that there will be a season in 2011. With the NFL being at the apex of it's popularity, why risk a disruption over a few million dollars? It's short sighted, reckless, and hazardous to a sport that has become the most watched in the nation. Should a lockout actually occur, it will be interesting to see how the league recovers - if it does at all.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)