A Radical Idea for the Players Union for 2011
by akbroncosfan on Feb 9, 2010 9:08 PM MST
Email
PrintCount me in the "owners are greedily trying to force a lockout" camp. I understand that economically things have to change for NFL owners, but this lockout is seeming like a near certainty for 2011. Don't take my NFL away! I'd have to find another hobby, and I don't wanna! Seriously, the NFL is about the hottest brand going right now anywhere, and these guys want to mess with their own success by shutting down. From the reports I've read, the players don't have a lot of options except giving in or being locked out. And even "giving in" seems tough to do when by most accounts there aren't any real offers on the table for them to take. And of course they won't give in, unions rarely do before the pain really sets in. So what can the union do? Just wait for the inevitable. I say no!
Stick with me for a moment on this one, it is way out in left field. Most of my ideas are. The owners brought in scabs during a previous player strike to keep the game going, right? Remember that? Well, what''s keeping theunion from running their own league in the event of a lockout? Every few years someone tries to make a competing league with the NFL, only to have the NFL destroy them in ratings and interest due to a superior product (XFL and WFL) or shady TV deals (USFL). But if the NFL isn't playing, what's keeping the same NFL players we're such huge fans of from doing their thing in a whole new league? A player-owned league? A Vince McMahon league? Donald Trump? Who cares! Get the best players on the field to play the game we know as American Football and we will watch it! Can't put it on CBS or FOX due to NFL contracts? Put it on the Food Network, for cryin' out loud, fans will find it and follow it if there's no NFL to compete with. Of course there would be an enormous set up cost to such an endeavor, but hey, there's billions at stake in this labor showdown. Even a total bluff in this direction would only cost a few million and be well worth it. Imagine the owners realizing they might be out of football altogether if they continue this course, or relegated to a second-tier league! The players have the tremendous advantage of knowing way in advance that this is coming, more than enough time to prepare such an audacious plan. Current player contracts with NFL teams need not be honored if there is a lockout, surely? I am not a lawyer, there are probably a million reasons why they can do no such thing, but how awesome would that be to stick it to the owners in such a way?
This is a Fan-Created Comment on MileHighReport.com. The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR
13 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It will never happen
because the union will give in.Look at how the unions are fading in recent times.
Apathy reigns.I am a retired postal worker.In the early 70’s after the strike with the union winning,meetings were jam packed.Standing room only and many couldn’t get in the halls.Now days only a small number attend and even smaller number are active.
Members always have excuses not to join or be involved.Kids,committments,wives.I wonder if union members didn’t have the same committments when unions were strong in decades past.
No, unions are going the way of families eating together at the table and conversing,neighborhood kids playing games outside and exercising.
Look,the owners played the game with scab players before but many starters crossed the picket lines to play in those games.ALOT more money is involved now days and people seem to be more concerned with their own situations more than a cause.
Maybe I’m wrong and the players union will fight to the end but looking at the decline of unions in the United States over the last 20 years,I sadly believe the owners will win this battle.With the economy like it is players will not stand together the length of time it will take to be victorious.IMHO
Yes, The Union Will Give In
because they’re just like me, in the regard that at their place of employment THEY HAVE NO LEVERAGE. The owners hold all the power and DeMaurice Smith is a complete moron if he doesn’t realize this. He is posturing and trying to gain leverage but it won’t work. They’re not giving up millions of dollars and no one really wants a lockout. Not the owners, not the players, not Commish Goodell and most importantly, not me. There is wisdom in Goodell’s words. The players will make more money, everyone will. Thus, wanting a bigger piece of the pie should be inconsequential. Owners invest their money (unless they’re losers like Mike Brown of the Bengals or Donald Sterling of the Los Angeles Clippers) into NFL franchises in hopes that they’ll win. They give the players the opportunity to promulgate their dreams so I don’t think the union should screw with them. No lockout in my opinion. Thank goodness!
Brad James
by the new Bradfather on Feb 10, 2010 12:56 AM MST up reply actions
I think Unions evolved themselves into something that no longer identifies with their members,
thus the lost their ability to mobilize.
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
The guy formerly known as ZAPPA
That, or management learned it could hold out indefinitely on contract negotiations (there’s no penalty in the NLRA for doing so!) and learned that it could illegally fire workers at will during organizing drives.
The pendulum is shifting back the other way.
In 20-40 years, Union membership will likely again be at an all-time high and American society will be enjoying another golden age in economic security. Then the pendulum will shift the other way and Unions will again degrade into irrelvent quasi-political arms of political parties and their power will be systematically stripped through worker apathy.
America always seems to be about shifting extremes. We always tend to go too far one way or the other. I’m a middle of the road kind of guy. I believe in being fair to everyone involved. In this case, the NFLPA got more than is fair and is determined to keep it, while the Owners realized that since the NFLPA won’t play ball they will throw ALL IN and try to break the Unions back.
If the NFLPA had just come to the table and offered reasonable concessions, the public would have rallied to their support(myself included) and the owners would have been more likely to accept less than they really desired because of the goodwill offered by the Union.
Instead, the NFLPA thinks they have to play hardball no matter what and that will cause their demise as it has caused the demise of all private unions in America. The only Unions that really hold any power anymore are public employees’ unions, but they are going to face a tough time in the coming years if the economy doesn’t jumpstart soon.
It’s just two sides unwilling to give concessions when they are needed. I think the NFL owners have given in ALOT to the NFLPA. This year was the NFLPA’s turn to give back so to speak. They thumbed their nose at the idea and they will pay for it with even steeper concessions than they could have had if they had come to the table willing to negotiate.
The entire process is going to be a huge loser for us fans no matter how you slice it….
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
The guy formerly known as ZAPPA
Love the passion
Can’t put it on CBS or FOX due to NFL contracts? Put it on the Food Network, for cryin’ out loud, fans will find it and follow it if there’s no NFL to compete with.
The problem, as you hinted to, is simple time and money. With planning, red tape, personnel, stadiums, advertising, ticket sales, etc… it would take years to implement a new football game of any substantial size.
And even “giving in” seems tough to do when by most accounts there aren’t any real offers on the table for them to take.
I’ve heard that the starting offer from the owners is 41% ( believe I read it in SI), down from the 59% it currently is.
Hopefully they meet in the middle before a work stoppage, but with that said I tend to side more with the owners. 59% of all revenue going to employees is an absolutely astonishing number.
Good luck with the Redskins Mr. Mike! I'll be watching and cheering for a non-Bronco team for the first time in my life. Well, except when they play the Broncos!
50-50 is fair in my book, but apparently that would be dasterdly.
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
The guy formerly known as ZAPPA
If only this idea could work
Barriers to entry in new sports leagues are inconceivably large. Combine that with a network freeze-out — each of the big 4 has a piece of the NFL — and the public’s identification with existing NFL teams and about a hundred other reasons, and it won’t happen.
In the abstract, worker-owned businesses = awesome. Thanks for putting the idea out there.
Great Idea
Unfortunately, I have to agree with most of the other comments, that logistically, I don’t think the players could pull it off. It would most likely come across as an adult form of a schoolyard pick up game, and I don’t see television networks (broadcast, cable, or otherwise) going for it. I’m not even sure you’d get the NFL fans to go out to it — how many people would pay NFL ticket prices (which is what would be needed to generate the players’ salaries) to see a group of players, most of whom they don’t know play in the local high school stadium?
We live in an age when instant gratification isn't fast enough
Even the players would not want to play in this league
New league will not be able to pay them what NFL pays and there will be VERY uncertain future. Then a player has 2 options: sit or play. Considering what pay scales and contracts could be, for a particular player this will mean:
1) sit 2011, come back to play in NFL in 2012 for, say, $5M per year for 4 years
2) play in a new league in 2011 for $500K, risk injury that will wipe out your chance of NFL payoff and know your new league is likely to fold.
Why would any NFL palyer play in this league?
One thing I don't do is get into politics whether it's sports or other.
This whole thing should have been settled long ago and to me the NFLPA is shuffling their feet in maybe not the players best interest. They need to realize the times and the economy in terms of what they should be doing. With the soaring costs of attending a game live it would seem that they could work this out for the best of all sides with a mediator or arbitrator. If there is a lockout then all sides lose…The owners, the players and the fans. The players and fans mostly because of TV contracts for the owners. We lose!
I think it has to do with the new NFLPA Prez having to "earn his stripes" so to speak.
Gene Upshaw would have hashed out an agreement before 2011. He operated from a position of strength and respect. This new guy has nothing to show and respect isn’t automatically given. Which is why I think the NFLPA is going to get its ass handed to it by 2012 and they will have a new guy in charge before the end of 2012.
It may take a decade or longer for the NFLPA to recover.
That’s what my crystal ball is saying to me anyway.
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
The guy formerly known as ZAPPA
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Getting Social With MHR
Web Stuff
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Jim Irsay says he would welcome Peyton Manning back … at the right price
- Roddy White isn’t thrilled with Roger Goodell’s $20 million salary
- Could concussions actually kill football?
- J.T. Thomas arrested for possessing some marijuana
- Bucs hire Butch Davis as ‘special assistant,’ have no issue with his double-dipping
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
