So The Roge' and chief NFL negotiator Jeff Pash have decided that until a new CBA is ratified, they are cutting their annual salary down to $1, Mike Florio at PFT reports. This could be an honest act of good faith on the league side to give themselves incentives to get to the bargaining table and see that a deal is done before the March 4th lockout. Now, will the union take the bait. Florio opines that the union could feel that this is nothing more than a cheap PR stunt and that Goodell will get his pay elsewhere, perhaps in the form of back pay when a new CBA is in fact signed. A fair point indeed, but at the very least the league is putting on the front that they are willing and eager to get to the negotiating table now. Goodell has been fairly consistent on this, but this just gets back to the on-camera posturing by both sides going all the way back to September with the players in that very first game putting their fingers in the air as an act of "solidarity" (I wonder if Jay Cutler feels that way right now).
This deal is going to get done out of sight of a camera lens. I feel like the money will take care of itself (after all, it is millioinaires bickering with billionaires), but I have said before that it will not get done unless each side makes some sort of compromise on the other secondary issues in play (18-game schedule, rookie wage scale, etc.). My previous post on this topic gives my take on these key issues and how they should resolve themselves. The bottom line is this, Goodell taking a pay cut may look like a sincere gesture, but at the end of the day he represents the owners negotiating against the players. Both sides need to get to the table NOW and start talking to each other and not the media. If they don't, perhaps Roger might want to start looking in the classifieds for another line of work......
I liked how Jason Whitlock characterized it, and I believe Florio and Co. mentioned it too - that it isn't millionaires and billionaires, but rather rich parents and their spoiled children.
ReplyDeleteRich parents who owe their riches to their spoiled children, perhaps? I don't see how Jerry Jones is nearly as wealthy as he is without Nick's boys Troy Aikman, Emmitt Smith, and Michael Irvin. I know most if not all NFL owners owe much of their fortunes to owning The Home Depot, but all of their NFL revenues is directly due to the talent of their rosters. Otherwise, we'd be talking about the XFL, UFL, and Arena League CBA negotiations. But we're not. Because they all have crappy, second (or worse)-tier players. Advantage: players union.
ReplyDeleteOwners market their team, pay for facilities, and give the players all of the things they need to succeed. You can't win in the NFL on raw talent alone (I'm sure we can ALL agree on that). I'm not saying the owners deserve a bigger piece of the pie than what they already get...but the players are not totally responsible for all of the teams' successes (or lack thereof)
ReplyDelete@AK - Whitlock's point was more along the lines of the fact that the NFLPA will crumble because the players want their money, a la spoiled kids becoming bitchy once their parents cut off their money supply.
ReplyDeleteThe NFLPA is probably the weakest of the unions. Their only real recourse is to decertify and hope they can win a lawsuit in court on anti-trust grounds after the NFL imposes the rules of labor after the union decertifies.
My point is, you can easily find 32 other billionaires willing to reap the benefits of other people's talent, but those 32 guys can't find 32 other 55-man rosters that can bring in the same kind of revenue that the current players do. I know owners do more than just send and receive checks, but let's not give them too much credit. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates could buy NFL teams, on the players terms, and this conversation wouldn't be happening. Also, how awesome would that divisional rivalry be?
ReplyDeleteYou give too much credit to the average NFL fan. The strike of 1987 proved that people will pay to root for scrubs and scabs in the laundry of their favorite NFL team. The owners can certainly find 55 other guys per team. That won't even be an issue.
ReplyDeleteAgain, the Arena League folded, the XFL folded (though admittedly they were both gimmicky forms of football), and the UFL has started extremely slowly because it realizes it's on dangerous footing from the outset. Why? Because they know they don't have the players to compete with the NFL. They just don't have the same quality of product that the NFL has. If those guys were promoted to the NFL, and the current batch of players was thrown out, people would still watch, sure. But it wouldn't be nearly as popular, and it would fall off eventually. I think the fact that the replacement players were only temporary helps make that situation look better than it was. What if the labor dispute had never been resolved? By 1990, the NFL would probably have enjoyed the same popularity as the NHL currently does, and there likely would have been another league, that COULD negotiate with the best players, that would have surpassed the NFL.
ReplyDeleteI tried watching the XFL. I got really excited about it. Bu it was like watching high school or D-II/D-III football. Are there good high school and D-II/D-III football teams? Sure. But I probably wouldn't turn out every Sunday to watch it, nor shell out money for jerseys, tickets, or other memorabilia.
Nick, it appears that De Smith will not be taking the pay cut. Link
ReplyDeleteUgh Link Fail. Let's try again...
ReplyDeleteLINK