February 17th, 2011 Thursday
That’s My Take
NFL Labor Talks: Who’s Right, Who’s Wrong?
So the latest on the NFL Labor Talks situation, it appears both sides have agreed to meet with a mediator; they’ll meet, but there’s no guarantee that either side will agree to any settlements offered through mediation. The intent however is to try and meet the March 3rd deadline, but from the outside looking in it appears to be a long shot at best.
What is really amazing to me through all of this, that both sides have allowed this situation to fester as long as it has and now the country’s most popular and most successful sport is in serious jeopardy of coming to a halt?
A lockout, a strike, is there really a difference when you think about it? It just means no work and for football fans, no games. No one wants a stoppage, but everything we are hearing seems to headed toward that direction. Both sides are ages apart on several issues without any sign of budging anytime soon.
I can’t say that I believe there is any right or wrong side in this dispute, but as a fan that has to pay exorbitant prices for tickets and concessions at games I just don’t understand what each side is disputing here. I know the owners are in this business to make money (and of course win games are part of the process), but seeing how the players make these enormous salaries I just don’t get it.
If the Players union was fighting for better working conditions and fair pay, I could see the point of all this. I am not going to take the side of the owners here, but in my working place I don’t share any of the revenue with the boss. I am paid a simple salary for the work I complete. If I didn’t have what I considered to be fair and basic benefits, medical, dental, 401K, etc, I could see taking a position of protest.
I am not fully aware of all the issues on the table that the two sides are disputing, but it would seem to me that the players of today make more than enough money, but if their fight is for player’s benefits after football, medical insurance, and pension, I can see their point; any issue beyond that sounds like just asking for more money.
Do the players really need more money? Are they not able to market themselves off the field (maybe they can’t use the NFL as a stepping stool, but does Tom Brady really need to NFL to receive new endorsements?) Okay, so not all players are Tom Brady, but most that reach this level will make great money, even if for a short time. Should the owners be held accountable for player’s mismanagement of their money?
By the same token, as long as the owners are making insane money (and with the TV contracts and shared revenue how can they not) they should be looking to take care of the most valuable commodities; the players. It’s nice to see the leagues advocating a more safety conscious environment on the playing field, but an 18-game schedule would not support such thinking. The owners focus in these meetings should be on providing for better pensions, insurance, and post-career benefits for its players.
I agree that revenue sharing should be a topic of discussion and negotiation, but not something the players should be able to hold the league hostage with. On this point I think the owners have every right to receive the majority share, but they should be fair about how it’s split.
There is some validity to what the players may be asking, but whether or not it is reasonable for them to expect to receive these concessions is questionable. Both sides should be working toward protecting their investment (the players) while they play (earn) and after they are done. While the two sides struggle in this bitter dispute, there are literally 1,000 of others that directly affected by the outcome, stadium personnel, all of the organizations’ personnel, the coaching staffs (by the way, who is paying all of those people?).
What I would like to know, if nothing changed today for the league and players, who is really in trouble, where are the real issues? It seems in a country with more than 10% unemployment, the NFL players should be happy to be working even if it’s only for a short stint. If most of them got a taste of what a lot of us face every day, they might appreciate more the position they sit in today.
It is a real shame that this may be just about money, but right or wrong someone is going to have to give in at some point or everyone (fans included) will lose.
C’mon man, let’s play some football (in the fall). I vote for no stoppage, get a deal done now!
Just my take.
By David Ortega
So the latest on the NFL Labor Talks situation, it appears both sides have agreed to meet with a mediator; they’ll meet, but there’s no guarantee that either side will agree to any settlements offered through mediation. The intent however is to try and meet the March 3rd deadline, but from the outside looking in it appears to be a long shot at best.
What is really amazing to me through all of this, that both sides have allowed this situation to fester as long as it has and now the country’s most popular and most successful sport is in serious jeopardy of coming to a halt?
A lockout, a strike, is there really a difference when you think about it? It just means no work and for football fans, no games. No one wants a stoppage, but everything we are hearing seems to headed toward that direction. Both sides are ages apart on several issues without any sign of budging anytime soon.
I can’t say that I believe there is any right or wrong side in this dispute, but as a fan that has to pay exorbitant prices for tickets and concessions at games I just don’t understand what each side is disputing here. I know the owners are in this business to make money (and of course win games are part of the process), but seeing how the players make these enormous salaries I just don’t get it.
If the Players union was fighting for better working conditions and fair pay, I could see the point of all this. I am not going to take the side of the owners here, but in my working place I don’t share any of the revenue with the boss. I am paid a simple salary for the work I complete. If I didn’t have what I considered to be fair and basic benefits, medical, dental, 401K, etc, I could see taking a position of protest.
I am not fully aware of all the issues on the table that the two sides are disputing, but it would seem to me that the players of today make more than enough money, but if their fight is for player’s benefits after football, medical insurance, and pension, I can see their point; any issue beyond that sounds like just asking for more money.
Do the players really need more money? Are they not able to market themselves off the field (maybe they can’t use the NFL as a stepping stool, but does Tom Brady really need to NFL to receive new endorsements?) Okay, so not all players are Tom Brady, but most that reach this level will make great money, even if for a short time. Should the owners be held accountable for player’s mismanagement of their money?
By the same token, as long as the owners are making insane money (and with the TV contracts and shared revenue how can they not) they should be looking to take care of the most valuable commodities; the players. It’s nice to see the leagues advocating a more safety conscious environment on the playing field, but an 18-game schedule would not support such thinking. The owners focus in these meetings should be on providing for better pensions, insurance, and post-career benefits for its players.
I agree that revenue sharing should be a topic of discussion and negotiation, but not something the players should be able to hold the league hostage with. On this point I think the owners have every right to receive the majority share, but they should be fair about how it’s split.
There is some validity to what the players may be asking, but whether or not it is reasonable for them to expect to receive these concessions is questionable. Both sides should be working toward protecting their investment (the players) while they play (earn) and after they are done. While the two sides struggle in this bitter dispute, there are literally 1,000 of others that directly affected by the outcome, stadium personnel, all of the organizations’ personnel, the coaching staffs (by the way, who is paying all of those people?).
What I would like to know, if nothing changed today for the league and players, who is really in trouble, where are the real issues? It seems in a country with more than 10% unemployment, the NFL players should be happy to be working even if it’s only for a short stint. If most of them got a taste of what a lot of us face every day, they might appreciate more the position they sit in today.
It is a real shame that this may be just about money, but right or wrong someone is going to have to give in at some point or everyone (fans included) will lose.
C’mon man, let’s play some football (in the fall). I vote for no stoppage, get a deal done now!
Just my take.
By David Ortega
No comments:
Post a Comment