The Good Fight
I have been trying my best to follow the ongoing battle between the NFL owners' group and the players' union, though I have to admit that the attention is not always easily paid. My interest, like most fans', is in seeing the impasse resolved, so that free agency cash can begin to flow and questions like those mused upon in this space--what happens to ARE, Chris Hope, etc.--can begin to be answered. From what I can tell, though, NFLPA head Gene Upshaw has left the negotiating table like it's a dysfunctional relationship: that is, often, but not for long. He's a firm believer in the power of the storm-out. I imagine he does the same thing when he buys a car.
But Upshaw's antics are only amusing. It's hard to fault the union for wanting a bigger--or, according to Upshaw, consistent--slice of the revenue. The real problem appears to be in the owners' group: essentially, the only thing holding up a deal at this point is accord among high- and low-revenue team owners. Not surprisingly, high-revenue teams (Washington, New England) aren't interested in broadening the revenue-sharing plan that will help teams like Arizona and New Orleans stay competitive. They would rather keep their teams' individual revenue (money made locally by teams, separate from money made when you buy that Randall Gay jersey from NFL.com) and give it to players in bonuses, thereby circumventing the salary cap and undermining the league's push for parity. Remember, parity is what sets the NFL apart from other leagues: without it, stories like that of the Carolina Panthers or the St. Louis Rams never happen. Without parity, stories like that of the Pittsburgh Pirates and Kansas City Royals do happen.
Patriots' owner Bob Kraft has emerged as a leader of the high-revenue group. Shame on him. The NFL has created a system, through judicious incorporation of socialist economic strategies ("sharing the wealth"), in which opportunity really is possible for all. (There's always hope, Cardinals.) A return to a more capitalist system will split the league into haves and have-nots and ruin that which makes the league so special. Stop being greedy, Bob. As Jerome Bettis said, everyone has enough to eat.
But Upshaw's antics are only amusing. It's hard to fault the union for wanting a bigger--or, according to Upshaw, consistent--slice of the revenue. The real problem appears to be in the owners' group: essentially, the only thing holding up a deal at this point is accord among high- and low-revenue team owners. Not surprisingly, high-revenue teams (Washington, New England) aren't interested in broadening the revenue-sharing plan that will help teams like Arizona and New Orleans stay competitive. They would rather keep their teams' individual revenue (money made locally by teams, separate from money made when you buy that Randall Gay jersey from NFL.com) and give it to players in bonuses, thereby circumventing the salary cap and undermining the league's push for parity. Remember, parity is what sets the NFL apart from other leagues: without it, stories like that of the Carolina Panthers or the St. Louis Rams never happen. Without parity, stories like that of the Pittsburgh Pirates and Kansas City Royals do happen.
Patriots' owner Bob Kraft has emerged as a leader of the high-revenue group. Shame on him. The NFL has created a system, through judicious incorporation of socialist economic strategies ("sharing the wealth"), in which opportunity really is possible for all. (There's always hope, Cardinals.) A return to a more capitalist system will split the league into haves and have-nots and ruin that which makes the league so special. Stop being greedy, Bob. As Jerome Bettis said, everyone has enough to eat.
posted by Shane at 12:52 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home