First, the Good News
We’ll start with the NFL. I have always been interested in the business side of sports almost as much as the action on the field. I’m one of the few fascinated by bargaining agreements, sponsorship deals and stories of teams finding alternate revenue streams. Seriously, I’m into that. So I read with great interest the reports stating the sides are working closer to a deal.
If you’re bored with the details, skip the rest of this paragraph and move on to the next one, I won’t be offended. Reports say the current negotiations show a 52/48 split in favor of the owners, teams having to bring payroll within 10% of the salary cap, Thursday night games all season coming in two years, a longer season possible but not mandated, a rookie wage scale, unrestricted free agency after four full seasons and more money going to the pension fund for retired players (which is much needed as many older players suffer severe health problems directly caused by their time in football). Things are getting tense because the deal will have to be wrapped up by July 15 or so to avoid missing games, starting with preseason contests. I feel this is little but a big game of chicken being played by the owners and the NFL Players Association, and a deal will get done before any games are lost.
I feel confident of this for a very simple reason: everyone is making money. The league is profitable. The owners are raking it in. The players are well paid. No one is suffering here. Both sides just wanted a little more of the windfall. Since everyone is making money, losing games would cost them that profitability. The owners may be blowhards, but they aren’t going to risk losing the parking, concession and souvenir revenue they bring in on game days. Sure they wanted more, but they will settle. The players want their checks too. Since football players don’t make as much as NBA or Major League Baseball players (and thus can’t hold out as long without seriously crimping their lifestyle), nor are their contracts as long, nor are they guaranteed, there will be an agreement.
I have one other thought regarding this lockout. Since the offseason has been free of the constant off-season camps, minicamps, micro-minicamps, mini-cooper camps and perhaps a shortened preseason training camp, I think this has the potential to be the best regular season in a long time. My logic? Training camp was designed and implemented back when football players didn’t make a whole lot of money. Most of them, with the exception of a few stars, had regular jobs in the offseason. That seems strange now but it was true all the way up to the 1970s, actually. Training camp was needed for players to work themselves back into shape.
This is no longer remotely needed. Players keep themselves in excellent shape in the offseason for the most part and have the money to work with personal trainers and strength coaches. The offseason camps are more of an exercise in the teams controlling the players’ lives than anything else. They worry about injuries, but then drive their players in contact drills when they are months and months away from playing a meaningful game.
A season where the players are not coming into camp with bruises, muscle pulls and sprains from contact drills in the spring and summer will see those players come back strong, fit and most importantly fresh. I think it would lead to a more exciting, athletic year with fewer injuries since everyone isn’t banged up by the time first coin is tossed.
On the Other Hand…
Unfortunately, I am not nearly as enthusiastic about the NBA’s chances. The list of issues is shorter than the NFL’s, but it’s a whopper anyway. This league has a broken economic model. Despite a spectacularly good season with TV ratings soaring, teams are losing money. Players currently get 57% of the league’s revenue. Plus the NBA currently has a ceiling on how much a player can earn in a year and a salary cap on team payroll. Since there is a limit on how much teams can pay their stars each year, the teams end up signing them to longer-term contracts to make up for it. The obvious danger to this is a player who does not live up to his billing then becomes an albatross, weighing his team down by having to pay a guaranteed contract to a player for many years when he isn’t worth the money. That contract also makes him virtually untradeable until the final year of the deal.
I certainly don’t blame the players for wanting longer-term contracts. They play a physical sport that tears up joints and backs. They want security. This is obviously the owners’ fault for signing these deals, although many felt they had to in order to stay competitive because no one could convince star players to come to their team for a three-year deal for instance when other teams were offering the same money for six years.
Actually, the stars’ contracts aren’t even the real problem. In the effort to build winning teams, owners overestimated mediocre players, convincing themselves the player’s talents would compliment a bigger star and be that “last piece of the puzzle” teams dream of finding. It’s those contracts that are really hurting teams. So what do the owners want? Simple. They want a sharp reduction in the 57% cut for the players and they want to shorten the length of guaranteed contracts.
In brief, they want to pay the players a lot less money and for a lot shorter time. Good luck getting them to agree to that. So why will this one drag out while the NFL’s wont? Because of the critical point made that the owners are in fact losing money. Overall they will lose less money giving up the game day revenue and not paying out the salaries than they will lose if they have the season and pay the players. That’s how out of whack the NBA has allowed its situation to become.
The players obviously do not want to give up long, guaranteed contracts for a sport where you could tear a knee at any second to finish your career. You can’t blame them for that. You also can’t blame the owners for taking the road of losing less money. It’s a difficult stand-off, and one that could drag on and on, and perhaps even eat up the entire 2011-2012 season. It happened in hockey, and it could happen here.
My prediction is the players will cave, but only after at least half and perhaps all of next season is lost. The big contracts will allow players to hold out longer, but again, not having that paycheck will grind away at their solidarity. These guys are not going to like a lockout putting a dent in their lifestyles, especially if it goes on for six months or more. The union will try to keep them together, saying it is for the good of not only them but the players who will come in the future. That will keep the players together for a while, but not forever. When your boss is better off financially by not paying you, it’s you that has to bend. I only hope it happens before this wonderfully talent-rich league loses its momentum.
No comments:
Post a Comment