Over these years, The Brown Log has been consistent in our support of many actions taken by NFL commish Roger Goodell. He has been tough on bad behavior and he has been a strong and reasonable voice in managing operations. With regards to the now concluded labor troubles, I believed Goodell would find it nearly impossible to manage the private club of owners without damaging the league and it's players in some way. In the end, the issues were solved without affecting the regular season and believe me, balancing the owners and players needs was no simple task. Blame would have been absorbed 100% by Goodell has this unrest continued through and caused games to be canceled. Therefore the credit for a great solution and 10 upcoming years of labor peace must go to Goodell.
With the Browns in an off week, the BL will start a new feature we've been thinking about from some time: The NFL Politburo, a regular feature that will explore the labor issues pending in 2011 between owners and players.
NFL owners are men who in private industry made fortunes for themselves in the free market system. However when they arrive to the NFL they morph into communists, in favor of imposing central controls and limits on the free market.
Most fans feel more anger towards the players, whom are very well paid. The Brown Log with this regular feature will dig into this issue point by point, trying to help fans understand the real villians in the pending labor issue. The problem rests firmly with the owners of today's NFL teams who wish to more deeply impose communist principles onto NFL players. Apparently NFL owners simply do not trust themselves to operate in a free market. They need rookie salary limits, salary caps and exemption from free markets. Pro football can be a brutal game in which the average player's career lasts 3 years. So please don't blame the players for fighting for the free market.
The real solution to the NFL's labor issues would be to remove anti-trust protection from the NFL and let the free market rule.
Which side is better positioned to withstand a work stoppage?
The owners, based on simple economics. In theory, they could reduce their operating expenses by 50 percent (an estimated $4.4 billion) via the elimination of player salaries and benefits and the temporary layoffs or salary reductions of various other employees. Meanwhile, thanks to the terms of the extensions to the lucrative TV deals the league has with DirecTV and several broadcast networks, the owners would continue to receive payments during a lockout – though the money would eventually have to be repaid via credits for future games. Still, that’s a serious cash-flow advantage that would, again in theory, allow the owners to realize more than 50 percent of their revenues (nearly $4 billion) and, therefore, to cover their operating expenses for an entire season if necessary. Players, meanwhile, would theoretically be much more financially stressed in the short term, and the relatively short career span of NFL players would make the prospect of missing games even more unpalatable.
Bottom line: The owners are going flaunt the free market, take advantage of their monopoly position that they have thanks to their anti trust exemption and crush the players, period. In a nation built on free market principals, it's astonishing that there is not outrage over the socialist behavior of NFL owners.
Finally, here is some insight from Browns linebacker Scott Fujita, who shared his dismay after meeting NFL commish Roger Goodell. Goodell has been brilliant as the leader of the league but in the labor issue he is stuck in the unenviable position of having to cowtow to the communists he answers to, aka the NFL Politburo....
If Big Ben ends up sitting in a prison cell and or suspended part of the season by Roger Goodell, it will certainly assist our Cleveland Browns chances in 2010 so let's hope he keeps on quacking all the way to the big house.
One has to wonder however what the position of NFL commissioner Roger Goodell might be. Goodell's NFL Personal Conduct Policy (click here to read the policy) to date has correctly held NFL players to a much higher standard than any commissioner in the past and Goodell is not bound by legal judgements. Practically speaking, he can do as he wishes when it comes to enforcing standards of player ethics.
From Roethlisberger's point of view, even in the best case scenario, his behavior that evening is still well outside the standards that Goodell's Personal Conduct Policy seeks to enforce.
If Goodell doesn't punish Roethlisberger at least as severly as he punished Vick, what would that mean? White quarterbacks are more important to the NFL than black quarterbacks? Or perhaps Goodell is simply a dog lover.
We will follow this issue closely in the coming weeks...
