It seems to me that the biggest hurdle the National Football League owners and players faced during their recent negotiations for a new collective bargaining agreement was a failure to establish a "meeting of the minds."
That's legal jargon for "we couldn't see eye-to-eye."
But over the past few decades, history has shown that the only time the NFL and its players reached a meeting of the minds was when they were able to find common ground. I thought the relationship established by NFL Players Association Executive Director Gene Upshaw and NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue (I worked for each of them previously) was built on trust and mutual respect.
Fast forward to 2011, and the NFL is being represented by Jeff Pash, a very able and consummate attorney. Representing the players is newcomer DeMaurice Smith, a respected, hard-nosed litigator. And therein lies the problem. While Commissioner Paul Tagliabue was an attorney by trade, he doffed his barrister modus operandi for that of a partial, but reasoned, advocate.
No such soul-levying is taking place in New York. Both Pash and Smith are staying true to form. They have approached the negotiations as most litigators do, with their arguments in one hand and a court filing in the other. Would any other outcome reasonably be expected?
Both sides are also being represented by a number of other individuals who do not have legal backgrounds -- but the decisions are clearly being driven primarily by the lead negotiators, who, in this case, are seasoned litigators.
I analogize the situation to an injured player who consults a surgeon for advice. Rehabilitation is always an option, but don't most surgeons, by definition, believe surgery is the best way to permanently repair damaged knees? Don't we train lawyers to use the legal system as the ultimate forum for dispute resolution? How could the parties have ended up anywhere other than a courtroom?
My recommendation, therefore -- being an attorney myself -- is to "kill all the lawyers." Having worked both as a general manager and as an agent in the past, my experience has been that third parties are sometimes necessary to break a logjam between agents and GMs. While working for the Jacksonville Jaguars, I found myself in a dead-end situation with star quarterback Mark Brunell's agents -- Leigh Steinberg and later Frank Bauer. In both cases, I voluntarily removed myself from the negotiations and got the player to speak directly to the owner. Neither party was a professional negotiator, but each had a vested interest in the outcome.
In the few times I used this strategy, I found it was much easier to get over an impasse and ultimately reach a meeting of the minds. Perhaps that might just be what is needed here. Perhaps if we give both Pash and Smith a brief respite from the rancor of these negotiations (indeed, both sides have now resorted to name calling), something positive might happen.
Why not let Jerry Richardson or Robert Kraft sit face-to-face with Drew Brees or Peyton Manning (after all, they lent their names to this litigation) to work out a resolution. Somehow, I think, as in the case with Brunell, we would get back to playing football in the NFL sooner rather than later.
But then again, if the work stoppage helps the UFL gain some much-needed momentum, maybe we ought to keep it our little secret.
After all, boys will be boys. Or, in this case, lawyers will be lawyers.
The owners can't have it both ways. If the season is cancelled the teams should still have to pay for the rental of the various stadia and make up for the loss of revenue to each city that has a franchise; and also pay the employees of said stadia for lost wages.
Lets turn it around and imagine the owners playing football against the NFL players ... how would that work out ?
Absurd !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Will not affect me either way if they strike... they have priced me out of supporting professional level sports a long time ago. There are much better things to do than watch football, like spending time with my family or enjoying nature.
The game was just as good, and many old enoug to remember might say better, when players were smaller, slimmer, and inflicted less head injuries on themselves and others. Yes, many players had their share of crippling injuries to limbs. But so many more survived into seniors who were not punch-drunk like old boxers.
There's be a tremendous lack of sense by both sides. Of course, much of it reflects the changes in our society. Football doesn't exist in isolation. And lives don't end after a career ends. Many former professionals had careers and places in their community that extended success in other endeavors. Today the players make so much money that their only concern after a career is to use their money to make more money.
Let's acknowledge the exceptions on both sides of this dispute. And also that these people are NOT calling the shots for either side. Hopefully, the public will weigh in with the reality that they are ultimately paying!
Become what you are, the power house behind the game, not the players, not the owners but the fan. Demand a thirty percent cut across the board.
because you would have to be a fool not be.
You think the players can have a "meeting of minds" with the owners?
Right, with their jobs being at the will of the owners. You would have to be crazy to put yourself in that position.
================================
Could you please explain?
And NOT because of their performance on the field.