For once, NFL players are on the right side of labor dispute

For more than 15 years in sports media, I’ve been as consistent and predictable as rain in Seattle on the issue of strikes and lockouts in professional leagues. It has been my default position that in the never-ending battle between billionaire owners and millionaire players, the owners should always win.

That position changes today. At least a little.

Admittedly, my logic has been somewhat oversimplified on these matters: The owners are the bosses, and the players are the employees. If the players don’t like the pay or the benefits, they can quit the company — and the industry — and go do something else for a living. Period.

My argument has been that most owners have spent lifetimes earning their fortunes, so when they make the enormous investment required to purchase a professional sports franchise, they certainly deserve the lion’s share of the return on that risk.

By contrast, the players’ investments usually amount to little more than using their God-given physical talents to make millions of dollars playing kids’ games.

For most fans, watching athletes flying around the field wearing diamond earrings that cost more than our cars — and driving cars that cost more than our homes — makes it difficult to feel sorry for them when they engage in these contractual staring contests with owners. We want them to blink, collect their already overly inflated paychecks, and get back into the damn game.

This time around, however, as the NFL Players Association prepares for the March lockout that it believes to be inevitable, I think its members have a legitimate gripe.

My support for the players in this instance has nothing to do with compensation, mind you, for reasons already stated. The owners want a larger piece of the overall revenue pie in the next collective bargaining agreement, due to higher overhead costs, but the players will not agree to a smaller slice unless the owners open their books and make public their profit-loss ledgers.

Rubbish, I say. A data manager for Facebook doesn’t get to see Mark Zuckerberg’s tax returns before accepting his salary. He takes the offer or he leaves it.

Rather, I’ve got the players’ backs in this face-off when it comes to the 18-game schedule the owners are trying to force them to play, without a corresponding increase in pay and health benefits and a well-expanded roster to offset the substantially higher physical toll on the players’ bodies, and the inevitable injuries that will result.

Dolphins’ owner Stephen Ross recently tried to advance the ridiculous notion that the injury rate wouldn’t change because two preseason games would be dropped under the new proposal, keeping the total schedule at 20 games per team.

If this were a court of law, the idiocy of that insulting statement alone — placing physical demands of preseason games on even par with regular season games — would result in a directed verdict in favor of the players.

The 18-game schedule proposal also makes a mockery of the league’s newly professed concerns for player safety, which has manifested itself in hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines against defensive players for having the audacity to hit offensive players in a tackle-football league. Even offensive players, such as the Pittsburgh Steelers’ Hines Ward, have spoken out against the hypocrisy.

If the league was truly interested in the health and well-being of its players, it would take every penny of those ridiculous fines and put them into a fund for retired players battling lifelong injuries sustained while playing in the league.

Don’t hold your breath waiting for that offer.

No, it’s not easy supporting the players in most contractual stalemates. But in this one, it’s the right thing to do.

Bob Frantz is a freelance journalist and regular contributor to The Examiner. E-mail him at bfrantz@sfexaminer.com.

Other SportsSan Franciscosports

If you find our journalism valuable and relevant, please consider joining our Examiner membership program.
Find out more at www.sfexaminer.com/join/

Just Posted

School board members Gabriela Lopez (left) and Alison Collins (right) say they have been the subject of frequent hateful, racist and sexist attacks during their time on the school board. (Kevin N. Hume/S.F Examiner)
Angered by Lowell decision, SFUSD grad targets school board members with violent imagery

Facebook page depicts two women of color on board with swastikas and x-marks on their faces

Supervisor Sandra Lee Fewer, a former school board member, said it was ‘ridiculous’ that the school district did not yet have a plan to reopen. <ins>(Kevin N. Hume/S.F. Examiner)</ins>
Supervisors demand SFUSD set a timeline for reopening

Pressure grows on district to resume in-person learning as The City’s COVID-19 case count goes down

“Tenet,” the new Christopher Nolan film starring John David Washington, is showing at the drive-in in Concord. (Courtesy Warner Bros.)
Drive-ins are popping up all over the Bay Area

By Amelia Williams Bay City News Foundation Anyone else catch the “Grease”… Continue reading

The San Francisco International Arts Festival will present performances this weekend outdoors at Fort Mason, including on the Parade Ground, Eucalyptus Grove and Black Point Battery. (Kevin N. Hume/S.F. Examiner)
SF International Arts Festival wins health department approval for weekend performances

Rules allow no more than 50 people at outdoor Fort Mason performances

In this handout image provided by the California Department of Corrections, convicted murderer Scott Peterson poses for a mug shot March 17, 2005 in San Quentin, California. Judge Alfred A. Delucchi sentenced Peterson to death March 16 for murdering his wife, Laci Peterson, and their unborn child. (California Department of Corrections via Getty Images/TNS)
Prosecutors to retry penalty phase of Scott Peterson trial

2003 discovery of Laci Peterson’s body led to sensational high-profile murder trial of husband

Most Read