Three Myths About Professional Athletes and Their Unions: NFL Owners vs. Players

[Better Believe It]

February 15, 2011

Three Myths About Professional Athletes and Their Unions
NFL Owners vs. Players
By DAVID MACARAY

With the NFL’s contract set to expire on March 3, and rumors of a lockout gaining momentum, fans are not only wondering if there will be a 2011-12 football season, they’re already blaming the NLFPA (National Football League Players Association) for this predicament. For whatever reason, it’s the players and their union who usually get blamed in these disputes. Rarely do fans direct their hostility toward the owners.

Myth #1: These guys don’t need a union.

For openers, if they didn’t have a union, they wouldn’t have minimum salaries, defined pensions, guaranteed work rules, or grievance procedures. They wouldn’t have these things because they wouldn’t have had the muscle to obtain them. Professional athletes need a union for the same reason nurses, airline pilots and autoworkers need one. Without a union, they’d be at the mercy of the owners.

Myth #2: They make too much money.

In a perfect world, school teachers, social workers and existential poets would earn more money and wield more prestige than men who can hit a moving baseball or catch a football. But it’s not a perfect world; and whether we like it or not, the entertainment industry (including music, TV, movies, professional sports) generates a staggering amount of revenue….billions and billions of dollars a year.

Which raises the question of who should get the lion’s share. Should it be those with the demonstrable talent, the skilled individuals who actually perform—the singers, actors and athletes—or should it be the parasites who cling to the talent, who draw sustenance from it—the owners, studio executives and promoters? Also, it’s worth noting that the majority of team owners became wealthy through inheritance. These “jock-sniffers” (players’ derogatory slang for owners) bought their teams with daddy’s money.

Myth #3: High salaries are why tickets cost so much.

This is perhaps the silliest myth of all because it ignores a fundamental principle taught in Economics 101: the law of supply and demand. Team owners will charge as much as the market will bear. Simple as that. Does anyone really believe that team owners would charge less for tickets if their payroll were to suddenly shrink? That these owners would willingly seek less money for tickets than what they already knew they could get? Of course they wouldn’t, and to think otherwise is absurd. They would continue to charge all that the market will bear, regardless of team payrolls, because that’s the nature of commerce.

Read the full article at:

http://www.counterpunch.org/macaray02152011.html

[Brickbat]

1. K&R for the truth.

[disillusioned73]

2. Kick for the anti-union unrec I witnessed..

:dem:

[cbdo2007]

3. "parasites" who cling to talent.....

owners, studio executives, promoters.....

Um....the players wouldn't make any money without these people. How much money would Alex Rodriguez make if there were no baseball teams creating a business out of his talent? What is he going to just charge people $10 to watch him hit a baseball by himself out in a field??? The "owners, studio executives, promoters" are the ones getting people in the seats, securing tv contracts, etc. to pay these players all this money so they don't have to go out and get jobs as customer service reps for Sprint like the rest of us.

I'm not taking either side in these arguments, but it's futile to demonize one side when BOTH sides need each other for either of them to make money. Is the "talent" being able to hit a baseball 400 feet or is the talent hiring the right people to be the best in the country and getting millions of people to watch the guy hitting the baseball?

[TomClash]

4. Easy answer

No doubt it's the guy hitting the baseball. Lots of people can do law, marketing and finance pretty well but very few people can hit a curveball.

[cbdo2007]

6. Well I've never seen a professional baseball/football player make money

with their talent without the owners, so if it's so easy for them why do they need the owners at all? They should just create their own league and do it all themselves.

[Better Believe It]

9. I guess you missed the Super Bowl. The Green Bay Packers don't have any billionaire owners.

The baseball players tried to form their own league once.

They were busted by the owners with the support of the government.

[TomClash]

33. You need to go back and read your own question nt

[jdlh8894]

20. Hell, just use a curved bat!

[Better Believe It]

7. You are in fact taking the side of the owners.

Following your logic one could also say "How many of us would have jobs if it wasn't for the terrific contributions of Wall Street bankers and corporate CEO's?"

Without them we'd all be out of work!

So bow down and kiss their asses!

Come to think of it, that's exactly the argument you are making in defense of entertainment industry moguls!

Oh .... now many baseball players make as much money as Alex Rodriquez who you decided to cite?

Answer.

None.

[cbdo2007]

8. Right, well I don't know how to go start my own telecommunications company....

so I'm grateful for Sprint for knowing how to do this and for giving me a job in the field I know. I honestly couldn't do it without them.

Didn't know it was so easy for you to create a company hiring thousands of people. You're certainly a better businessman than me!

[Better Believe It]

11. It's easy to run a company that destroys thousands of jobs. Happens everyday.

If fact, CEO's get paid a hefty bonus for doing that!

Haven't you been following what has been happening in the economy?

News flash!

We're in a Great Recession.

Working people haven't caused it.

So guess who's responsible for this economic crisis and this attack on our jobs and living standards.

Working people haven't laid themselves off. Owners did.

Workers haven't outsourced jobs. Owners did.

Working folks didn't dismantle and ship entire plants to cheap labor nations. Owners did.

Working people didn't cut wages and benefits. Owners did.

Thanks.

Workers didn't cause the economic crash. Corporate owners and Wall Street bankers did.

[cbdo2007]

14. Still, you support these "corporate owners" all day every day....

with your business, and they're employing millions and millions of people.

How many people do you employ??? How much of your yearly income helps big evil corporations stay in business??? I'm guessing at least 90%. You're good at pointing out the problem, but you don't do a very good job offering alternatives. I can rail on "corporat executives" all I want but they allow me to buy a nice house and feed and cloth my family. I couldn't do it without them and you couldn't either.

[Better Believe It]

17. They "allow" you to buy a house and "feed" and "cloth" your family. Well, they are just precious!

They so gooooood to you and kind.

And they "allow" you to buy some food and clothes!

Well, that's just too sweet!

Well, without giving you enough money to buy some food and clothes you'd be unable to make them money! They won't let you starve and work naked, will they?

You're joking, right?

[cbdo2007]

18. Let me guess, you own your own business?

[Better Believe It]

23. Right. I'm one of those job destroying corporate gangsters who you seem to be defending.

Get real.

[cbdo2007]

28. So you owe all the money you make to the "corporate gangsters" just like I do??

So without them you would be out on the street just like me???

Thought so.

[Better Believe It]

29. They get a big cut right off the top before I even see a penny!

And when they are able to cut pay and benefits they get an even bigger slice!

How do you think they enrich themselves, hard work?

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Better Believe It]

15. You mean you don't know how to steal and destroy jobs like the big guys?

Well, you could learn, if that's what you really want to do with your life.

You really don't have to be that fricken smart, especially since the politicians have your back.

[TomClash]

5. They also have a very short career span

Most NFL players are done in 5 years or less.

[Yavin4]

10. It's Actually 3 Years

and the median salary is $770,000. Over a life time of work, their annual pay is roughly, $52,500.

[Better Believe It]

12. Three years and health problems for the rest of their lives.

How does that compare with the billionaire owners?

[Yavin4]

26. I Agree with You

The players are getting screwed over by the NFL owners, but too many fans just swallow the sports media meme and play off the envy angle.

[yawnmaster]

13. Then there is plenty of time for them to get another job. eom

[cbdo2007]

16. ha ha, your argument is that they have to work 3 years to make what I will make working 40 years

of my life for??!?!?!?

$52,500 is more than the average income in the U.S. so I'd say that's pretty good only having to work for 3 years.

Really, they can work 3 years, put the money in the bank and live off the interest for the rest of their lives, and still make more per year than I do...just on the interest. Poor players...geez, too bad for them. I don't know how they can scrape by...

[Better Believe It]

22. Ho! Ho! Corporate owners have to "work" for 3 days to make what you make in 40 years.

Obviously, one must side with corporate owners and Wall Street!

[Yavin4]

25. It's Slightly More Than The Average American Income

And they have massive health care costs that you can only imagine.

[Johonny]

19. Reminds me of my work

guy a few weeks ago was complaining why six figured engineers with pensions and health insurance need a union. Yeah what did that union get us.


I support the players union hands down. Compare the lives of professionals to the indentured college athlete to see what unions bring you.

[Odin2005]

21. With how many health problems retired football players have they deserve every cent they get.

[RockaFowler]

27. Wholeheartedly agree

Look at some guys who are now paralyzed. There was one rookie who played in the Rookie Beach Football game in Hawaii who hurt his leg so bad he was never able to play again. One season and he was done. Look at some of the High School and College guys who never even make it to the pros due to their injuries. I can't believe people are siding with the owners in this dispute.

[yawnmaster]

42. If only there were someway of educating them regarding the dangers of the sport!! eom

[treestar]

24. You're defending rich football players?

They deserve all that money?

Then why don't the other rich, whose talents are merely different?

[Better Believe It]

30. I'm not a corporate suckass, so yes.

How about you?

[treestar]

38. What about football isn't corporate?

big money is big money.

I don't get the difference. Why should one type of talent be rewarded lavishly while others are not?

You think whoever invented the electronics everyone uses don't deserve to make big money? If the football players do, why don't the others?

[Better Believe It]

40. The players and other football employees are not the owners. Do you understand the difference?

[treestar]

59. Just because people are owners they shouldn't make money?

I see the difference, but are you really expecting owners to take less money than employees?

And the owners do risk capital, there is a contribution there. In fact, there is no place for employees to work without it.

It makes no sense to completely discredit people for starting and owning businesses. You just hand ammunition to the right wing that you expect to sit back and be provided for by others. This is an attack the right often makes.

Some people exist who built that football league. Without it, the players have no jobs.

[Celeborn Skywalker]

32. You prefer the corporate owners get it?

They're living and profiting handsomely off the talent of their players.

[RandomThoughts]

34. So what should be done about that.

I figure mine and miss calibrate the weaponry, only thing I can think of.

[treestar]

39. No, my point was that why are people being rich tolerated in this

one field of endeavor?

On what basis is it allowed that it's OK for someone to be rich?

[malaise]

35. Excellent article

Thanks

Rec

[DonCoquixote]

36. Thank you

Florida is where a lot of athletes retire to, and contrary to myth, many of these guys have busted themselves so bad they are half dead bu the time they are 40, and half broke from medical bills.

[Safetykitten]

37. We must include these atheletes in our prayers. So much is riding on these men of the people.

[Better Believe It]

41. NFL Players Association stands in solidarity with Wisconsin public workers.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x428645

[KansasVoter]

44. NFL players have crossed picket lines in the past. They are not a REAL workers union.

[Better Believe It]

45. Right. That's why they have employers, can be locked out and are members of the AFL-CIO.

The AFL-CIO leadership ordered all of their union members to cross the air traffic controllers union picketlines during their strike in 1980.

Under your criteria that means none of the AFL-CIO unions are "real workers unions" and the AFL-CIO is not a labor organization.

[KansasVoter]

47. If you think the NFL players give a shit about the plumbers union you are gullible as hell.

Only this year will they give a shit.

Wow, the people on this forum amaze me.

[Better Believe It]

51. So do you think Teamsters and auto workers care more about poor, exploited underpaid plumbers?

Just askin.

[KansasVoter]

52. Yes, I know the teamsters do. You have too much IDOL worship for pro sports players.

[fishwax]

49. is there any field that hasn't had workers cross picket lines?

How does the fact that strikebreakers were brought in make a union less legitimate?

[KansasVoter]

53. OK, your right, the NFL is just like union service workers. My bad!

[fishwax]

54. Yes, that's exactly what I said. Your logical skills are impeccable.

[KansasVoter]

55. LOL....you are trying to say the NFL = Other unions Einstein!!

[fishwax]

56. no, but the NFLPA is actually a union

[KansasVoter]

43. Players should start their own league if it is so easy.

[Better Believe It]

46. Baseball players tried that once. The employers crushed them.

It was difficult enough for ball players to establish real collective bargaining rights and a voice in their industry and you think they should try to accomplish something that is even harder for them to achieve?

I suppose all big corporations should tell American workers "if you don't like working here under our conditions, quit!"

And "if you try to have some say over your pay and conditions by organizing a union we'll starve you out!".

Hey, isn't that what they are doing now, including employers in the sports entertainment industry?

And you think that's a good thing?

[HuckleB]

48. One thing that is missing is that taxpayers subsidize these sports via stadiums, services, etc...

That makes no sense to me, and I'd like to see all unions fight against this.

[fishwax]

50. k/r

:kick:

[Spike89]

57. Wow, what a silly argument!

It has zero to do with how much money either side makes. The point is who has power and control. The debate over whether labor or management is inherently evil is stupid. Neither is. You do need people to run, manage, innovate, nurture, promote, assume the risk, and otherwise take care of any business, or indeed, you have no jobs. However, labor does the work, fulfills the demand management creates, and is often the determining factor on whether the business succeeds.
You need both and both sides bring something to the table. The debate is the same when there are millions at stake as it is when profits and wages are minimal. Unions are needed to protect labor because individually, workers have less power than owners.
Unions will never, ever have too much power. If a business can't make money because of the union, non-union alternatives will arise or the business will shutter--either way, the union doesn't benefit. Owners on the other hand can certainly wield too much power and have often done so.
Therefore by default, I support unions. That doesn't mean all management is evil or bad, just that it is management's job to attempt to pay as little as possible to labor with no downside (for owners at least) in being too good. Unions job is to maximize the wages, conditions, and benefits of their workers, but if they are too successful, they will cost their union jobs, and in extreme cases break the union. They really can't hurt the owner class without harming themselves.

[FLPanhandle]

58. Both groups owners/players make far more than the average fan will ever hope to

Therefore, it's hard for the average fan to feel any sympathy for either side.

I don't feel any for the owners nor do I think the players are suffering. What I see are two rich groups fighting over getting more.

There is a long line of other workers who I'll sympathize with before I get around to sparing outrage for how professional athletes are treated (or the owners).