NFL lockout? Why it's coming 
For players and owners, how much of too much is enough?

By Jeff MacGregor
ESPN.com

As a public service this morning, I direct you to this list of the criminally insane. And to this list of the stupidest people in the world.

When approaching anybody on either list, use caution!


Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich's yacht towers over those owned by American pro sports franchise owners.

Because every one of the 1,728 people -- 32 NFL owners and 1,696 NFL players -- are clearly out of their minds, and represent a danger not just to themselves, but to you and to me and to logic and sense and Sunday afternoons.

So a couple of quick thoughts today on right and wrong, on money and value, on compassion and contempt and on the prospect of an NFL lockout in 2011.

The first step to problem-solving and fair-minded conflict resolution is understanding. So forget what you may have already read or heard on the subject, let's begin by framing the NFL owners' core argument for a lockout:

"I need a bigger boat."

And the counterargument offered by the NFL players:

"So do we."

I may have oversimplified that. Let me try again.

Here is the NFL Owners' Argument In Favor Of A Lockout: "My magical NFL franchise money-printing machine may or may not be printing fractionally less money than it was last year. I'm not really sure. I have people who keep track of that. What I really want is a bigger boat. And a sandwich. Edward? Where is he? EDWARD! Where do you slip off to when my back's turned? Have cook make me one of those lobster rolls I like so much. But easy on the rmoulade, for God's sake, I have hot yoga tomorrow. What was I saying?"

Which leads to the NFL Players Association Counterargument: "In a time of terrible economic struggle, with unemployment and discontent rising all around us, with ordinary families fighting to stay together and make ends meet, we take great pride in being able to keep a straight face when we say that a fourth-string receiver on a last place team is worth a million dollars a year."


Let's face it, even rich NFL owners get hungry.

No, sorry, that's not it. Let me try again.

The owners ask:

"Won't someone please take pity on me and make me stop overpaying these players of my own free will?"

And the players answer:

"You know, not just anybody can kick a ball. Especially in pants this tight."

Nope. But I feel like we're getting much closer to it. Hang on.

The owners:

"As a Capitalist, I condemn Socialism in the most vigorous manner possible. Condemn it! With vigor! Except insofar as 'revenue sharing' accounts for a huge portion of my pre-tax profits. And by 'revenue sharing' I mean 'redistribution of wealth.' And by 'pre-tax,' I mean that I won't really be paying any taxes at all. Ever. That's what accountants are for. And tax shelters. I saved $70 million in personal taxes last year alone thanks to a fictitious ermine ranch, a shuttered kettle-corn factory and four unreleased movies starring Sybil Danning and Michael Dudikoff. And the city paid for our new stadium, so there's that."

The players' association:

"What in the world would happen to any of us without football? Most of us are unfit for anything else. Some of us majored in Gym -- GYM! -- and minored in Contemporary Theories of Gym. Some of us can barely read. Seriously. Because someone else pulled us through. Through school. Through life. Teachers, friends, administrators, tutors, coaches, agents. Sandra Bullock. Because we were tall and strong and fast and could catch a ball or knock other people down. Everybody wants to help a football player. No matter what it costs."

Almost there. I can feel it.

The owners:

"What's the saying? 'Too much is never enough?' That's very true. Unless we're talking about this damned rmoulade! Edward! EDWARD!"


Some labor conflicts are based on actual grievances that could affect the future of the business and workers' ability to care for their families.


The players' association responds:

"In three years most of these kids will have been spat out of the game. They'll be broke and barely employable. Old at 25. A few others will make it deeper into the years, deeper into the game, and you cross your fingers that they don't wind up crippled; or blow everything they earned on exotic cars that don't run and exotic women who do and a house with 11 bathrooms and nothing in the refrigerator. A bare handful become superstars. Part of their job is to help us all forget about the others who never made it."

I'm failing to get us to the heart of this argument. Unless failure is the heart of this argument.

In any case, none of this applies to the Green Bay Packers, who are publicly owned. So they don't have one crazy owner.

They have 112,000 crazy owners.

Every one of whom wants a bigger boat.

Next Week: What To Do When There's No One To Root For.

Jeff MacGregor is a senior writer for ESPN.com and ESPN The Magazine. Please continue to submit your answers to his question "What are sports for?" You can e-mail him at jeff_macgregor@hotmail.com.

I'm actually here on behalf of the NFLPA, and I was just reading through this forum and noticed a few of you either had questions about the Lockout or had some strong opinions. I'm fairly certain we can all agree on the fact that we NEED to have an NFL season next year. If you would like to have a say in the situation, take a moment and head on over to NFLLockout.com  and sign the petition.

I'm sure you all still have questions, so feel free to ask me whatever comes to mind on the topic.

"NFLLockout" wrote:

NFL pools $900M for labor fight 

By DANIEL KAPLAN
Staff writer
Published November 01, 2010 : Page 01

The NFL is building a nearly $900 million lockout pool financed from the savings the league reaped by not paying non-health care benefits to players this year as well as from revenue the league is holding back from the teams, financial and football sources said last week.

The money, $28 million from each of the 32 clubs, is in addition to reserves the league has saved that are sufficient to pay for two years of interest on roughly $1 billion of stadium debt that flows through the league, the sources said.

The NFLs TV contracts also require payments to the league even if there are no games played next year. The union is contesting that move, though an independent mediator delayed his decision from this month to January. The league ultimately would pay back, with interest, the money to the media companies.

The collective-bargaining agreement expires March 3, and a potential lockout at that point could stretch into next season.

One banking source who attended the leagues annual bank meeting in Dallas last week, where the league briefed its lenders on the financial contingency planning, said the NFL was flexing its financial muscle, though not as overtly as when the NHL several years ago outwardly required $10 million letters of credit from each of its teams as labor talks intensified with the NHL Players Association. In the NFLs case, the league is in part holding back money due the clubs, rather than, as the NHL did, require teams to actively dip into their own pockets.

We are not going to comment on specifics of what we discuss with our bankers, NFL spokesman Greg Aiello wrote in an e-mail. But if the question is whether we have planned for all financial contingencies, the answer is that of course we have, as we have stated many times. Our goal and No. 1 priority, however, remain the same: Reaching an agreement as soon as possible that is fair to the players, clubs and fans.

The NFL recently told owners that they could lose $1 billion by next September because companies and fans would be unwilling to invest in the league because of the labor uncertainty. That figure doesnt account for cost savings the league would enjoy from not paying players, or reflect money saved this year without a salary cap or floor.

The nearly $900 million the NFL is planning for is spread between two pools of money. The first is the $10 million each of the 32 clubs saved in March when the teams did not have to pay non-health care benefits, such as life insurance or pension-plan payments. Under terms of the CBA, the teams obligations to pay these benefits ceased with the expiration of the salary cap in March. The league instructed the teams to hold onto that money and not spend it, the sources said, though its unclear if the money is held together in one account or individually at the 32 clubs.

The league also is in the process of holding back $18 million per club from pooled revenue that otherwise would have been paid out to them. This $576 million total, plus the $320 million, will serve as the main lockout funding for the league.

The NFL also has built interest reserves, the sources said, sufficient to pay two years of debt from the G3 program, the NFL financing program that granted money to stadium construction.

Part of the leagues point in putting together such substantial lockout funds is to send a message to the players union, said Bill Gould, the former chairman of the National Labor Relations Board and a Stanford University professor. Because NFL players have such short careers, players could be nervous if the league appeared to be preparing for a long work stoppage.

They want to put the fear of god in the union, Gould said.

The NFL Players Association is building its own war chest, an amount thats now in excess of $200 million. Total assets for the union, which includes the value of the groups building, stood at $311 million as of March 31, according to the NFLPAs annual report.

The union is also advising players to save part of their salaries.

We have been attempting to tell players and other business partners that the league has been preparing for a lockout for a long time now, so it is no surprise they are doing this, said George Atallah, NFLPA assistant executive director of external affairs, of the NFLs lockout funds. It is disingenuous for them to be preparing for a lockout on one hand and to blame the lockout for any financial woes on the other hand.

Several NFL owners and executives last month expressed hope that the collective-bargaining agreement could be renewed before expiring in March, though privately, most labor and league sources do not share that sentiment. As of late last week, no new collective-bargaining sessions were scheduled, with the two sides seemingly far apart.