I really don't see what the owners stand to gain besides money from what they're doing. I haven't picked sides in this debate but I just don't know what they think they're doing.
From Jason Cole's article on Y! Sports today:
As a reporter, Im thinking about the possibility of the discovery process in a class-action lawsuit the players would file against the owners after the likely NFL Players Association decertification. It would give a great, in-depth look at the finances of each team, including how much each franchise pays to different employees and what each club counts as expenses.
Im thinking about the chance for Peyton Manning(notes), Drew Brees(notes) and Tom Brady(notes) to take the stand as named plaintiffs in such a class-action suit and then testify against the league and its labor practice.
Im thinking about how the NFL will defend the rule it has on franchise players, which basically allows the leagues teams the chance to keep any player from year to year without the open threat of another team negotiating for that players services. Nowhere else in this country is there a business that openly restrains the personal freedom of someone to work where they want, when they want and for whom they want (which also puts the NFL draft in serious question).
If youre not getting the message here, this kind of stuff is a reporters dream. Its our version of what the AFC championship game was for Scott. Heck, this might be Super Bowl stuff. Conversely, this is a nightmare scenario for the NFL, a chance for the public to get a good look at where the money comes from and, most importantly, where it goes.
Or worse, a chance for each of the other owners to see how their brethren spends their money. Zygi Wilf will get a full look at Jerry Jones book. Bob Kraft will get a line-by-line view at Mike Brown. As one member of the union said recently, The thing the NFL really doesnt want is for all the owners to see each others books.
Earlier [Wednesday] there was a report about information that was offered, Smith said as he exited the bargaining session. Just to be absolutely clear, the information that was offered wasnt what we asked for. And according to our investment bankers and advisors, that information would be utterly meaningless in making a determination about whether to write an $800 million check to the National Football League.
We have consistently requested access to fully audited financial statements since May 2009, well before even our first collective bargaining meeting. We believe that is the appropriate information to analyze the leagues request for a multibillion check written by the players back to the owners.
The first question we posed to ourselves was, How much financial information would you want if youre going to be asked to write a $5 billion check. Thats a sufficient amount of financial information that so far we havent seen.
In return, NFL vice president and staff attorney Jeff Pash said the union has already received more information than it ever has in a CBA negotiation. While that may be true, the players have also never been asked to take a pay cut.
A huge pay cut, at that.
Article I just really don't see what they stand to gain by not coming to an agreement. The part about the franchise tag and drafting players intrigued me quite a bit.
Will good player-owner relationships be shattered?
How will the NFL repair the image of their own players standing against them?
What do the owners stand to gain?
I don't know how a group of people can ask for so much more money yet when asked why they need it, respond with "trust us, we need it." Who the hell would trust that person?
Like I said I'm not taking sides in this debate. It's a bunch of over-privileged people squabbling. I just want a new CBA.