By Jimmy Cunningham, howiGit New York Writer, Manhattan, NY
Last week Adrian Peterson of the Minnesota Vikings said of playing in the NFL, “It’s like modern day slavery, you know?” Since then other players have come out to back Peterson’s claims. This is moronic for two reasons. One for the simple fact of what he said. If modern day slavery is getting paid $10.2 million from your “owner,” including medical benefits, trainers to nurse your injuries, massage therapists to make your muscles feel better, and stays in 5-star hotels, then sign me up. Rashard Mendenhall of the Steelers was one of the players to back the Peterson quote by stating “Anyone with (knowledge) of the slave trade and the NFL could say that these two parallel each other … [Peterson] is correct in his (analogy) of this game. It is a lot deeper than most people understand.” Apparently Mendenhall is not one of the people with knowledge of the slave trade. In the slave trade those slaves were taken from their home and forced to work with consequences of beatings or worse. Today’s “modern day slaves” chose to play for pay and are not happy that they aren’t getting a higher cut of revenues.
To be fair other players have come out against Peterson, my favorite quote coming from Ryan Grant of the Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers; “Their is unfortunately actually still slavery existing in this world. Literal modern day slavery. [Peterson's] was a very misinformed statement. I understand what point he was trying to make. I just feel like he should have been advised a little differently.” Thank you Ryan for having some semblance of sense.
The second reason that this is moronic is because of where the players stand right now in the labor dispute. It seems as if the players have the support of the fans and the media. The owners tried a sneaky deal with their TV contracts and that was shut down. The
players used their very powerful decertification card to really put the pressure on the owners. Jerry Richardson proved to be as moronic as Peterson by poking fun at Peyton Manning and Drew Brees. For the first time in the history of professional sports labor
disputes the public is favoring the players. It would seem for the players to get what they want all they have to do is shut up. Literally shut your mouths for a few months.
Turn off your twitter accounts, say no to radio interviews, and stay off television. The players that have been leading this fight against the owners have to be livid at Peterson and his backers. If these players can keep their mouths shut and not get the public upset by comparing themselves to slaves while being millionaires (in a bad economy, no less) they will win. They have the public, the media, and so far the law backing them. The only thing standing in their way is themselves and their mouths. Shut up and win. We will see if they are capable of that.
Comparing this to slavery is completely idiotic and shows how truly uninformed these players really are. It’s not even close and I couldn’t agree with grant more, there is still slavery going on in places in the world and I promise they would gladly trade places with these players.
The other hung I’ve been thinking about is does it really matter whose side the fans are on? They can’t effect the league to one side over the other. They can either goto te games or not they can buy fan gear or not. You know you can’t goto a game and say you want your money to goto players not owners. I just think the players can have the fans on their side as much as they want but it won’t affect the actual situation the league is in
I think the fans play a huge part, baseball saw huge effects in ratings and attendance after their strike. It took the home run races to really bring fans back. Fans are are the reason there is revenue to be argued over. If fans stop buying the gear, going to games, and watching on tv it hurts the owners bottom line.
Agreed, but I don’t think the fans will stop going to the games. Yourself case in point.
I will not but I think many will, baseball is a perfect example. “America’s pasttime” suffered greatly due to their strike
But it will hurt the players as well and won’t effect anything for these negotiations…in fact if I was an owner and saw that the fans were on the other side it would make me want more money fromthe deal anyway to ensure I don’t lose money if they stop going to games
I dunno, if the owners started to see the writing on the wall that they have no support from the people who buy their product I think it has to favor the players
Are the fans and the media really on the side of the players? I’m not so sure that is the case. I would argue that the owners have effectively used the media to make the players look like fools. Most fan comments I’ve read or people I’ve discussed the matter seem to side with neither the players or the owners…or when they do take a side it for the owners. Additionally, I’m not sold that the players will win and I definitely don’t believe they should win.
http://sports-glutton.com/2011/03/15/nfl-and-nflpa-who-is-right-and-who-is-wrong/
I think they should have a mediator decide to give the additional revenue to parking lot attendants, concession vendors, and other front office staff.
I wouldn’t disagree with that either.
Additionally, what about all the second and third string players who might not have a long career and possibly can’t finacially afford “a strike”…is the NFLPA and their big name players actually helping or hurting the majority of the union’s members with their position? Seems to me that the NFLPA is acting in the best interest of the few who have already made it or will make it.
I think the media, other then Peter King, seems to be on the players side. The owners having been doing sleezy transparent things the entire time, Roger Goodell is a negative to the situation, and before Peterson opened his mouth the players have been united and smart. I don’t buy the average years thing. That is for the most part due to injury or lack of talent. If there is not football you cant get hurt. If there are better players then you, that is unfortunate. The players getting a good deal out of this benefits the majority and the future much more then a few special teams players, who by the way are also millionares.
I think fan and media support for the players indicates what about the sport draws in such a massive amount of yearly revenue. At this past Super Bowl, a large number of tickets were sold at up to $400 a piece for people to stand outside in the cold and watch the game projected on the side of the stadium. It’s a fair bet that this was not because Jerry Jones has a pretty stadium. It’s because we all want to watch the players play football. In that light, the “We need a billion dollars to grow the sport and build new stadiums” argument starts to look flawed.
In a disagreement that is to be solved first with litigation and then with closed-door bargaining, fan opinions don’t have an immediately dispositive effect on the outcome. But it’s at least a significant bargaining chip for the players if they can show that the source of all the league’s revenue is the fans’ and the media’s support for and adoration of the players.
Shmiiii, I agree. The owners would have alot more luck if they would open their books too.
Owners: We need a billion dollars
Players: Why
Owners: Stadiums, up keep, some teams are losing money.
Players: Okay show us how much you make and how and we can work that out.
Owners: Oh no just trust us. We promise we really need it.
Players: Trust you? You just had a TV deal deemed illegal to try and screw us over in a lost season.
The players do not want any more money, just the same that they ahd. The owners want more money and refuse to show why. That is why they are in the wrong, and I believe people are starting to see that
The owners are called the owners for a reason…because they own the business. The players are the employees not business partners (as they claim). The owners don’t have to justify their position by showing the NFLPA their books. The minute the NFLPA assumes the finacial risk of being a partner in the business that is the NFL (meaning contributing money, instead of collecting a pay check) is the minute they have a right to see the books.
That’s fair.
A large portion of the business policies of the NFL are made possible by their anti-trust immunity status, which is dependant on the players operating as a union and as business partners. If your boss was so dependent on you for his revenue, would you take a 12.5% pay cut “because trust me”?
I agree, although I haven’t stayed on top of this enough to know if that’s really the case.
With out the players the owners do not have a product.
So the owners do not want to show the books, which would seem to be a resultion to the problem, because they don’t have to? That seems like a pretty dumb reason to lose football and profits for a year. If they really need the money as they claim, which is why we are in a lock out, then show the books. Who cares about the rights or finacial risks, what secret or advantage do the players gain by seeing the books. They don’t want to show the books because they do not need the money. They just want more.
Without the owners the players don’t have a job.
“Who cares about the rights or finacial risks, what secret or advantage do the players gain by seeing the books.”
I’m sure as a fan you don’t care about rights or finacial risks, but if it was your business you would care.
I think it is fairly obvious that any employee gains an advantage from seeing a company’s financial records, while negotiating acontracts with their employers.
No business has a product without it’s employees. I think that means that owners have 0 obligation to open the books, although it would be nice if they did.
I didnt read all of the previous comments so forgive me if i repeat anyone. First, yesterday Leonard Weaver of the Eagles, when talking about the owners/players relationships said. ” we need to see some equal opportunity here and stop treating us basically like Adrian Peterson said, like slaves. . .” He did make a public apology almost immediately afterwards but it shows how misguided these players are. They feel that they have a sense of entitlement (perhaps because they feel us fans go to seem them play, not the owners).. but in reality we live in the United States, if you work for someone they generally get to decide what to pay you and what the rules of working there are. I would love to side with the players but when they make comments like this or ask questions like, who is going to pay for my family’s healthcare when im out of work, its hard to relate too because we all know someone who has no job, didnt earn a minimum of lets say 500,000 last year and still has to pay for their family’s healthcare. I agree they should just shut their mouths. That said the owners should just open their books and maybe this can all go away.
The contract clause of the Constitution guarantees that no person can be told what he’s going to be paid and what the rules are. That person has the right to go look for a job in the next town. And if all the businesses in every town in America have joined together to make labor decisions, like salary caps and a set number of available positions, that individual can sue for anti-trust. The only way to avoid an anti-trust is for the labor to unionize, and then the business must treat the union in good faith as a business partner. If the business uses unfair television deals and the threat of a work stoppage to gain leverage over their business partner, the union has the option to decertify and sue, because the business has violated US labor law.
The thing you seem to be missing is that the players are asking to open the books because the owners are trying to take money away from them. The players are fine with the deal they have, they do not want one cent more. The owners are saying that they need the money but do not want to show why. As Smhi said I do not think if your boss comes to you and says I am taking %12.5 away from you because I need it you would be okay with that with out knowing why. Expecially after your owners struck and illegal tv deal so they could try to bleed you out, threaten to make the season longer with out paying more, all the while talking about how they care about safety.
The owner should open the books, but certainly don’t have to. The players have the right to demand to know why they need the extra money, hence the inherent conflict. It’s really on the owners to decide what happens, as they own the businesses and are the ones making the demands.
Yes it falls on the owners, and no one has shown me a reason of why the shouldn’t show their books other then they do not have to. In order to solve this problem they either have to find a reason of why not or do it. Saying we dont have to, take less money is not fair to anyone.
You also say with out the owners the players don’t have jobs, that what an anti-trust lawsuit will decide, and that will hurt the owners alot more then giving cause as to why they are demanding a billion dollars
all solid points, but you are wrong.
To be honest I don’t know enough of the details about what the owners are trying to take away or get from the players, or what the players are doing. Basically i dont know many details other than what i hear on espn briefly, so I cant really disagree with you. I stand by my statement that what these players are saying about slavery and feeding their families is unreliable to the 99% of the population. They can say it all they want to their families and friends but making it public is not a smart move.
But, even if football doesnt happen, it really doesn’t matter. Because no football is more exciting than football itself.
Lol, so I am wrong but you know none of the details as to why, you just know. You sound like an owner
exactly, you are finally figuring it out. Fantastic picture for the post by the way
that was senor G’s doing
Gotta keep things G so they don’t get out of line.
Don’t worry about what that actually means.
Anyone want to watch Amistad with me later?
Monday Night Football is pretty much the same thing
the owners will be able to survive a lockout for much longer then the players. the average fan can’t hurt the owners without also hurting the players…that was my original point. For the fans the only way they can affect this issue is to stop buying tickets and to stop buying jerseys and other promotional items. But that hurts both the players and the owners. the fans can say whatever they want on which side they favor but when it comes down to it they dont have any real sway to help one side over the other.
If the players are willing to sign the deal that was already in place and the owners are locking out the players, public favor will certainly put pressure on the owners to get a deal done. The owners may have more money, and for many this is not their only income, but there are some very high profile and influential owners who sole source of income is pro football, they need the yearly income in order to make any money. There are also taxes on the stadiums, upkeep on the stadiums, and employees that are not on the field who will have to get paid or fired. The owners have more but also have much more expenses. This is why they tried that direct tv deal, they would not have tried something so shady if they were gonna be just fine.
what sort of public pressure would make them do this? the players will be hurting long before the owners will feel even a pinch.
The pressure of fans cancelling the season tickets, the fans showing up to boo Goodell at the draft, drop in sales of merchandise, facebook groups, the nfls favorite way of communicating letter writing to name a few
gotta love articles about two week old news
Sorry I can’t be on the internet all day looking at little league stats for my futures team YOU NEVER STUCK UP FOR ME JOHN.
what does baseball have to do with him and your wrong he did not say that
Adrian Peterson didn’t say that?
There are people who “play” this “game” for love, not for business. I say make a good living, but let us stop with this “I am a millionaire athlete.” The game would be just as entertaining with those guys who love it, and would play just to have the jersey. Enough with the serious, “a man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do” stuff. Like when Ricky Henderson cried on national TV because he wasn’t “being treated like a man,” because someone was making more money than him. Act like a man. Here’s the “Duh-Factor”: IT IS A GAME. THEY PLAY. They are paid big bucks so that they can extend their childhood. People other than those who are there now will “play” the “game” for much cheaper, and perhaps for free. Because they love the GAME.
What you said are my sentiments exactly. That said, being a realist, I think you need to walk a fine line. These leagues are a business, there is no way around that, and the athletes are overpaid. It’s just a shame that a huge majority of these athletes can’t take a step back and realize that. Or better yet, realize that most of them did initially start playing because they loved the game.