NFL vs Players Union II

I blogged here a while ago about select details about the financial structure of the NFL and the impending dispute with the players union. For some reason, I understood it that there would be brinkmanship on either side before an acceptable settlement comes up before the next season commences. Jeremy Singer-Vine goes through what is the preliminary proposal presented by the owners proposing that players would be entitled to 46-48% share of revenues as opposed to the even split that characterized the last agreement.

To my mind, the players seem to have ceded quite some ground with that 2-4% spread because I see nothing that shows that the economics of the NFL has changed substantially. Indeed, while this proposal is not concluded yet, reflects the vulnerability of players to the factors that the first blog post revealed. That players have a perishable lifespan in the game allows the team owners to wield substantial economic power. In addition, the existing players have merely preserved their pay by pushing the cuts to younger layers who will face the pay ceilings and salary caps.

The lesson: When two unions engage in discussion with each other, it is future workers that pay the cost. This may be worth bearing in mind in the season of sports and impending political lockouts.