Leave it to collective bargaining arguments to make a run at dominating conversations everywhere. While Senate Democrats move to Illinois, Assembly Democrats move outside the Capitol and Republicans refuse to move on anything at all in Wisconsin, the NFL has quite the debate on its hands as well.
At least in football, the opposing sides have generally limited the name-calling, bickering, petty stunts and heavy-handedness. Still, it's understandable that football fans are worried about what the near future has in store and whether or not Sunday afternoons will ever be the same.
Ever since George Cohen, the federal mediator now helping the NFL Players Association and the owners work through their massive differences, started meeting regularly with the two sides, I've been cautiously optimistic of a deal getting done.
That's not to say that it's going to be easy, that the league won't look any differently, or that some fans won't be turned off by a standoff that's perceived to be between a bunch of millionaires and a handful of billionaires. However, the fact that both sides agreed to a one-week extension means that some mild progress—at least—is being made.
I've got plenty of frustrations with this whole battle. There is no reason a rookie, regardless of how high he's drafted, should make several times more money than established veterans. There is also a strikingly obvious disconnect between the NFL's crackdown on handling the increase in concussions and its insistence on expanding the regular season to 18 games. It's incomprehensible to me why two sides can't find someway to allocate the $775 million that currently fills the gap between player and owner.
Even though it all seems ludicrous, the relative decency both sides have shown through the entire thing leaves me with a slightly less bitter taste in my mouth. I think they have Wisconsin politicians to thank for that.
There have been a few spout-offs from the players' side, including a tweet from Chad Ochocinco that read, ""LOCKOUT: any compromise on mere fundamentals is a surrender, owners have the leverage either way, I just want 2 b able 2 celebrate after td's.""
The guy's got a point. Owners have the upper hand no matter what happens. They have more money, more control and are not hurt nearly as much as the players if they choose to dig in and hunker down.
Despite that being true, they show up every day and sit across the table from the NFLPA's loquacious president DeMaurice Smith—who for some reason often referred to as Demar by ESPN personalities because, you know, it's appropriate to refer to powerful individuals in legal battles by pet names—and listen to what he has to say.
When it's all said and done, there is not going to be a lockout. What the deal is, I don't really know. Hopefully, the 16-game regular season remains in tact. It's better for the players in an era when we're seeing the devastating effects of injuries on retired players. It's better for fans who don't want to see the accomplishments of current and former players diminished by 18-game seasons leading to the eventual re-writing of every record (yes, I'm aware of the fact that we've extended the regular season before).
If a deal doesn't get done by this Friday, it will before anything meaningful is missed. Both sides are too invested in the integrity of the game—or are at least not losing the faith of a huge population—for a lockout to happen. Wish I could say the same about our state lawmakers.
Do you have faith that players and owners can hammer out a deal and prevent a lockout? E-mail Parker at pjgabriel@dailycardinal.com
