Don’t Be Fooled

Big Matt, can we get you typing this column on an old-style typewritter on a spinning stage in front of an American flag? Maybe you'd like an exploded cigar to grit in your teeth. "More truth after the jump" hilarious. I was woofing like Arsenio's crowd from the get-go

I most often do not read Big Matt's articals, but this one that said "this is an easy one, no preamble required" I had to read on. And as I read all the hatered fill tirad this owner hating writer was spilling out, I just had to comment.So this whole mess is the owners fault. I'm sorry that is just not the case. Remmember its not not the owners that drove paylers salreries up to where they are paying for a $50 million garanteed contract for a player who could not even add one plus one. As for the arument of the players putting thier bodies on the line, I have great respect for the players that can do that, but they do get millions and millions and millions and millions and millions... need I go on, for doing so, so that argument is moot in my eyes. As for the owners not showing the books to the players, lets get this staight the players are employees of the owners and do not have a right to see the bookes of an operating business. The comment you wrote and I quote "The owners are responsible for the evolution of greed and deceit",really, are you for real.Responsible for the evolution of GREED and DECEIT,are you truely stupid or is it a way you learned to be growing up.Blame Caesar not gladiators sounds good but the fact that the gladiators were slaves and forced to fight, NFL players are neither. What has happened in your life that has you so up in arms and descusted with anybody that is trying to run an NFL team. Now by reading this you might think that I am favoring the owners in this whole debalcal, that is not the case. I am a third generation union member, I just don't blame managment or owners for everything. I believe both parties are at fault and that the course that the players are taking is not in the best interest of all the parties envolved.

Reading the comments above(and how great is it that we have a forum like this?) I feel a need to put in my two cents. I've been reading this site for a little over a year now, and Big Matt has always been a highlight for me, but I have to disagree with him here. I blame the owners...in part. I don't hold their wealth against them, and I don't feel that Clark Hunt should be downgraded in our eyes because he inherited the team. I've been impressed with him since he took over, and some of the things he is catching flak for seem certainly unnecessary and probably baseless. The owners locked out the players, and tried to save tv cash for a rainy day. That doesn't mean this was the premeditated plan all along. The date for the CBA to expire has been fixed, negotiations have been occurring off and on for two years, both sides knew this could happen. The players aren't saints either. They went through a long process early last season to get votes to decertify, even if that meant that this would be decided in the courts(which, by the way, removes any hope of this getting done quickly once you factor in appeals). It seems like everyone was preparing for this. Personally, I don't hold animosity for the owners. I don't like that it costs me over a hundred bucks to spend a day at Arrowhead, but that is the club's right to set prices and mine to watch the game from my recliner in my basement, or better yet, listen to the radio(I'm old-school). I don't agree with most of what the players are asking for, though. Retirement help? The median salary in 2009 was $770,000. The absolute minimum for a rookie was $285,000. The median yearly wage for the rest of us in 2009? A whopping $32,140. I found all these through bing if you want to check on them. If you can't save for retirement while bringing in AT LEAST 7x (at the rookie minimum) what the average American makes a year, then you don't need more money, you need someone to teach you how to handle a budget. Even the argument that these players only earn money for x number of years seems hollow to me. Players know that their career can end in a single cut in wet grass, maybe during OTAs. Plan for life after football, even if that means getting a degree so that the player can earn a good living when his career inevitably ends. I don't want to sound calloused, but I personally think the owners, as employers, have a better case here in the court of common sense. I support more help for players who have sacrificed so much to the game that medical problems dog them for the rest of their lives. I would love to see the owners proactively work to support retired players who gave everything they could for the game. But I can't seem to get my head around the need for the average player to make even more money upfront. Money got us into this mess, I don't see how more money will get us out of it. Sorry that took so long, but thanks for letting me get a couple of weeks worth of personal debate out there.

One of the things I think we should consider is that the players are working on an agreement to share in the profits of their teams. If you were working under those kinds of agreements and your employer, or business pardner may be a better way of calling him came to you and said he wanted a bigger percentage of the profits with a lame excuse, wouldn't you want to see the books to see if he was telling the truth or just blowing smoke? I think most people would, considering that we are talking millions of dollars. And one thing that bugs me is that the pie is split in several slices and the cap is one of them. Every team receives the maximum cap money besides their profit and this cap money is to go to players. So if a team low balls players salaries and sticks that money in his pocket, how many of you would think as I do that it is out and out theft?

The owners are just like any business owner, except they are better than most, thats why they deal with way more money. That is not a reason to scorn them. I work harder and make less than my boss, who works harder and makes less than her boss, who works harder and makes less than his boss etc etc. Welcome to the USA. The TV money may seem like they planned this lockout... maybe, but why is it not as deplorable that the NFLPA has decertified!? What a sham! They allow the NFL to have their monopoly because they collectively bargain, then they decided to just eliminate the union so that they can't bargain and it becomes an illegal monopoly... well that seems pretty shady to me! Even worse, they claim to no longer be a union (whoo hoo their website is down!) yet they plot to try and ruin the draft! How does an entity that does not exist do this??? Who is plotting and manuevering now!? What the NFL did with the TV money may be morally wrong, but what the NFLPA is doing is illegal, they are attempting to defraud the courts into believeing that they decertified, when they still are operating! Get out of the court rooms, and get back to mediation like the owners wanted, like we will eventually get to, and lets get a deal done. Good God, they want pensions!!!! most people work 30 - 40 years for theirs, whats their average career length, 5 years!? You got a free college degree, go get a career after your done playing your child's game! Their "talent" gave them a college degree, and millions of dollars... they want more??? Go out and earn it in the real world, like so many former players have done.

Man! Just when there's great debate on a potentially historic topic I think I may have come to the party a little late. I had all these great sarcastic comments about socializing the league and taking it out of the hands of private industry and into the hands of the good ole Federal Government. Comments like "Then it really WOULD be the NATIONAL Football League" and "The Draft would have a whole new meaning as random US citizens are conscripted into the service of professional football for the public good!" Oh well. I think TIDL did a decent job in addressing that side of the argument. Seriously though, I gotta believe that the owner's wouldn't have opened this Pandora's Box if they hadn't concluded that the previous deal was bad news for them. By the way, opting out of the deal in no way broke their contractual obligations to the players as BlockEater suggested. I think it's a nice piece of SPIN on the part of the players to say that they're innocent because they "haven't once asked for more money." Of COURSE you haven't asked for more money because the whole reason this happened was that the owners found that they had agreed to give them too much money in the first place and now, after having waited until the contractually agreed upon time that they could opt out of a deal they realized was a bad one (for them), they are asking you to take less (as a percentage). Regardless, this blows goats. Give me back my NFL please.

I might have sided with the owners, knowing full well that it does indeed take a serious amount of money to fund everything. The problem is that they are whining about the money, and refuse to lay the facts out on the table. The "I don't gotta" attitude isn't going to garner them much public empathy.

I was just going to complain about commenting not being much fun when everyone is agreeing. It has been a while since I have disagreed with Big Matt so it probably seems like I am always on his side. I like playing the devil's advocate so I try to present the other side when I can come up with an argument I believe. I am with Matt on this one again, but I am certainly glad you presented the other side. Here is why I side with the players and I’m not necessarily trying to sway your opinion: The players are not asking for more money. They are ok with moving forward the same as the last agreement. The owners are the ones asking for a larger piece of the pie. The owners need the players. If it was as easy as just finding the next players then leagues like the UFL, CFL, etc would be more successful. It is the owners’ money, but they are the ones that signed the players to the contracts that they are now saying is “losing them money”. If they truly were losing money because of their own poor contract negotiations in the past, then man up and admit it and show the players your books. This isn’t the same as you walking into your boss’ office. These players have signed contracts to perform a service that midway through they are now being asked to perform for less (and work more 18 game season). Finally, if the business model wasn’t working then more owners and NFL teams would go belly up. That isn’t happening. The NFL makes plenty of money to go around. The players are even willing to take a cut but would just like to see proper documentation as to why they should do so. I think that is a fair thing to ask.

I remember hearing how Rush Limbaugh wanted to buy the Rams but wasn't allowed because of his political views. That is complete discrimination! The owners and people pulling the strings at the NFL are working in an environment that is free from all the typical laws that corporate America adhere to. They have a monopoly. They discriminate who they will hire or do business with even though though they also accept PUBLIC TAX DOLLARS for their billion dollar stadiums. they can take a players money for things they have "allegedly" done even though there Isn't enough evidence for police charges, or a public trial. I man seriously, if some man/women started a rumor that Clark Hunt slapped him/her at a bar, or made and unwanted move on him/her at a hotel, but there was little to no evidence for this...and the police said they could gather absolutely no substantial evidence for this claim...do you think he would be at risk of losing his next several paychecks?! How can they take players money away from them at their own discretion? Where does this money then go? Oh ya...they get to keep it!! AAHHHH!!!! I could go on and on but I'm getting to frustrated thinking about it 8) But you guys are right...this is NOT the AMERICAN WAY...this is 350AD DARK AGES!

Matt, Matt, Matt..... When you posted that you were going to start writing your article last weekend I somehow thought your today's post would be much longer. Truly a shame. I want to attribute the brevity of your article to the same reason I disagree with your view. It's one sided. You should have gone with your "temptation to blame both sides". Someone once said "It's so much easier to see the world in black and white. Gray? I don't know what to do with gray." Your main argument against the owners is greed. How can you not say the players are greedy as well when both sides are fighting over money? Sure the owners have more but here's the thing, no matter how they acquired their billions (inheritance, oil, silver theft, or slowly sucking it out of the NFL fan base) IT'S THE OWNERS MONEY!! Not yours, not mine, not Paddy's and they are free to do what they want with it. They chose to own a big freaking business, an NFL franchise. The Chiefs are a business. They are not a charity. This is America and the Hunt family doesn't have to start giving away money just because they are billionaires. They don't OWE us anything including an NFL season in 2011. They sell us a product plain and simple. If you don't like the product then you don't have to buy the product. You crucify the owners for being greedy but they are exactly like every other business in this great capitalist society we live in. They want to expand their business. They feel like having more money would help them to do so and eventually improve the league. I would tend to side with the owners in this argument. I would rather have a team in Mexico or London than another player losing his $50,000 dollar earring on the practice field. Every enormous business has employees. You want to make the players out to be these great martyrs but really they're just employees. If I went into my boss' office and demanded that he showed me his books (funny he just happens to also be a billionaire) I'd be escorted out and probably fired. You claim that the players and the coaches are what makes the NFL great but without the huge capitol it takes to run this enormous business there would be no NFL. No huge stadiums, no enormous media coverage, no players, no coaches. They can find different players. If Peyton Manning doesn't want to play someone else will and the league will go on but the same isn't true about the opposite. The owners like Clark Hunt are why the NFL is what it is today.. they built it. From what I understand the owners tried to meet in the middle and it was the players that walked away. While I agree with the few players suing the league solely based on the fact that it is possibly the quickest resolve to this crap I want the owners to have the extra money. If they have to pay the players more who do you think will make up the difference.. You guessed it.. WE THE FANS!! They're not going to cut the product quality, they're going to raise the price of the product. You think your season tickets are expensive now... I am scared. I think both sides are playing games right now. I want my NFL. I am addicted. I'll probably keep buying the product no matter what happens these next few months, and Matt, I'd bet money that you will too. HOORAY ADDICTS!!!!

Matt, I am a conservative Republican and all I can say is A-Man.

Jeremy: true dat

Wow! Hot topic? Rule Number one to negotiating: Never take the first offer. Rule Number Two to negotiating: Never take the second offer. Rule Number Three to negotiating: Never take the third offer. Rule Number Four for to negotiating: Stretch them out as far as possible, (make sure it is as far as they can go), and then sue/ask for more. That is exactly what is happening here. That is the PROCESS. There will be football this year, even if it costs the mini camps, training camps or even a few preseason games, but there is too much money to be lost by all interested parties, owners, players, agents, TV networks, Satellite TV companies, Merchandising, Vegas, Fantasy Football companies/sites, etc. The players want to make sure they are getting the best deal possible for the next XX years. They will. I promise!!!!

Got to say we fans need to band together and have each others back. Taking sides only dilutes the discussion. To me, and I love this site, it seems the bad owners are against the not so bad players. I think both groups are so much crap. I will side with the first one to give a darn about me, the fan.

I'm sorry, of course I meant AA. The political aspects of the column are the age old stereotypical leftist rants of owner = robber/baron. Union politics are overwhelmingly slanted to one party, and at the end of the day are wealth redistribution vehicles. If you want to make more money, feel free to buy a team and have at it, if not, take what they pay you to play. And if that's not good enough, don't accept the offer.

im with mike! i don't want to hear all this hoot about the nfl, the owners, the players... get back to talking about things related to the chiefs!

mike k. I agree there shouldn't be any blogging about how you want a certain presidential canidate to win his or her prespective office on a Chiefs site, unless it would lower cost of going to the game for the average fan. Lets say there platform is no more parking fee's at Arrowhead then I say blog it, that said.......... Do you really think this article is political? What else is there to write about in football right now? This is not Arrowhead Pride bro!This is arrowheadaddict, (which pride has something that plants a virus on my pc everytime I try and go over there right now so I dont recommend it.) My tool detector is sniffing you out man. The facts are the facts the owners wont open up thier books to justify the 60 percent pay cut over the tenured duration of a players football career. The owners are saying were broke we need a bigger piece of the pie. The players say okay we will go with that just show us the pie so we can see how it gets split up. The owners wont. If they were losing money like they say they are then they would sell thier team. There are so many groups trying to by NFL teams right now its absurd. The owners refusing to open the books says so much with out really saying anything at all. It says not only forget the players but forget the fans, we will close shop down until we get our way no matter what, and there's nothing we can do about it except quit watching. MIke they're liars brother, this isn't politics its just as much football as a player getting traded.

I'd have a lot more respect for the owners if they just went ahead and embraced the role of the archetypal feudal lord. It's the posturing that's so nauseating. But they have no incentive to change what they're doing. They have a closed monopoly, complaisant fans, and a media largely dependent on their good will for access. I think I saw that some players are filing anti-trust lawsuits, but I thought the league had an exemption under federal law. Anyone know? Having said that, I have to admit I really wouldn't care if the players got screwed as long as we get football next season.

I quit visiting this site for a long time after Adam B.'s video endorsements for Obama back in '08. Once again, it looks as if Arrowhead Pride is a political blog as opposed to a site dedicated to news about the Chiefs.