I still maintain that there is not a right side to the NFL lockout. I believe there is enough blame for this situation to go around and that the NFL and the NFL’s union, err, former-and-someday-to-be-again union, should realize they have more incentives to work together to find a deal than they do to stop negotiating and keep the players out of work.
However, I came across a post today that is the best I have read at putting forth the players’ perspective.
I don’t agree with every point TJ “The Dude” Johnson makes. But it’s a well-written, well-researched look at the reasons the players have taken the strategy they have used.
In fact, if they hired this guy to make their case with the public they’d probably be better off. If you have a few minutes, check it out. I thought it was a pretty good read.
Loading ...
The majority of Johnson’s argument falls on the idea that players are poor at managing their money. This is supposed to imply that players are more sympathetic in this debate, or perhaps that they should receive more because they lack financial skills.
His comparison to PowerBall winners is apt. People who are not finance professionals get a large sum of money quickly, and then tend to blow it. But what weight do we give to the freedom to make those choices? Should the owners withhold 80% of each players salary and invest with a trustee? That would keep players from spending it on ponzi schemes and strippers. Does that sound fair?
To paraphrase comment #7, a solider also faces great risk just doing his job. Often career or life ending. And the starting pay in the Army isn’t $310,000 a year.
I agree, Sir Whoopass. I said I did not agree with everything Mr. Johnson wrote.
I, too, believe that the responsibility for money management falls on the players, that they have the ability – and a better opportunity than most through three to five years of free tuition – to get educations. And I also think even the minimum salary sets a player up pretty well, at least for their immediate future, for having an opportunity to find future success after a player’s career ends.
I just appreciated the way the argument was made. It was a well-written, articulate piece that laid out several of the players’ points without calling people dumb, swearing at them or calling football “modern day slavery.”
I would say if the players were using Mr. Johnson as their spokesman they would be viewed more positively by the public than they are.
Zoneblitz is not going to be your site for breaking news on the NFL labor woes. But I do think it’s worth pointing out a well-written, well-researched piece if it can contribute decently to the dialogue.