Roger Goodell Issues “Statement” on NFL Labor Situation

Yesterday NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell issued a statement in regard to the current NFL Labor Negotiations that are threatening to cause a lock-out and potentially affect the start of the new NFL league year. The portion of the statement that the NFL has chosen to highlight and push forward to the media is:

"“We need an agreement that both sides can live with and obtain what they need, not simply what they want,” Commissioner Roger Goodell wrote in an op-ed that is appearing in newspapers across the country.“Today’s collective bargain agreement does not work as it should from the standpoint of the teams,” he continued. “If needed adjustments are made, the NFL will be better for everyone. The first step is making sure a new collective bargaining agreement is more balanced and supports innovation and growth.”"

Quite frankly there’s a lot of this statement that I find disturbing. The commissioner makes an extremely well-constructed case for the owners. But the one-sided nature of the comments, and quite frankly the contradictory information in some places, are troubling to me. I would like to think of the commissioner as playing a more objective role in negotiations. He obviously isn’t. The owners have appointed their own leadership, as have the players. The commissioner has a chance to stand at the center and provide a clear voice of reason on this issue. Instead it seems like the commissioner is firmly on the side of NFL owners.

Come with me for a second. The NFL, which from now on will just be synonymous with the owners, wants to see an end to all the peripheral, non-crucial garbage outside of the negotiating room that is affecting the discussions held within it. Yet, just in the last several days the NFL has abruptly walked out in the middle of negotiations, sued the NFLPA on a labor practice charge and today the commissioner came out with a thinly-veiled reproach of the NFLPA in an “official statement.” And that’s not to mention anything of the NFL’s general demeanor when negotiations are actually on-going.

If that isn’t talking out of both sides of your mouth, then I don’t know what is. For starters, it wasn’t the players who dramatically walked out in the middle of negotiations and cancelled the second scheduled meeting. That was the owners.

Then they went about suing the NFLPA on a labor charge for trying to decertify so they could file an antitrust suit in the event of a lock-out. They claim the NFLPA isn’t negotiating in good faith (pot, meet the kettle). Now, the decertification business is something that the NFL knew the NFLPA was doing for months. It was widely reported that the NFLPA was going team-to-team around the middle of the season collecting signatures in the event the CBA expired and the owners locked them out. This was widely known, and the owners sat on it until two and a half weeks until the deadline? That timing isn’t a little bit off to anyone else?

When it was reported that Jerry Richardson had been quite insulting towards the intelligence of Peyton Manning and Drew Brees, we mentioned it might be indicative of the greater perception of the owners toward the players. After all, the owners certainly seem to be approaching negotiations like the players are a lot less intelligent. How many serious labor negotiations, besides the NFL’s of course, go forward without both sides having fully detailed (and at the very least, adequate) financial information? The players still have never had full financial disclosure from the owners. In fact, Roger Goodell rejected that request himself. The players are simply expected to take, at face, what the owners tell them. Seriously, that’s the NFL owner’s idea of good faith negotiations.

Then you have today’s press release in which the commissioner offers an extremely one-sided take on the NFL’s Labor Situation (just slightly more nuanced than pointing a finger). It basically boiled down to, ‘this would all work if the players would just stop being so difficult.’

The argument is great (after all Goodell is a bright guy), it’s very easy to read the statement and think that the players are being unreasonable if not for some pretty grievous omissions.  For instance the unsustainable CBA that the players are practically acused of pilfering from the owners in 2006 didn’t expire. The owners reneged, they voted to end it two years early. That argument holds a lot more water if the owners let the old deal expire and then came to the public as if they needed to adjust things in order to sustain themselves.

But in one of the most successful financial years in the history of the NFL, it’s a lot harder to sell that your business model is unsustainable. The only good evidence we’ve seen about the unsustainability of the NFL business models is that the Green Bay Packers weren’t as profitable last year. That very well could be attributable to a bad economy, but let’s not forget two very key points on that. First of all, the Packers did still MAKE a profit last year, it just wasn’t as much as they wanted. Second, the Packers just won a Super Bowl so that argument holds considerably less water when you look at how much business they’re about to do.

After all the NFL is booming while the US is in a recession. And the revenue sharing prevents any franchise from failing, but it also prevents owners from maximizing their profits and that was also a big part of the dissatisfaction with the current CBA. That had something to do with why the owners opted out early. Roger didn’t mention that.

What if this were the other way around? If the owners had “gotten the best of” the players the first time around do you think they would take seriously the NFLPA’s demands they renegotiate, early no less? I doubt it.

Goodell also mentions the expenses undertaken by the owners on new stadium costs. In explaining why the old CBA won’t continue to suffice Goodell opines:

"The status quo means failing to recognize the many costs of financing, building, maintaining and operating stadiums. We need new stadiums in Los Angeles, Minneapolis, San Francisco, Oakland and San Diego; and the ability for more league investment in new technology to improve service to fans in stadiums and at home."

Maybe in the interest of objectivity he could have also mentioned that just in the last couple years the players have kicked in 800 million dollars to build the New Meadowlands and 300 million to help Jerry Jones build his palace in Dallas. That 1.1 billion in stadium contributions by the players was quite conveniently left out of Goodell’s statement so his case sounded stronger. That’s just blatantly dishonest.

So is this:

"The status quo means players continuing to keep 60 percent of available revenue, in good years or bad, no matter how the national economy or the economics of the league have changed. From 2001 to 2009, player compensation doubled and the teams committed a total of $34 billion to player costs. The NFL is healthy in many respects, but we do not have a healthy business model that can sustain growth."

That 60 percent of revenue comes after the league owners scoop a cool billion off the top. That was part of the 2006 CBA, and something else Roger Goodell leaves out because it weakens his side (err… the owner’s position). Since the beginning of the time period that Goodell claimed the players had been taking 60 percent, they have yet to even receive 55.

"2002–51.87 %2003–50.23 %2004–52.18 %2005–50.52 %2006–52.74 %2007–51.84 %2008–50.96 %2009–50.06 %"

The highest portion of revenues the players have ever received was 52.74% yet there is Roger Goodell actually lying to the national media. Is that how the NFL counts to 60? You wonder why the players insist on full financial disclosure? There’s a pretty good indication just in this press release that the NFL is being dishonest at worst, not forthcoming at best.

All that and the NFL has the audacity to claim the NFLPA isn’t negotiating in good faith?

Roger Goodell says he’s going to reduce his salary to one dollar in the event of a lock-out. He’s earning that salary right now with this ridiculous, hypocritical garbage he’s spewing. He’s supposed to be a leader and yet this is blatant misinformation, it boils down to little more than political posturing on the part of the NFL and its owners and Goodell is making a farce of his role as NFL Commissioner.

Paul Tagliabue and Pete Rozelle left a pretty large legacy behind them. Goodell has a very long way to go before he even deserves to be mentioned in the same sentence.