My Gut Says the Players Didn't Want An Agreement

One thing became obvious when the NFL Players' Association chose to decertify their union this evening: they never wanted to reach an agreement.

When teams began voting last fall on whether or not to decertify the union, I questioned whether they knew what they were getting into.  Now it is plain to see they knew quit well, and that was toward a definite decertification, no matter what offer was on the table.

If you doubt that assertion, I refer you to the offer that had been made.  The offer had reduced the amount of money the owners wanted to take "off the top" of all shared revenue, above and beyond the current $1 billion, from the initially requested $1 billion to $325 million -- a concession of almost $700 million, hardly chump change.  It had dropped the amount of off-season training required of players by a full one third.  The discussion of expanding the season to 18 games would be put off until a later date.  The bottom line is that the league was making 90 percent of the concessions, yet the players claimed it wasn't enough.

Clearly the players feel they can take more from the owners through the U.S. court system.  My question is this, though: if you are already taking 59.6 cents from every dollar of NFL revenue, do you really deserve a whole lot more?  Why is it such a crime if the owners turn a profit?  In this day and age, big business is seen as villainous, and the players have tried to paint themselves the victims.  But these players are making hundreds of thousands of dollars at a bare minimum, and often times tens of millions.  Can you be a victim, can you accuse someone of taking money out of your pockets, when your pockets are already overflowing?

I wish the two sides luck in finding a resolution.  I don't care one bit about the plight of either side; I just want to watch football in September.