Like many Americans, I have libertarian tendencies

[Hplarrm]

and while it is impossible for me to feel much sympathy toward a college athlete about to sign a contract for more money than they have ever seen, it does bother me a bit when individuals are not allowed to sell their services to the highest bidder in a free market.

 

Thus, as the new CBA begins to take shape, one of the more troubling parts of it for me is the apparent abridgement of individual rights to participate in a free market which is going on in the NFL. The oddest thing about it is that the co-conspirators in this anti-American abridgement of individual abilities is not only the NFL (they are a corporation after all and due to the consistent taking advantage of the individual I have cone to expect bad behavior from them).

 

However, the NFLPA is joining toe to toe with the NFL in actions that flat out abridge the abilities of individuals to operate in a free market. These include:

 

1. The it seems to me outrageous agreement of the BFL and NFLPA to bar NFL teams from signing up adults who want to play the game. The NFLPA and the NFL have agreed to rules which not only ban the signing of minors to contracts (even with their parents approval (unlike other pro team sports and individual sports like golf or tennis allow even minors to sign contracts with their parents signed consent) but also bar adults from signing with individual teams until their age group reaches 21.

 

2. Even the draft itself abridges the ability of normal individuals to choose to live wherever they want to or can make a deal. Many folks falsely try to claim that an NFL worker is the same as a Ford motor company worker as they try to justify the NFL not letting their workers look at the books. This analogy not only falls apart in reality as the NFL worker and Ford worker simply operate under different economic systems, but actually the NFL worker has fewer rights that an auto worker takes for granted. An auto worker can choose to work in any city where he finds a job. If he worships the sun he can try to find a job in a plant in CA or if he likes having more than 2 seasons he can try to work in the midwest. However, an NFL player if he chooses to be an NFL athlete is assigned to negotiate with only one team without regard to where that player wants to live is irrelevant (whether he wants to live near his parents who are ill or always attend his games or he wants to live and raise his kids with a loved one near his hometown). Sure, NFL players get huge compensation to give up this right most Americans take for granted, but it amazes me that folks give up this principle so easily.

 

3. The worse thing about the draft is actually that it represents a huge taxpayer subsidy to the private business of the NFL. State run and taxpayer funded schools like football lineman mill U. Nebraska also are well compensated for their gleefully training student athletes for the NFL business at limited cost to the NFL (they do pay for the combine which allows them to abridge individual rights in an orderly manner) but this huge taxpayer subsidy to this private business is simply not the theory or principle we operate under as a country. Its no surprise to me that various travesties occur under this system which sees universities stand on their heads to in essence hire student athletes without paying them.

 

4. What also is outrageous is that traditionally the courts have been the protector of individual rights being ignored by the government or trampled on by corporations. The courts have correctly IMHO stood up for individual rights by only accepting the limited anti-trust protection the NFL enjoys if they negotiate in good faith with a representative of the players which is democratically elected. This is why the decertification threat by the NFLPA has proven to be so powerful. It is clear that with the union, that the courts (as reflected in the decisions by Reagan appointee Doty) stand by individuals to operate in a free market. In the face of this threat the NFL ran kicking and screaming to sign a CBA with the NFLPA which has now resulted in the players getting a majority of the total gross receipts of the NFL.

 

However, even if one accepts this system even if it goes against free market principles simply because it works to generate higher profits for both the players and the owners than if they used an actual free market (which was the ask of Brady et al. in their suit) it still does nothing to preserve the rights of young athletes.

 

These potential players have no representation and essentially no rights until they sign a contract. Its no wonder that that the NFLPA would agree to a rookie salary cap in exchange for more money for the vets and the retirement fund as young athletes are not represented at all in this "negotiation".

 

Overall, this fan is quite pleased to get this game back after it was held hostage in a fight between millionaires and billionaires. I am happy with any deal which the owners and players make to bring back the game!

 

However the principle still sticks in my craw that young athletes are having what most of us take for granted as rights to be stripped from them.

 

They are getting screwed in principle but at least they are well paid for bending over.

 

The NFL and the NFLPA deserve each other in their un-American actions to simply generate cash.

[DrDawkinstein]

There is no such thing as a free market "within the NFL". The free market is that players can decide to play for the UFL, or arena league, or even CFL, if they do not want to play for the NFL.

 

I'll agree that the other choices in the true market are not that great. And that the fans, and players could benefit from a real competitor.

 

But the NFL is it's own private entity. Once you are drafted into it, and decide to play in it, you follow it's employee rules.

 

The NFLPA is part of, and directly dependent on, the NFL. It does not exist without the NFL. I mean, NFL is right in it's name. It is not "The Football Players' Union of America". Therefore, it is in the NFLPA's best interest that the NFL succeeds at the end of the day.

 

It's not free market from team to team. It's from League to League.

 

If a player wants to play in another city, he can quit the NFL and play for that city's UFL team (if they had one).

 

If I want to change cities, I cant demand that my company transfer me to that city's branch. Unless there is a job opening posted, and I qualify to get that job based on the company's rules and hiring process. I can also quit and find a job with another company in that new city.

 

The NFL is NOT the USA. I think people get that confused sometimes.

Edited July 17, 2011 by DrDareustein

[Buftex]

and while it is impossible for me to feel much sympathy toward a college athlete about to sign a contract for more money than they have ever seen, it does bother me a bit when individuals are not allowed to sell their services to the highest bidder in a free market.

 

Thus, as the new CBA begins to take shape, one of the more troubling parts of it for me is the apparent abridgement of individual rights to participate in a free market which is going on in the NFL. The oddest thing about it is that the co-conspirators in this anti-American abridgement of individual abilities is not only the NFL (they are a corporation after all and due to the consistent taking advantage of the individual I have cone to expect bad behavior from them).

 

However, the NFLPA is joining toe to toe with the NFL in actions that flat out abridge the abilities of individuals to operate in a free market. These include:

 

1. The it seems to me outrageous agreement of the BFL and NFLPA to bar NFL teams from signing up adults who want to play the game. The NFLPA and the NFL have agreed to rules which not only ban the signing of minors to contracts (even with their parents approval (unlike other pro team sports and individual sports like golf or tennis allow even minors to sign contracts with their parents signed consent) but also bar adults from signing with individual teams until their age group reaches 21.

 

2. Even the draft itself abridges the ability of normal individuals to choose to live wherever they want to or can make a deal. Many folks falsely try to claim that an NFL worker is the same as a Ford motor company worker as they try to justify the NFL not letting their workers look at the books. This analogy not only falls apart in reality as the NFL worker and Ford worker simply operate under different economic systems, but actually the NFL worker has fewer rights that an auto worker takes for granted. An auto worker can choose to work in any city where he finds a job. If he worships the sun he can try to find a job in a plant in CA or if he likes having more than 2 seasons he can try to work in the midwest. However, an NFL player if he chooses to be an NFL athlete is assigned to negotiate with only one team without regard to where that player wants to live is irrelevant (whether he wants to live near his parents who are ill or always attend his games or he wants to live and raise his kids with a loved one near his hometown). Sure, NFL players get huge compensation to give up this right most Americans take for granted, but it amazes me that folks give up this principle so easily.

 

3. The worse thing about the draft is actually that it represents a huge taxpayer subsidy to the private business of the NFL. State run and taxpayer funded schools like football lineman mill U. Nebraska also are well compensated for their gleefully training student athletes for the NFL business at limited cost to the NFL (they do pay for the combine which allows them to abridge individual rights in an orderly manner) but this huge taxpayer subsidy to this private business is simply not the theory or principle we operate under as a country. Its no surprise to me that various travesties occur under this system which sees universities stand on their heads to in essence hire student athletes without paying them.

 

4. What also is outrageous is that traditionally the courts have been the protector of individual rights being ignored by the government or trampled on by corporations. The courts have correctly IMHO stood up for individual rights by only accepting the limited anti-trust protection the NFL enjoys if they negotiate in good faith with a representative of the players which is democratically elected. This is why the decertification threat by the NFLPA has proven to be so powerful. It is clear that with the union, that the courts (as reflected in the decisions by Reagan appointee Doty) stand by individuals to operate in a free market. In the face of this threat the NFL ran kicking and screaming to sign a CBA with the NFLPA which has now resulted in the players getting a majority of the total gross receipts of the NFL.

 

However, even if one accepts this system even if it goes against free market principles simply because it works to generate higher profits for both the players and the owners than if they used an actual free market (which was the ask of Brady et al. in their suit) it still does nothing to preserve the rights of young athletes.

 

These potential players have no representation and essentially no rights until they sign a contract. Its no wonder that that the NFLPA would agree to a rookie salary cap in exchange for more money for the vets and the retirement fund as young athletes are not represented at all in this "negotiation".

 

Overall, this fan is quite pleased to get this game back after it was held hostage in a fight between millionaires and billionaires. I am happy with any deal which the owners and players make to bring back the game!

 

However the principle still sticks in my craw that young athletes are having what most of us take for granted as rights to be stripped from them.

 

They are getting screwed in principle but at least they are well paid for bending over.

 

The NFL and the NFLPA deserve each other in their un-American actions to simply generate cash.

 

 

Lighten up...it's time for football!

 

Like you said (I think) the NFL and it's players are not "normal" in any regards, in comparison to other businesses...so just deal with that...if both sides can agree on how things should work, why should fans be so concerned?

 

Personally, the labor thing means little to me, if the two sides agree on how things will work. The owners and players, apparently, realize that the NFL draft is a big part of what makes the league more successful than any other pro sport. And I am not talking about the interest that fans have in the draft, which increases by the year. It is the idea that you have 32 teams, some in more desirable cities than others...everyone can't play for the Cowboys, Dolphins or wherever...teams in Buffalo, Cleveland, Detroit, and Baltimore (etc etc) can compete, with the higher profile cities, if they want. That, bigger picture, is better for the owners, the players and the fans. It is good for all involved. Sure, you are going to get the incidents where a guy doesn't like the situation he is in, and wants to go somewhere else. If a guy wants out bad enough, more often than not, his team will accommodate him.

 

If you really have the need to feel self-conscious about enjoying football too much, worry more about the head injuries that the players are exposed to. I hate the new rules, the "softening" of the game, but I don't like the notion that young men are severely hampering their quality of life, in later years, for my entertainment.

Edited July 17, 2011 by Buftex

[Buffalo Barbarian]

There is no such thing as a free market "within the NFL". The free market is that players can decide to play for the UFL, or arena league, or even CFL, if they do not want to play for the NFL.

 

I'll agree that the other choices in the true market are not that great. And that the fans, and players could benefit from a real competitor.

 

But the NFL is it's own private entity. Once you are drafted into it, and decide to play in it, you follow it's employee rules.

 

The NFLPA is part of, and directly dependent on, the NFL. It does not exist without the NFL. I mean, NFL is right in it's name. It is not "The Football Players' Union of America". Therefore, it is in the NFLPA's best interest that the NFL succeeds at the end of the day.

 

It's not free market from team to team. It's from League to League.

 

If a player wants to play in another city, he can quit the NFL and play for that city's UFL team (if they had one).

 

If I want to change cities, I cant demand that my company transfer me to that city's branch. Unless there is a job opening posted, and I qualify to get that job based on the company's rules and hiring process. I can also quit and find a job with another company in that new city.

 

The NFL is NOT the USA. I think people get that confused sometimes.

 

couldn't have said it any better.

[ropeerasers]

You think major football programs are losing money and that's covered by taxpayers? Really?

[NoSaint]

You think major football programs are losing money and that's covered by taxpayers? Really?

Only about 60 football programs make money, and only 14 athletic departments do. There are top 25 teams that lose money in football any given year... Just saying.

[Scrappy]

Next thing you know, they'll stop you from smoking everywhere.

[Mickey]

There is no such thing as a free market "within the NFL". The free market is that players can decide to play for the UFL, or arena league, or even CFL, if they do not want to play for the NFL.

 

I'll agree that the other choices in the true market are not that great. And that the fans, and players could benefit from a real competitor.

 

But the NFL is it's own private entity. Once you are drafted into it, and decide to play in it, you follow it's employee rules.

 

The NFLPA is part of, and directly dependent on, the NFL. It does not exist without the NFL. I mean, NFL is right in it's name. It is not "The Football Players' Union of America". Therefore, it is in the NFLPA's best interest that the NFL succeeds at the end of the day.

 

It's not free market from team to team. It's from League to League.

 

If a player wants to play in another city, he can quit the NFL and play for that city's UFL team (if they had one).

 

If I want to change cities, I cant demand that my company transfer me to that city's branch. Unless there is a job opening posted, and I qualify to get that job based on the company's rules and hiring process. I can also quit and find a job with another company in that new city.

 

The NFL is NOT the USA. I think people get that confused sometimes.

 

I am afraid you are wrong. The Supreme Court ruling in the American Needle case last year held that the teams do compete against on another and thus are subject to antitrust law,.

 

couldn't have said it any better.

 

That argument was shot down last year by the Supreme Court in the American Needle case.

[uncle flap]

First of all, no one is forced to declare for the draft. Declaring for the draft is in essence submitting an application to work for a company. After that, all bets are off.

 

The poor college students you refer to who are not "allowed to sell their services to the highest bidder" in fact are allowed to do just that. In the case of a football player, the NFL as a whole is the highest bidder. Those students are free to sell their services to any other company in the country (or world, for that matter). These players choose the NFL bc they will typically make more money working for the NFL than any other company (ie WalMart, Ford, Jim's SteakOut, etc). The fact that the SC has ruled NFL teams compete against each other has no bearing on this topic.

 

So anyway, I fail to see what "rights" are being infringed upon.

[Hplarrm]

You think major football programs are losing money and that's covered by taxpayers? Really?

I agree with NoSaint that the actual analyses of the raw dollars in and out of many major college football programs actually shows that in terms of the own books looking purely at dollars in from items such as ticket sales and additional cash flow positive cash flow items like advertising and good sales, many of these programs are money losers when you balance that with the costs of travel, training, etc.

 

It is an illusion many folks seem to live in that even when you constrain the analysis to the big programs that football is profitable in and of itself. In fact, as more and more details of things like the number of tickets schools are forced to buy for bowl games there are plenty of opportunities even in major programs to lose money on football.

 

The question then is why do schools do this? The answer is that they actually end up making the money they lose on football and it enormous travel and other costs back in terms of alumni loyalty, donations, and sense of ongoing relationship between slumni and the school.

 

The University at Buffalo is a good example, it was dumping tons of money into moving its programs up to the Division I level. The payoff was that the team spent years as a doormat for other teams to beat up and inflate their records.

 

However, Bill Greiner and the UB muckety mucks simply used this as an excuse to party and build relationships with donors who came out anyway to party with the kids who really did not care whether the product was winning or not. Greiner and UB kept their eye on the prize of using football as a reason to reach out to donors and build their college even if the football program was not very good and ticket sales were not a good source of income at all.

 

Football presents benefits far beyond it as a business model which usually is a money loser and often detracts from the educational experience of many students as it sucked up resources away from other student athletic activities. As more and more women went to college and it was clearly unfair not to devote a level of resources similar to their attendance to women and greater equity was achieved for women sports, we then began to see sports like wrestling take it in the teeth as the investment went into football.

 

However, it is simply an illusion that even most major college football programs are healthy businesses in and of themselves. Football does not pay for itself from the game itself, but from collateral benefits. Do taxpayer dollars subsidize college football. You bet!

 

Does it also pay part of tab for the NFL as a private business?

 

Ask yourself what is the equivalent investment which NFL teams make to MLB drafting dozens of kids each year as young as 16 years old and then assigns them to a huge web of Rookie league, A ball, AA, and AAA teams some owned by the MLB teams and some contracted with. The same is true for hockey. Both the NFL and the NBA instead live off the massive subsidy provided by colleges (often paid for with your and my tax dollars as in the UB example)to train their athletes.

 

If you want a third party analysis of this business, there is a comprehensive examination from PBS at > http://www.pbs.org/nbr/site/features/special/college-football_home/ < It does not advocate the same subsidy cut I have on this but it does provide access to collected data and examples which illustrate my points.

[Hplarrm]

First of all, no one is forced to declare for the draft. Declaring for the draft is in essence submitting an application to work for a company. After that, all bets are off.

 

The poor college students you refer to who are not "allowed to sell their services to the highest bidder" in fact are allowed to do just that. In the case of a football player, the NFL as a whole is the highest bidder. Those students are free to sell their services to any other company in the country (or world, for that matter). These players choose the NFL bc they will typically make more money working for the NFL than any other company (ie WalMart, Ford, Jim's SteakOut, etc). The fact that the SC has ruled NFL teams compete against each other has no bearing on this topic.

 

So anyway, I fail to see what "rights" are being infringed upon.

I agree that I do not look at any "right" of student athletes as being abridged. This is why I use the word abilities as being infringed upon. Typically it is the American ethic to respect the ability of people to sell their personal services to the highest bidder among employers.

 

I actually flat out say that I do not feel sorry for any college athlete who chooses to enter the social compact known as the NFL as they are going to be paid more than they have ever seen before to get bent over and become a part of this social compact.

 

I only ask folks to recognize that the NFL is nothing like a free market enterprise because it does things like collude with the NFLPA to require that if one makes a choice to enter into this social compact you give up certain things like what most of us Americans take for granted as the right to live where we choose.

 

In certain countries like Cuba they tell you what region of their controlled life you must live in. They claim that the benefits of this planned approach makes their neighborhoods and lifestyle more diverse. That may be true but I am afraid I do not buy the idea of some power telling you where you must live without regard to an individuals personal desires. The benefits of diverse neighborhoods is nice but does not compensate from some power assigning you to some city.

 

Likewise with the NFL, they offer some serious cash benefits for allowing this social compact to assign you to some city. However, just cause they pay you more does not change the fact they are ordering you around. NFL players are simply not allowed to sell their services to the highest individual bidding NFL business. Instead these individual businesses collude with the NFLPA to assign an individual to a specific city in order to get the benefits of their socialistic compact.

 

I understand this though I am not sure you and others do.

 

If folks are fine with the social compact basis of the NFL instead of a free-market approach that is fine by me. I just wish folks would realize it instead of the bizarre insistence that the NFL team are the same as free market businesses like Ford motor company.

 

The NFL is much more like a socialist enterprise than a free market enterprise because the profits are much higher from this socialistic approach.

 

It seems vacuous to me that so many people do not seem to realize this.

[zonabb]

Who cares how two parties in a negotiation proceed so long as they agree to the terms?

 

And don't say "many" Americans are liberatarian as a means to lead into you argument and flailingly attempt to justify it. The majority of americans aren't libertarians nor believe in it. Many are, but in a country of 320 million, many is relative and makes that ideology a minority and even fringe.

[Hplarrm]

Who cares how two parties in a negotiation proceed so long as they agree to the terms?

 

And don't say "many" Americans are liberatarian as a means to lead into you argument and flailingly attempt to justify it. The majority of americans aren't libertarians nor believe in it. Many are, but in a country of 320 million, many is relative and makes that ideology a minority and even fringe.

I agree that my interest in supporting the abilities of individual to compete in a free market is a fringe view these days. If a person supported a free market approach then they should actually support the free market approach advocated by Brady et al in their lawsuit which demanded that individual NFL teams negotiate personal services contracts with individual players.

 

Though I am generally libertarian (I think the rubric man Americans is fair since our country does have a general free market ethic) I do recognize that there are also some benefits and efficiencies in a more socialistic approach.

 

This I think is what the NFL is.

 

It does amuse though that some seem to want to support the owners with the claim that NFL players are just like workers in a business like a Ford auto employee and object to one of the base demands of the NFLPA which was to look at the books if the NFL was going to make deals which in essence treated the players like "mere" employees rather than as an organized entity which claimed by agreement of all parties a significant majority of the total gross receipts.

 

The folks who simply fail to see that the NFL really only exists in our society which has always valued the individual because they are granted a limited anti-trust exemption which allows this social compact to collude against the individual with the NFLPA.

 

Its great to me that this collusion exists as it makes for a fun game.

 

The thing which I find mostly hilarious but sometimes annoying is the folks who do not seem to realize that the NFL makes such huge profits from its socialistic compact approach and collusion with the union. The folks who were supportive of the owners over the union in this dust-up strike me as showing the same level of thinking as folks who were demanding that the government keep its hands off of their Medicare.

 

I am glad the NFL appears to be headed back. The owners like the GOP idiots who seemed to be hoist on their own brinksmanship over debt ceiling have not gotten what they were demanding because they were gonna kill us all if they did not get it.

 

While neither the NFLPA serves the interest of fans nor does Obama serve the interest of the average person it appears they both are the worse except for their opponent.

[nucci]

I agree that I do not look at any "right" of student athletes as being abridged. This is why I use the word abilities as being infringed upon. Typically it is the American ethic to respect the ability of people to sell their personal services to the highest bidder among employers.

 

I actually flat out say that I do not feel sorry for any college athlete who chooses to enter the social compact known as the NFL as they are going to be paid more than they have ever seen before to get bent over and become a part of this social compact.

 

I only ask folks to recognize that the NFL is nothing like a free market enterprise because it does things like collude with the NFLPA to require that if one makes a choice to enter into this social compact you give up certain things like what most of us Americans take for granted as the right to live where we choose.

 

In certain countries like Cuba they tell you what region of their controlled life you must live in. They claim that the benefits of this planned approach makes their neighborhoods and lifestyle more diverse. That may be true but I am afraid I do not buy the idea of some power telling you where you must live without regard to an individuals personal desires. The benefits of diverse neighborhoods is nice but does not compensate from some power assigning you to some city.

 

Likewise with the NFL, they offer some serious cash benefits for allowing this social compact to assign you to some city. However, just cause they pay you more does not change the fact they are ordering you around. NFL players are simply not allowed to sell their services to the highest individual bidding NFL business. Instead these individual businesses collude with the NFLPA to assign an individual to a specific city in order to get the benefits of their socialistic compact.

 

I understand this though I am not sure you and others do.

 

If folks are fine with the social compact basis of the NFL instead of a free-market approach that is fine by me. I just wish folks would realize it instead of the bizarre insistence that the NFL team are the same as free market businesses like Ford motor company.

 

The NFL is much more like a socialist enterprise than a free market enterprise because the profits are much higher from this socialistic approach.

 

It seems vacuous to me that so many people do not seem to realize this.

Who cares? Many here just want to watch, enjoy, and root for our team to win.

[KOKBILLS]

Who cares? Many here just want to watch, enjoy, and root for our team to win.

 

Exactly...

 

Though I have to admit no better example of why the Lockout sucks-out-loud than a thread like this...

 

UGH!

[billsfan89]

You don't have to play in the NFL. If you want to play in the league you have to play by its rules to enter the league;.

 

Seriously is the NFL draft an unfair process? Are fans and players displeased with the fact that the get drafted by teams that will pay them huge amounts of money.

[EasternOHBillsFan]

Marvin Miller ruined baseball, so it is not surprising that we're inundated with labor nonsense in sports. I like the old days where you had owners, and you either played and got paid for what you were worth or you didn't play, point blank. All this labor talk makes me sick. Let's just play some football already!!

[vincec]

I am afraid you are wrong. The Supreme Court ruling in the American Needle case last year held that the teams do compete against on another and thus are subject to antitrust law,.

This case was about apparel licensing, but let's assume that this applies to all features of the NFL. How can the NFL and NFLPA agree on a rookie wage scale? College players aren't part of the union and should be able to negotiate their salary in a free market. They can't be forced to join the union to play in the NFL either. How is the rookie wage scale legal?

[joemac]

Free market? Are you kidding a complete free market with no regulation leads to a monopoly where there is no choice. At best even with regulation the best we have in this country is an oligarchy. Try out looking for a cell phone contract and tell me how much competition there really is for your business.

[DrDawkinstein]

I am afraid you are wrong. The Supreme Court ruling in the American Needle case last year held that the teams do compete against on another and thus are subject to antitrust law,.

 

 

 

That argument was shot down last year by the Supreme Court in the American Needle case.

 

Ive been digging through some marginally informative articles, considering you couldnt bother to link any real information in your response. I dont see anything about how that applies to the NFL workforce and the Union, or this made up "market within the NFL". It looks like it worked out for the American Needle company that was merely a vendor, but doesn't look very relevant to what the OP was talking about.

 

Feel free to post some better links if Im still wrong.