BEING ABUSIVE

One more attempt to address the monopolistic power of the NFL.

Years ago I had assumed the management duties in a rural claim office. The claim representatives all had a certain settlement authority awarded to them. Some, with a more advanced classification received the higher authority. I , as "da boss" had the most settlement authority in the office.

My example this time is of the 6'5" claim representative who had the habit of standing beside my desk and looking over my shoulder as I examined his "emergency need" for additional settlement authority. Unfortunately for him I had studied proxemics- including what constitutes appropriate "personal space", and he was clearly violating mine. I told him so.

My style was a careful reading of the claim file before making a decision. It was tough to do with this guy towering over me. And, he knew it. It was his way of getting a head start on the negotiations with me in his effort to convince me to increase his authority.

I was reminded of the story as I read the sports pages about the NFL's recent flurry of more fines for "questionable" hits. The problem is, as most TV viewers - game officials - and instant replay have confirmed, - many , but not all, of those hits were unavoidable.

It reminded me of my college management studies where the books clarified that many labor unions gained acceptance only due to to the power abuses of management. I'm sure friend Harry would be much more informative if writing about same in his interesting blogs.

Earlier this year NFL owners openly talked about the possibility of an employee lockout if both sides couldn't reach an agreement on a new contract. The union decided to take their first "small" step right before the season began.

They requested the teams to vote for allowing decertification of the union so that a lock out of the players could possibly be avoided at crunch time . The union need not decertify - it just wants the authority to do so. The players agreed.

The NFL's position was "no comment." They were planning their own direct "first step", and it wasn''t so "small." It had to do with money owed by the players. The NFL was to become the ultimate arbiter - if you read between the lines. The move was cloaked in safety concerns The purpose of this blog is not to refute this - only to suggest that there is often more than meets the eye in the nefarious world of the NFL. You may or may not disagree. Just consider it.

Steeler defensive standout and previous Super Bowl MVP and Defensive MVP James Harrison was to be the initial guinea pig. What? You want to pick some third line defensive back to gain the kind of publicity you seek?

Harrison ultimately was fined $75,000 for two questionable hits and then invited by the NFL to come to speak with them in their NY offices.. When he returned they not only did not reduce his fine but added another one for $20,000. Now, he is to formally appeal the first fines. Harrison and his agent as well as Steeler management and owners all have probably a pretty good guess as to what odds Vegas bookies are giving him.

I hesitate to talk about the NFL and Vegas oddmakers in the same paragraph as we all know how strongly the NFL feels about the evils of gambling. The editors of your family paper and favorite weekly sports magazines are apparently unaware of the NFL's feelings as they consistently update us of the game odds daily during each football week

The league has insisted that each team communicate any player injuries - not once - but now twice a week,. One assumes the purpose is to make sure the odds may be more accurate. A teams failure to do that will, and has, resulted in fines for the teams involved.

You see, like the lowly claim superintendent above - the NFL has the last word. And, that's probably as it should be- as long as they don't abuse that authority. The key now is to determine how that authority is being interpreted by the NFL and whether it results in a violation of their limited anti-trust exemption?

Earlier this year The Supreme Court refused to broaden that exemption in a matter of who gets to make hats, shirts etc for the NFL. The NFL had precipitously given a carte-blanche authority to Reebok to do that in exchange for a pittance of some size; we can only imagine. The little guy, manufacturer American Needle took them on and won, claiming that the NFL violated anti-trust laws.

The NFL tells us daily that they have replaced baseball as "The American Pastime" - and now it's seeking to acquire baseball's blanket anti-trust exemption as well. Don't expect them to give up.

Following the Court's decision NFLPA (players) executive director Demaurice Smith said in a statement:

"Today's Supreme Court ruling is not only a win for the players past, present, and future, but, a win for the fans. While the NFLPA and the players of the NFL are pleased with the ruling, we remain focused on reaching a fair and equitable CBA (colelctive bargaining agreement.) We hope that today also marks a renewed effort by the NFL to bargain in good faith and avoid a lockout."

Back to the fines. The NFL apparently has the sole authority to fine folks and to determine for how much, based on what three men feel is an "illegal hit". It is not being left to people willing to put on a uniform and run up and down a NFL field.

These folks are called "officials" - and they aren't seeing the same thing the folks up in the ivory tower are seeing. Why should they? Maybe because they're not the ones preparing for negotiations down the road with the players association? Like a courtroom attorney the NFL has made their opening statement via their inexplicable refusal to stop fining the players "without further review" by an impartial panel.

This "holy trinity" has made clear their unwillingness to accept any unbiased judgment to work toward a resolution of a problem that is very real. They have couched their actions as "a determination that no football player will sustain permanent and disabling injuries as a result of playing this game." Noble aim - if consistently applied. Recall the video games and your ads.

No real fan wants to see a ball player permanently disabled as a result of an illegal hit. Unfortunately, there appears to be disagreement as to what constitutes just that. The NFL, in their early flurry of labor/management negotiations has jumped on the injury issue quicker than the guy who insists you tell everybody yes or no whether you have stopped beating your mother.

What? It's coincidental to raise the issue now they are negotiating a new contract? Apparently, we'll save the issue of the height of the players socks for other times of crisis. Oh, and then there's the support they're giving regarding the owners agreed upon decision to expand the regular season by two more games? Maybe those two will be "flag football?"

Steelers safety Troy Polamaulu had a reasojnable suggestion to have a panel - removed from the current triumvirate - to be in charge of "second guessing." The NFL remained silent.

Don't you think it's strange that we live in a country that prides itself on free speech - but in dealings with the NFL, "it ain't free"? If there is any verbal disagreement with the NFL by players - coaches - and even some owners - they may well be fined in a very high amount. There is no consistency in the amount of the fine . It's decided by the same people from whom a clarification was being sought by the supposed "speech offenders".

And, you don't think we're in trouble? Making the NFL judge and jury doesn't bother you?

Surely there is no 100% employment of attorneys in the USA.. Someone must be available to examine what, on the surface, appears to be a clear incentive for the NFL to be abusive.

How is this different than the town bully that sucker punched you. You know, the guy who insisted you tripped and fell into his fist - 26 times.

So what leverage do the NFLPA folks have. How about a walkout? Seems to be a lot of that going around. Would decertification change the game rules? One suspects that the NFL players would be happier to contribute to this effort than pay the fines being taken out of their pocket by the NFL , who simply refuse to consider alternatives.

Truly, you're not bothered by "three suits" who have decided they are omnipotent? Wait until the lockout. Not worried? Sort of like the adage, "I cried about having no shoes until I met a man with no legs."

This is a case of abuse by the NFL and our chances of getting them to stop is like convincing Congress - earmarks are bad..

(This blog has been in a rough draft unpublished form for a few days. We now read that NFLPA executive director has joined in support for Polamaus alternative plan. Let the game begin!)