I want to take a bit to discuss an article from Jason Cole at Yahoo Sports and just kind of discuss the ideas he purports that the players dropped the ball on the negotiations for the NFL CBA. 4 Douchebag players, after disbanding the NFLPA decided to sue the NFL on the grounds of unfair labor practices. The idea of the lawsuit comes and disbanding the NFLPA is from prior tactics used to get the best out of the NFL as they can. Essentially they are saying that the NFL works as a monopoly and inhibits players from reaching their maximum earning potential. Well, if the NFL did not work as a monopoly then there wouldn't be much of an NFL. I will not go further into this point as it is an aside from what Mr. Cole wrote.

So 4 douchebags sued the NFL for this in order to make all players better off except that after they did this to get more from the NFL, they have no decided that they want even more from the NFL for themselves, not for the betterment of the rest of the players but so they can have more of the pie.

Mr. Cole states that this is good for all players because it will drive up the value of contracts for the other players and I would respond to Mr. Cole and say you have not really thought this out and in fact you are the idiot.

Mr. Cole, the idea of a salary cap means that the NFL pie, not just to mention that the total revenue of the NFL is limited. The cap means that there is only so much money to go around. If one player is going to take a bigger portion of that pie then that by the VERY LAWS of mathematics, means that all others can only make that much less. Therefore, they are trying to enrich themselves at the cost to all other players playing the game.

Peyton "Greed" Manning may be the best quarterback to ever play the game but because he takes up 20% of the salary cap just by his salary means that the rest of the Colts by definition can only take up 80% of the salary cap. Him not being able to get the salary cap applied to him may mean he may make more money, I am contending nothing on that fact, but by him now making 25% of the salary cap, that means the rest of the team can only earn at most 75% of the salary cap.

If Peyton Manning is the best qb of all time and qb is the most important position then why have the Colts not won more Superbowls...because one man cannot win in the NFL and by him taking such a large piece of the pie means that he is not only hurting the other players on the team by keeping them from earning more money but also he is preventing the team from using the cap money he is eating up to sign better players and possibly win more championships.

Now that is holding a few things in Ceteris Paribus, namely that the Colts would use that money to improve the talent on the team and not make poor choices and decrease the talent on the team (were looking at you Bengals) but my point stands, the opportunity cost of signing Peyton Manning is that the money that is being paid to him cannot be paid any where else.

Further, if Peyton Manning et al qb's are making more money then in a capped environment, that means that now the qb's will be getting more of the limited money out there and by definition again, all other positions will be making less then they could because Peyton is driving up the price for one position. In the real world this is called income disparity (inequality) and is usually considered a bad thing unless you are on of the 1% controlling 98% of the wealth.

What the players named are suing for is to make everyone better off...at least that is what they were supposed to be suing for and now that they got that they have deicded that they deserve more so others can get less than them saying to start the suite we are all equal but now that we have finished this charade, we actually are not equal, we want more. That could be a very definition of the word douchebaggery!

Just one update that I thought of after typing this...and why is it so bad that a player get the franchise tag, not because they are not making A LOT of money, but rather because they feel they could be making even more without it. Now, since they are making an average of the top five players and they are not top five players, at least not all of them, it is highly unlikely that they would in reality make more with free agency, rather they would get a large lump sum payment in the form bonus money that would make them feel richer and they could drop the contract year play and fall back to normal pay now being paid more then they are worth. Now this argument is subjective. I am saying that they are not the top five player (Mankins and Jackson since they are pushing this idiocy and Brees and Manning realized they were f-ing idiots and backed off their claims...) but I stand by that.


Home Page