Posnanski unloads both barrels on owners and Goodell

[Dave Lane]

http://joeposnanski.si.com/2011/04/2...the-last-drop/

Roger Goodell is clearly no schlemiel or schlimazel. Roger Goodell looks, as the cliché goes, right out of central casting. He’s a powerful looking guy, fills out a suit, gives every impression of being in charge at every moment of every day. If you were in a group stuck on an elevator with Roger Goodell, there is no question that he would be in charge, even if you had CEOs of companies and three-star generals in there. There are just people who exude authority, people who will walk down the street and people will just know that they are CEO of something or other. Goodell has that aura.

But, while watching this NFL labor mess, something has occurred to me, something that cuts completely against looks and aura and everything else. It has occurred to me that Roger Goodell might about 20,000 leagues over his head. It has occurred to me that while Bud Selig is destined to be underestimated because of the way he carries himself, that Roger Goodell is destined to be overestimated for exactly the same reason.

Here’s my thinking: The owners, under Goodell’s leadership, decided to go for broke as they try to negotiate a new collective bargaining agreement. They did this at a time when the NFL is, by far, the most successful sports league in America, perhaps the world. They did this at a time when the league is a $9 billion entity, when television networks are sending flowers and chocolate, and when reports are coming out constantly about the horrible damage that football does to its players. Goodell, in representing the owners, had the gall to cry poor, to demand a billion more right off the top for the league’s billionaire owners, to say that the game could not possibly continue like this, to take money away from players who seem to be dying young and suffering terribly in their later years, and to actually demand expanding the season.

At this point, the feeling had to be that Goodell knew what he was doing. The NFL is on some kind of crazy winning streak when it comes to building the game — pro football just keeps getting bigger and bigger. Heck, the NFL DRAFT is now one of the biggest sporting events on the calendar. And that’s just a bunch of people in a room writing names on index cards. The league seems invulnerable to harm, and destined only to get richer and more popular and more powerful. On top of that, Goodell just embodies confidence and certainty. If the league officials figured that this was the time to take a bunch of money away from the players, hey, who could argue with their record?

Still, there were signs early on that things were not going as planned. In sports’ work stoppages, at least in my view, the majority of Americans automatically tend to side with the owners … or anyway they tend to side AGAINST the players. I think the reasons for this are involved and complicated and worthy of a 10,000-word post of their own. But generally people seem to get angrier at the players that they know than the silhouettes of the owners that they don’t.

But not in this case. Oh, sure, there were plenty who blamed the players, almost out of habit. More than usual, though, seemed to realize that the players were not really asking for anything. It was the owners shrieking that the system was irreparably broken, that they needed more money, that they needed to add games, that they were in big trouble. And when the players asked them to open the books and actually PROVE that they were in any sort of trouble at all, well, suddenly crickets chirped.

So I think many people blamed the owners for this whole fight. I know I did. I think the NFL owners already have by far the best deal in sports and are driven by pure greed to get more. Roger Goodell’s attempts to change this perception seemed to me pretty pathetic and unconvincing. He kept trying to call the attempt to add two games to the regular season a mere “reconfiguring” of the schedule (and he kept saying that the fans wanted it, though every poll suggested that the fans overwhelmingly did not). He kept talking in vague generalities about the financial doom that the league would face if they did not rework the CBA … and nobody really believed him. He sent what seemed to me an ill-conceived letter to the players association. He sent what seemed to me a ridiculous letter to the fans. And, as expected, he presided over a lockout of the players.

Right now, that lockout looks to be the most self-destructive move that a league has made in a long, long time. The lockout was enjoined by a judge on Monday, meaning it’s now over. The league is appealing Judge Nelson’s ruling, but from what I can tell the league’s appeal seems on shaky ground, and as our own Michael McCann says, the league now has a whole lot to worry about. The players, assuming the ruling is not overturned, now have serious negotiating power. The owners, assuming the ruling is not overturned, now have a serious problem convincing anyone that they aren’t already overflowing in money. This thing has a chance to become a major embarrassment for the owners … and perhaps more than just an embarrassment. It could be a financial catastrophe.

And based on Goodell’s opinion column in The Wall Street Journal on Tuesday, it looks like the impressive NFL commissioner is completely out of ideas. I wrote on Twitter that the only thing missing from this ludicrous column was exclamation points. You could tell right away that this column was untrustworthy when in the second sentence he wrote, “For six weeks, there has been a work stoppage,” as if that was caused by some sort of natural disaster and was not a result of the owners locking out the players. He then talks about how great the NFL system has been for everyone without even taking one sentence to mention the inconvenient fact that it was the owners, not the players, who wanted to blow up the old system in a bald money grab. He then offers an utterly unrealistic and devious doomsday scenario “if the players win” — a scenario that he knows will never happen and is only in play now because of the owners’ greedy lockout that was slammed down by the courts.

It all screamed of desperation and, frankly, it felt a bit incompetent, too. If Bud Selig ever wrote a column like that, people would be pulling out their torches and pitchforks. Roger Goodell is undoubtedly a brilliant guy, and he has a strong history with the league, and he is trying to represent a group of very different owners who probably resent that they have to give ANY of their money to the players. But that’s the job of commissioner, and right now it looks like Goodell is flailing.

Of course, maybe he isn’t. Maybe he has expected everything that has happened and has contingency plans that are not easily seen now. Maybe everything is going exactly according to plan. I have mentioned that I am reading Robert Caro’s Master of the Senate about Lyndon Johnson, and the amazing thing about LBJ as Senator was how he manipulated people without them knowing it, how sometimes he wanted bills he supported to fail, and how sometimes he wanted people he differed with on his side, and how he had a clear plan that he did not want anyone to see until it was too late.

Maybe Goodell is like that, too. That is certainly the reputation he has built in many quarters. I am beginning to think, though, that reputation is way, way off. Bud Selig is clearly much more effective and authoritative than he lets on. I can’t help but wonder if Roger Goodell is exactly the opposite.

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by Pittsie

How about not f'ing up the wildly successful league their fathers built? This isn't a widget factory, where the primary motive is to make an extra $.00001/widget.

Public perception matters to sponsors, consumers, and networks.

I have no idea what angle the owners are taking. None of us are privy to the information the owners have. Nevermind the fact that the league doesn't belong to the proverbial "we". It belongs to the owners of the 32 teams. If they want to run the league into the toilet that's their prerogative. Frankly it's none of any of our business what they want to do with it.

It's well within your right to wonder what they're doing, or disagree with what they're doing, but to be upset by it? That just seems silly to me (not saying you are, but some here clearly are).

Posnanski's assertion that the owners should be motivated by anything but greed screams "this article is nothing but an emotional plea", which means it's nothing but Entertainment Tonight for sports, which I don't have time for.

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Uh...Poz stayed at the Star for years despite more lucrative offers elsewhere.

Try being less dumb.

And he stayed only out of loyalty to the Star? It wasn't because he placed value on living in the area for his wife/kids? Being close to his family/friends? Not because he felt that putting in years at the Star would improve his resume? Those things all factor into the greed equation.

[L.A. Chieffan]

that caro book sounds interesting

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

And he stayed only out of loyalty to the Star? It wasn't because he placed value on living in the area for his wife/kids? Being close to his family/friends? Not because he felt that putting in years at the Star would improve his resume? Those things all factor into the greed equation.

WTF are you talking about?

So Posnanski says the owners are chasing money and you say "Oh yeah, he'd bail on the star for an extra $1". This is categorically false. So rather than conceded you were talking out your ass and saying something along the lines of "My bad, I'm a moron", you're going to try to defend that your bit of ill-informed idiocy?

You're going to try to change any accepted meaning of the word "greed" and instead equate it with the entire calculus of considerations when making a major career change? I gotta imagine that's probably the dumbest thing I'll hear over the next 72 hours.

Like I said, please please please try being less stupid.

The only thing worse than ignorance is attempting to defend it. You were wrong, it's okay to admit it and just go about your merry way.

[HemiEd]

I am misting up with sympathy for the poor players.

[Skyy God]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

I have no idea what angle the owners are taking. None of us are privy to the information the owners have. Nevermind the fact that the league doesn't belong to the proverbial "we". It belongs to the owners of the 32 teams. If they want to run the league into the toilet that's their prerogative. Frankly it's none of any of our business what they want to do with it.

It's well within your right to wonder what they're doing, or disagree with what they're doing, but to be upset by it? That just seems silly to me (not saying you are, but some here clearly are).

If you don't think Goodell is a proxy for the owners, and that his positions are their positions, then there's really nothing left to discuss.

Originally Posted by Simplex3

Posnanski's assertion that the owners should be motivated by anything but greed screams "this article is nothing but an emotional plea", which means it's nothing but Entertainment Tonight for sports, which I don't have time for.

Assuming arguendo your point about profit motive, the owners would be far better off not damaging the reputation of their product and endangering future revenue growth. Instead, they're crying poor and squabbling over a few hundred million of existing revenue.

It's unbelievably short-sided.

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

WTF are you talking about?

So Posnanski says the owners are chasing money and you say "Oh yeah, he'd bail on the star for an extra $1". This is categorically false. So rather than conceded you were talking out your ass and saying something along the lines of "My bad, I'm a moron", you're going to try to defend that your bit of ill-informed idiocy?

Or I was simplifying the argument to a bullet point instead of writing a full thesis and you jumped on it like a fat kid on a candy bar, injecting meaning where there was none. Whichever.

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by Pittsie

If you don't think Goodell is a proxy for the owners, and that his positions are their positions, then there's really nothing left to discuss.

I'm not sure where you got that. That's exactly what Goodell is.

Originally Posted by Pittsie

Assuming arguendo your point about profit motive, the owners would be far better off not damaging the reputation of their product and endangering future revenue growth. Instead, they're crying poor and squabbling over a few hundred million of existing revenue.

It's unbelievably short-sided.

Given the information we have it appears to be short sighted. But the only thing I know for a fact about this situation is that we don't know much.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

Or I was simplifying the argument to a bullet point instead of writing a full thesis and you jumped on it like a fat kid on a candy bar, injecting meaning where there was none. Whichever.

So you were making shit up to prove a point?

Got it.

[DJ's left nut]

For the record - in no world is this:

Originally Posted by Simplex3

Posnanski can feed all the BS lines he wants about how he works his job for love of the craft, but if the paychecks stopped his ass would be out the door. Likewise he'd jump ship tomorrow for an extra $1. Greedy bastard.

A 'bullet point' view of this:

Originally Posted by Simplex3

And he stayed only out of loyalty to the Star? It wasn't because he placed value on living in the area for his wife/kids? Being close to his family/friends? Not because he felt that putting in years at the Star would improve his resume? Those things all factor into the greed equation.

Rather the latter is a BS back-peddling attempt to spin your way clear of the former and anyone that reads it knows better.

But again - feel free to continue defending your idiocy.

[Kerberos]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

By the way, this is a terrific article.

Goodell is in way over his head. He took over a wildly popular game and now may be driving it into the ground. Inconsistently strict definitions of excessive celebration. Inconsistent enforcement of penalties, like getting fined more money for a helmet-to-helmet hit than punching a helmetless Cortland Finnegan in the head. An 18-game season that no fan in their right mind wants. And now presiding over an embarrassing labor conflict driven by owners asking for the moon at the worst possible time.

Can anyone name a single good thing Goodell has done for the game?

Sorry but Finnegan is a morAn and completely egged that sucker punch on to himself. Stop being a douche nozzle on the field and people won't take swings at you.

[noa]

JoPo isn't saying that the owners should be motivated by something other than greed. He's saying that they should have been more careful in trusting Goodell to lead them down this path. The owners may have sacrificed bigger gains in the long run due their immediate desire for some extra money. Trusting Goodell haphazardly undermined the owners' ultimate goal. That's not an indictment on the owners for greed, its an indictment for their shortsightedness and failure to think this thing through.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Brock]

Originally Posted by noa

JoPo isn't saying that the owners should be motivated by something other than greed. He's saying that they should have been more careful in trusting Goodell to lead them down this path. The owners may have sacrificed bigger gains in the long run due their immediate desire for some extra money. Trusting Goodell haphazardly undermined the owners' ultimate goal. That's not an indictment on the owners for greed, its an indictment for their shortsightedness and failure to think this thing through.
Posted via Mobile Device

Goodell isn't the architect of this thing. He's a mouthpiece.

[suzzer99]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

And he stayed only out of loyalty to the Star? It wasn't because he placed value on living in the area for his wife/kids? Being close to his family/friends? Not because he felt that putting in years at the Star would improve his resume? Those things all factor into the greed equation.

Ok so how about the voluminous blog he puts out simply because he likes to write apparently? Saying Pos would have left the Star for $1 more, when he clearly stayed there for a long time as better offers were poring in, is just flat out wrong. The Star has made it obvious they can't pay for legit sports columnist any more with the sinking of the newspaper industry. What was he supposed to do, stay there for what Mellinger makes when SI probably offered 5x that or more?

Seriously, of all the public figures in the world to attack as being a money-grubbing whore - you may have picked just about the least likely candidate. Congrats, that wins some kind of stupid hall of fame award.

[jAZ]

Originally Posted by Brock

Goodell isn't the architect of this thing. He's a mouthpiece.

Exactly. Owner + Lawyers - Court Loss = Goodell-The-Scapegoat

I actually think Goodell has been outstanding as a commissioner.