Smash Articles
14
Playoff Teams
Rule Changes
17 Game
Season
Low Lights
-
-
-
-
-
-
| |  
Owner Franchise Tag
Language! It all comes down to those that get carte blanche regarding both
verbal etiquette and the written language. In this country, we believe in
freedom of speech however there is some language that must be confronted at all
costs so that there can never be any confusion as an attempt to sullen the
leagues image. On the surface, it appears to be innocent but the reality
is devastating.
Not so long ago, I attended a local athletic association where the parents took
turns verbally lashing out against its board of directors which was followed by
series of never ending confrontational statements. I soon joined that
board of ecentially the same officers, where one of my first statements ever
was, "We have an image problem". Soon thereafter, everything
that board did, regardless of whether it was written or done verbally lied
behind its true image ... "Volunteers that provide a wholesome environment
to learn & play". This statement was both simple and direct, and
it immediately disarmed that boards prior image back into handling its most pressing
issues ... which was defending the growth of our children from questionable
behavior as well as to handle day to day business.
One of the most negative statements that is tossed around today carte blanche
that is completely out of control is the term, "NFL owner".
There is no such entity that I'm aware of. The negative connotation of
these two words are obvious however I've never seen this issue touched by any
commentator or journalist primarily due to fear & political
correctness. To be direct, this issue is filled with landmines but this
perpetual negative statement must be address head on. The correct
statement is, "NFL Franchise Proxy", as the proxy has the authorization
over a franchise that "Plays-by" a set of league rules. There is
no ownership over anything ... just a tenuous right of proxy. To put this in perspective,
the 31 other league proxies could have stripped the Super Bowl Championship from
the New England Patriots for cheating however the commissioner was given carte
blanche over that decision as the commissioner held a pre-determined proxy over all of it's 32
franchise proxies to make this decision. Its expediency, right or wrong, protected the league
interests. What people don't seem to understand is that a single NFL
Franchise Proxy is powerless to the other 31 proxies, other than in its ability
to recoup its assets if forced out, and not $1 in profit is guaranteed.
For most this arrangement is beneficial but it involves inspiration,
perspiration and risk understanding that no NFL franchise proxy, nor any common
corporate owner, can do it all. To put this statement in perspective,
could any corporate owner make the 19,286 decisions that an organization made on this
day?
Most corporations do not use contracts, as their people are generally free to
come and go as they please. It is understood by all NFL parties that
contracts must be used as without them the teams ... the ultimate goals behind
these contracts ... could not function without these agreements. What
people tend to forget is that these binding documents involve volunteers on both
sides, as neither party is forced to do anything. Where things go sour, is
when one of these volunteers decides not to live up to their end of the
agreement. This might help to explain why new contracts appear to be
undervalued to the general lay person.
Where this argument all goes astray, which should be the #1 focus of the players
union is in regard to the Franchise & Transition Tag. This is a
complete and absolute winning argument for the players union. It is my
opinion that regardless of its issues, this needs to be addressed directly by
all the NFL Franchise Proxies to protect the integrity of its interests.
NFL fans, right up to today's NFL Franchise Proxy's have an unquestioned desire to
protect its best player, to protect it's franchise, however this is not how this
tool is being used. For example, Michael Vick regardless of whether he's
Philadelphia's best player or not should be an unrestricted free agent.
He's earned that right. He should be allowed to negotiate the security of
his future as today the most significant part of a players contract is in it's
guaranteed money. If the Franchise Tag is allowed to continue under the
new collective bargaining agreement and Michael Vick ends his career this year
due to injury, he will be forced by the collective bargaining agreement to forgo
his right to his security. No NFL player wants this stipulation applied to
them unless there would be no other way to realize the offered money. On
the other hand, if Michael Vick holds back on his play, to protect his future,
he will clearly forgo his true market value. Either way, this restriction
does much more than to not to negotiate in good faith. No union should
be allowed to forgo the rights of an individual to an NFL franchise proxy.
This particular collective bargaining restriction can be viewed no other way as
under the negative term "ownership", as it restricts a players freedom
to chose, and to be direct it destroys the credibility of this league at its
very foundation. It is what it is!
How is the Franchise Tag different from being a restricted free agent?
Restricted free agency applies to every NFL player, not just an
individual. Yes, it does give leverage to the NFL Franchise Proxy in
forcing the NFL player to the bargaining table but in no way does it force the
player into anything. The way restricted free agency is viewed is to pay
ones dues in producing for the league ... the way it should be. As for the
four versus six years of restricted free agency, that was the NFL Franchises
Proxy's leverage to get the union back to the bargaining
table.
The rest of the arguments, other than rookie contracts, just might be a pipe dream for
both parties involved. Do the right thing! What is set in motion is
not by my hand.
The Viking Ghost
Writer
http://MyVikingBlood.org
Date: July 5, 2011
|
