• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

why do professional sports players need a union?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Players want as big a slice of pie from the revenues they create for the owners. Without the players, the league wouldn't exist. Without the owners, the league wouldn't exist. It is in both of their best interest to reach a fair agreement through negotiations.

Professional sports are allowed an exemption from the anti-trust law for a host of reasons that I don't fully know or understand (not a lawyer). The unions protect the players from being taken advantage of in this situation (since they have no reasonable alternative).

The current NFL situation is quite different than the past. In normal negotiations, both sides want to reach an agreement because they both stand to hurt significantly without one. Think of a stream of water pushing a ball on a vertical track. Where the two forces of the water and gravity equalize is where the ball rests. This is where the settlement SHOULD be. However, the owners basically shifted the power to their side (increasing gravity) by setting up TV contracts so they wouldn't be hurt near as badly. The NFLPA responded by disbanding, essentially creating an anti-trust issue for the owners (increasing the power of the water).

To be perfectly honest, it seems to be a rather contentuous relationship right now, and with the budget deficit sucking up most/all of the government's attention, it hurts the players power and liklihood of a 2011 NFL season. The season can still happen, but both sides need to put their big-boy pants on and act reasonably and rationally (same goes with the US Government).
 
ghost recon88 said:
I for one am glad both the NFL and NBA locked out the players, these guys have started ruining the league with their antics and huge contracts.
Click to expand...

The owners are as much or more at fault. No one put a gun to their head and forced them to give Darko Milicic 4 years $20 million, sign Luke Walton to a 7-year deal, pay Gilbert Arenas a ridiculous sum, or overpay to retain some 3 string guard. The NBA owners bitched and complained about losing money and then last offseason went on spending sprees for players that would make Paris Hilton blush. The guys at the top of the league like Kobe, Lebron, Wade, etc are worth what they make and much more for what they bring to a franchise, but the owners are off their rockers paying what they have for mid-level and lower talent.
 
BlahBlahYouToo said:
oh, i'm sorry. they train for another 2 months in the off season. real tough work. must be rough...
Click to expand...

lol no.

nearly all proffesional athletes train all year. in fact they had a article on ESPN that mentioned baseball players train harder off season then during the season.

only ones i can see not training all year is maybe linemen. and hell i bet im wrong on that.
 
This is pretty fucking stupid.

They already have agents and managers. If you feel your agent/manager isn't "winning" enough cash for you,.. you fire them and find another one who will deliver what you think you deserve.
 
waggy said:
lol no.

nearly all proffesional athletes train all year. in fact they had a article on ESPN that mentioned baseball players train harder off season then during the season.

only ones i can see not training all year is maybe linemen. and hell i bet im wrong on that.
Click to expand...

This. Athletes also sacrifice quite a bit to play the game, something most people gloss over when talking about them.

I think linemen do work out quite a bit, though. They have to build / maintain their 10 yard explosiveness.


Macamus Prime said:
This is pretty fucking stupid.

They already have agents and managers. If you feel your agent/manager isn't "winning" enough cash for you,.. you fire them and find another one who will deliver what you think you deserve.
Click to expand...

If you're saying that the unions are unnecessary because of agents, I don't really think you understand what the unions provide and negotiate for on behalf of the players.
 
Macamus Prime said:
This is pretty fucking stupid.

They already have agents and managers. If you feel your agent/manager isn't "winning" enough cash for you,.. you fire them and find another one who will deliver what you think you deserve.
Click to expand...

I don't care who your agent is. If the NFL owners didn't have some form checks and balances, players would get screwed. If you had Rosenhaus and all the owners said "Let's not pay anyone more than $1Million/year," you'll get $1M/year. However, if trying to pull stunts like that got the entire player base to stop playing, then the owners have to think twice.
 
What I don't understand is why they are allowed to negotiate individually when they are in a union. Same with actors. Why can't factory workers do that?
 
yea as i've heard it explained, most of the guys aren't the big money stars. they are an injury away from losing their jobs...forever. not that their viability period is all that long either.

you don't hear about those guys, no one cares.

players are generaly not in a position to negotiate, the clock is ticking on their careers. unless ur a star of course.
 
Yup, people seem to think that all of the players are the high profile superstars. The average career in the NFL is only 3.5 yrs.
 
Top-tier professional sports players don't "need" a union. Collective bargaining typically stifles their earning power.

Mid- and bottom-tier professional sports players need a union because collective bargaining often gets them minimum salaries and other perquisites that they would not get in a "free market".

You know who really needs the players to be unionized? The owners, and to a lesser degree the fans and players. Without a players union and collective bargaining the individual franchises would be subject to antitrust litigation for collusion when they impose uniform contract provisions, free agency regulations, salary regulations, etc. Without those, sports would be bedlam.

Taken a step further, athletes are paid, at least in part, on statistical production. If the owners impose consistent rules of the game certain players could contend that the owners are colluding to damper their production and thus earning ability. (EX: The three-point line is moved back, causing 3-pt % to drop. Now 3-pt shooters are less valuable, teams pay them less, illegal collusion.) That could actually destroy professional sports entirely.

Without a players union, retirees would have no benefits.

Without a players union, teams would be subject to the labor laws of the state they reside in, causing huge disparities.

Without a players union, teams would be allowed to sign 12-year-olds to contracts (with parental consent) and squat on their rights, killing college sports.

Etc.
 
Rastus said:
What I don't understand is why they are allowed to negotiate individually when they are in a union. Same with actors. Why can't factory workers do that?
Click to expand...

Their CBA probably specifically states it. If individual factory workers had any actual power, then they could. The problem is, if 1 factory worker refuses to perform their job, there are 50,000,000 people who can do the exact same thing ready and willing to step in producing the same amount of revenue. They can't really do anything significantly better than the average Joe. However, the fact that football is a high skill, high results oriented entertainment industry, the same amount of money isn't made by replacing Adrian Peterson with the average Joe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top