The news this week has been infiltrated with horrific and grotesque events that have shocked readers throughout the world. The Norway Massacre, for example, was a massive tragedy that whose impact was felt all around the world. However, not all the news this week has been tragic, today great news was released for all football fans. The NFL has lifted the lockout and have come to a compromise between the players and the owners. A lockout is basically an agreement by employers not to negotiate or do any kind of business with employees. Players are also locked out of entering practices or stadiums. The reason this is a big deal is that not only are millions of football fans disappointed but the economies in these NFL cities would be drastically affected, as well as over 100,000 jobs. The owners want more from these players without a justifiable reason. They have complained about financial losses, but have refused to show proof about the loss, all the while taking money away from the players. The lockout also deals with healthcare for the players, even post career. Monday morning a Collective Bargaining Agreement was reached for the next 10 years, securing work conditions, hours, healthcare, and wages.
The New York Times gives the readers a brief recap of the anxiety of agents across country, trying to manage the negotiations about to occur. They explained that Monday 32 player representatives voted for this 10 year deal, while the owners voted in favor last Thursday. The New York Times describes the frenzy of what is about happen perfectly when they states, "Rookies can start signing contracts and every other free agent can begin negotiating them Tuesday, when trades can also begin; teams will start opening training camps Wednesday; and Friday, about 400 free agents can begin joining new teams — five months of activity being funneled into just a few weeks." USA Today however, offered a more indept look at what exactly was settled in the agreement today. They gave a categories of what was accomplished and what is now changed and offered to the players. Things like player health and safety, retirees, free agency, rookie contracts, and salary caps were all discussed to help the reader understand exactly what this lockout was occurring for.
The next news source I used was BBC news. They have an entire section dedicated to sports, in particular American Football. This source basically gives the reader a recap of the lockout but also explains the agreement using numbers while the other two just simply used a rough estimate. According to this news source, "It is understood that the new agreement will see the owners keep 53% and the players 47%." Besides the difference of using actual percentages, not much was different then the previous articles.
The Miami Herald, a source of news that dedicates a large portion to sports, had a very interesting and simply read article about the lockout. While the article is dedicated to how it affects Miami, the overall concept of what the situation seems straightforward something I am sure a lot of the readers appreciate. The final paper I chose to look at was The Washington Post. This article had a very different approach to the news of the lockout. They wrote 8 separate pieces on 8 different individuals whose future careers were affected or are in question due to the lockout. Each story deals with a different type of career revolving around the NFL. One story tells of a defensive back, Eric Smith, who is now a free agent, with no contract and little knowledge of what is going to happen now that the lockout is over.
Overall, newspapers are an excellent source of information and online newspapers are constantly being updated (such as the article in USA today). This helps the reader understand and grasp the full concept of the story, staying informed within seconds of the event. All these five articles dealt with the same story, although all had a slightly different twist and different bits of information. The Washington Post offered an inside look to the lives of those affected by this lockout, while sources like The Miami Herald offered an insight to how a city was affected by it. USA Today had the most information about what was settled in the agreement, while the New York Times only gives a quick overall explanation of the issue. Each paper brought a different bit of information but overall they were able to communicate the important message, football is back.
References:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/26/sports/football/NFL-Union-Labor-Deal.html?_r=1&hp
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2011/07/reports-nfl-players-agree-to-new-collective-bargaining-agreement/1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/american_football/14284718.stm
http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/07/25/2330653/with-nfl-lockout-over-frenzy-replaces.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/special-reports/nfl-lockout
In your post you say "They have complained about financial losses, but have refused to show proof about the loss, all the while taking money away from the players." This is actually an incorrect statement. I wrote about this as well for my post & agree with you, but the fact of the matter is there was/is proof that many NFL teams were losing money. For instance, the Dolphins lost ~7.7mill purely on core business operations, not counting depreciation. It is pretty complicated, but many NFL teams are in debt for the $$ they got to build new stadiums & owners tried finding a way to take some from player salaries. Statistics show an ex-NFL players lives 20yrs less than the average man, & the average playing career of a player is 2.5-3yrs in which their body/brain are completely damaged, so it is absolutely wrong to try to take away part of their pensions. For awhile in order to get a pension from the NFL you had to play a minimum of 4yrs...luckily that has changed for the players.
ReplyDeleteI have attached two links from Forbes to show you that you can find sports business information easily. Forbes is an excellent source for figuring out team revenues & losses.
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/30/football-valuations-10_NFL-Team-Valuations_Rank.html
http://blogs.forbes.com/sportsmoney/2011/01/10/numbers-show-nfls-economic-realities-for-lockout-unwarranted/
oh also! sorry for writing so much, but wanted to say that the NYT would never write an in depth article like USA Today because they still have a small share in the Boston Red Sox (which also owns Roush Fenway Racing). Because they are technically in an owners category they will not write articles that shed a bad light on either side as it would not be beneficial to them.
ReplyDelete