PFT: Revenue sharing remains a key source of potential controversy... 'Boys blurb

[Randy White]

Posted by Mike Florio on March 21, 2010 7:45 PM ET

As to the issue of owners sharing the money that their teams generate, the potential for discord remains. Indeed, four years ago we believed that, absent a comprehensive solution, the NFL possibly could split into two leagues -- one made up of teams willing to share every dollar and another composed of teams with an "every man for himself" mentality..

This, ladies and germs, is the REAL reason for the lockout.

The players are just the strawman target. If the revenue sharing was more to the liking of the small market teams, they wouldn't even be talks, much less threat, of a lockout.

While I understand both sides' argument and lean more towards the big market teams' side ( if you work for it, you should keep most if not all of it ), I'm also a pragmatist and as such I know that reality states that no matter how successful the Cowboys, Giants, Deadskins, Patriots, Jets, Dullphins, etc etc are business wise, there IS no business without teams like the Steelers, Jaguars, Packers, Saints, Colts or Bengals. That means that wether they like it or not, big market teams will have to compromise.

I believe they know that better than anybody and will be willing to do so. However, the question is: " how much " ?

I believer that, right now, the small market team are asking for way more than the big market teams are willing to give up. That's the nature of the beast. They, too, know that no matter how they see it, $10 is more than $0, and $0 is what they would get IF they don't come to an agreement with the big market teams and end up locking the players. The key is going to be the number of small market teams owners who are willing to sacrafice the golden goose in order to stand their ground vs the number of small market teams owners who are more practical or " pragmatic ". If the former is overwhelmingly larger than the previous, then we're going to be in for a long session of negotiations and a lockout would then be a " real " possibility. If it's the opposite, then negotiations will be concluded with relative speed and they'll be no lockout.

IMO: the far extreme of small market teams' owners is not big enough to overrule the entire league ( I believe the number is 8 in order to overrule something ) so I expect a compromise between the more moderate members of that coalition and the big market teams sometime during the season, and soon after, a new CBA with the players will be announced.

The big market teams don't want ANY part of a lockout. Too much money on the line, with alot of responsabilities because of new stadiums ( Both NY teams, Dallas, New England, Chicago, Baltimore, Houston, etc ) and too much hard work in securing all those local sponsors, to be thrown away.