National Football League Corporate Political Strategy - Robert Paul Ellentuck

7/29/2019 National Football League Corporate Political Strategy - Robert Paul Ellentuck

1/16

EMBA 212: Corporate Political Strategy

National Football League

Strategy on Concussions, Antitrust & LaborNegotiation Issues

Robert Paul Ellentuck


2/16

2

COPYRIGHT 2010, 2011ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

ROBERT PAUL ELLENTUCK

THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER EXPRESSLY PROHIBITS ANY AND ALL COPYING, FAXING, SCANNING, XEROXING,REPRODUCING, TRANSMISSION, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING, PRINTING, SUBMISSION (EITHER ELECTRONICALLYOR OF A SCANNED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED COPY, OR OF THE ORIGINAL COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL, A COPY OFTHE COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL, OR OF A PORTION OF THE ORIGINAL OR COPIED COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL), OR ANYAND ALL OTHER ACTIONS: ELECTRONIC OR OTHERWISE, OF ANY PORTION OF THIS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL OR THEENTIRE COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL, WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY VIOLATE THE RIGHTS OF THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER. SUCHPROHIBITION INCLUDES THE ORIGINAL COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL, A COPY OF THE ORIGINAL COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL,A PORTION OF THE ORIGINAL COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL, A PORTION OF THE COPIED COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL, ANELECTRONIC VERSION OF THE COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL, OR ANY OTHER POTENTIAL VERSION OF THE COPYRIGHTEDMATERIAL (WHETHER THE TECHNOLOGY EXISTS AS OF THE COPYRIGHT DATE, OR IS YET TO BE INVENTED). THISPROHIBITION EXPLICITLY EXTENDS TO ALL OF THE ABOVE ACTIONS, BUT IS IN NO WAY LIMITED TO THEM. ANY USEOF THE COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL, IN ANY MANNER, CAN ONLY BE WITH THE PRIOR CONSENT AND AUTHORIZATIONTHAT IS BOTH WRITTEN AND EXECUTED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER AND THE OTHER PARTY, RELATINGSPECIFICALLY TO THIS COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. THIS COPYRIGHT, AND ALL OF THE PROTECTIONS THAT IT AFFORDSTHE COPYRIGHT HOLDER EXPLICITLY EXTEND TO ANY COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL, IMAGE, FILE, DATA, OR ANY OTHERATTACHMENT IN ANY FORM, ELECTRONIC, PRINTED, OR IN ANY OTHER FORMAT, THAT ARE ATTACHED TO THISCOPYRIGHTED MA TERIAL IN ANY MANNER OR FORM, AND TO W HICH THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER HOLD S OR IS ELIGIBLE,UNDER THE WIDEST POSSIBLE INTERPRETATION, TO HOLD A COPYRIGHT TO. THE INTERPRETATION OF THECOPYRIGHT HOLDERS RIGHTS SHALL BE AS BROAD AS THE LAW ALLOWS, AND IN NO WAY SHALL BE LIMITED BY THERIGHT OR RESTRICTION NOT BEING STATED. THE COPYRIGHT SHALL ALSO EXTEND TO ALL FUTURE PROTECTIONSUNDER THE LAW, AS THEY BECOME AVAILABLE. THE FAILURE TO MENTION A PROTECTION OF ANY CURRENT ORFUTURE COPYRIGHT LAW SHALL NOT IN ANY WAY INDICATE THAT THE LAW DOES NOT APPLY IN FULL TO THECOPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. IF ANY PORTION OF THIS DOCUMENT OR COPYRIGHT IS NOT DEEMED TO APPLY, AT ANYTIME, FOR ANY REASON, THAT SHALL IN NO WAY LIMIT ANY AND ALL OTHER PROTECTIONS THAT THE COPYRIGHTGRANTS, NOR SHALL IT LIMIT FUTURE PROTECTIONS FROM APPLYING AS THEY BECOME AVAILABLE. THISCOPYRIGHT IS IN NO WAY INTENDED TO INFRINGE ON THE RIGHTS OF ANY OTHER PARTY.


3/16

Introduction

History of NFLThe National Football League (NFL) was formally created in 1920 by 11 teams. Currently, theleague is comprised of 32 teams, divided into two conferences: the AFC (American FootballConference) and NFC (National Football Conference). Each conference has 4 divisions with 4teams in each division, for a total of 16 teams per conference. The NFL is organized as a 501(c)(6) as a federal nonprofit and is tax exempt. The regular football season is 17 weeks (16 games and1 bye week). At the end of the regular season, 6 teams play in the playoffs, which culminate in theSuper Bowl. Each of the 32 teams is permitted 53 players and can dress 45 players to play eachweek. Players are members of a union, NFLPA (National Football League Players Association),which negotiates the general minimum contract for all players, the Collective BargainingAgreement (CBA). The current CBA was established in 2006 and is due to expire in March 2011.

As an organization, the NFL is currently facing three major issues. The first issue concerns playerconcussions and the impact of those injuries on player health and safety. The second issueexamines the recent ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that the NFL does not have a blanketantitrust exemption and the associated ramifications for future business and policy decisions. Thethird issue addresses the expiration of the CBA and the ensuing labor negotiations between theowners and players. How does the NFL respond to these issues? Who are the major stakeholders?Should Congress or any other government entity become involved with these issues? Whatstrategies can the NFL take to address these issues?

Issue: Concussions

BackgroundThe National Football League has been aware of concussions in players for the past twenty-fiveyears. However, since June 2007, injury caused by concussions has become a major concern in theathletic community. Published medical studies have linked head injuries to higher rates ofdementia and cognitive disabilities. The long-term ramifications of repeated concussions caninclude Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE). In recent years, there have been four deaths ofplayers linked to concussions (Andre Waters, Mike Webster, Terry Long, and Justin Strzelczyk).

Contrary to what most people believe, a concussion is not a bruise to the brain caused by hitting ahard surface. In fact, no physical swelling of the swelling or bleeding is usually seen onradiological scans. The injury generally occurs when the head either accelerates rapidly and then isstopped or is spun rapidly. These violent tremors can cause the brain cells to become depolarizedand fire all their neurotransmitters at once in an unhealthy cascade, flooding the brain with


4/16

2

chemicals and deadening certain receptors linked to learning and memory. The results ofteninclude confusion, blurred vision, memory loss, nausea, and sometimes unconsciousness. Peoplewho have had multiple concussions report more problems with memory, concentration, speechimpediments, headaches, and other neurological problems than those who have not. Neurologistssay that once a person suffers a concussion, that individual can be four times more likely to sustaina second one. Moreover, after several concussions, even smaller mechanisms of injury can require

more time to recover. In September 2009, a study commissioned by the NFL reported thatAlzheimers disease or similar memory-related conditions appear to have been diagnosed in theleagues retired players at vastly higher rate than the rest of the national population - including asusceptibility to Alzheimers that was 19 times higher than normal rate for men ages 30 through 49for a professional football player. After the study results were reported, Representative JohnConyers Jr., a Michigan Democrat and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, held a hearingon the impact of head injuries sustained by NFL players.

The NFL has responded to the issue by setting guidelines in place, including how long after aconcussion a player must sit out of a game. However, without an MRI, it is difficult toconclusively diagnose the existence of a concussion or to assess the severity of a concussion.Given that most return to play decisions are made by medical professionals on the field (without

the benefit of imaging equipment), this policy has not been terribly effective. While the NFLsshort-term response to the issue of concussions lacks efficacy, they have initiated talks regarding amore plausible long-term option that stands to offer greater benefit and protection to the players.Discussions at the Congressional, state and league level have recently centered on implementing alifetime concussion count. Similar to the pitch countused in baseball to avoid early debilitatinginjury to pitchers due to overusethe lifetime concussion count would use baseline testing, as wellas documented frequency and severity of incidents to determine the need for a player to removehimself from the possibility of further injury. While these discussions demonstrate a certain levelof concern by the NFL for the long-term health of athletes, this program also has limitations.Concussions at the youth level may not be consistently diagnosed and many youth and high schoolteams in low-income areas lack a team physician to diagnose concussions. Further, theimplementation of such a program now would be of little benefit toNFL players for years to come.

StakeholdersConcussions in professional football players affect a variety of stakeholders, including thefollowing: NFL Commissioner, NFL Head, Neck, and Spine Committee, players, sportscommentators, and House Committees. Reference Exhibit 1 for a more in-depth analysis of eachstakeholder, their interests/power and potential coalitions.

Opponents

Although there are many stakeholders in the concussion issue, there are relatively few opponents.The chief identifiable opponent at this juncture is the contingent of former players, who resent thelack of awareness and damage caused by the leagues indifference to repeated head injuries. Theseretired players certainly dont oppose the implementation of better testing and diagnosis, but theymay be perceived as opponents by the NFL because any acknowledgement of the long-term effectsof concussive injuries might lend credence to a lawsuit by retired players for compensation forinjuries suffered. Another possible opponent might be some of the players, who feel thatasprofessionals they accept the inherent risks of their sport and do not welcome leagueinfringement on their ability to generate income.


5/16

3

Life CycleThe NFL has only just recently started objective study of the concussion issue. The NFL iscurrently evaluating their policy options. Since the scientific evidence about what constitutes aconcussion and what short- and long-term effects there are to concussions is still being sifted, the

issue can be considered far from being resolved.

AlternativesThe NFL has several alternatives for how to address the issue of concussions.

One alternative would be to simply ignore the issue, which would be consistent with theapproach taken by the league for the majority of its existence. Even the currentcommissioner Roger Goodell had been denying the correlation between traumaticbrain injury (concussions) and long-term cognitive defects until 2009. Recent admissionsby the league that the preponderance of evidence does seem to denote a linkage would

make it difficult to return to the position of ignorance. Recent involvement by Congressinvestigating the concussion issues as well as the passage of state statutes protectingyounger players from traumatic brain injury also would further complicate a disinterestedstance by the NFL.

Another alternative would be to enforce the current return-to-play guidelines so that theyare being consistently applied across all teams. Current guidance (established in 2009)mandates that that NFL players who sustain a concussion or head injury should not

return to play or practice on the same day if they have any symptoms of aconcussion. In order to return to play, the player must have a normal neurological exam,normal neuropsychological testing, and be cleared by the team medical staff, as well as theteam's independent neurological consultant.1

A third alternative would be for the NFL to hire independent (league paid) neurologists forthe athletic medical teams so that concussions would not only be properly diagnosed, butphysicians would not be unduly influenced to allow the player to return to play. Under theexisting system, team doctors compensated by the franchise, so one could argue thatmitigating factors other than just player health might cloud the decision of player fitness.

Another option would be for the NFL can increase penalties for illegal hits. This optioncan certainly be used in conjunction with one of the aforementioned alternatives. Already,the NFL has issued stiffer monetary fines for illegal hits in the 2010 season, not bychanging the rules of the game but simply by enforcing the punitive measures cited in theNFL Handbook for tackle violations.

RecommendationsBased on the available options to address the issue of player concussions, we would recommendthat the NFL should implement all of the following measures:

1 http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2533203/will_the_nfls_new_returntoplay_guidelines.html?cat=14


6/16

4

Punishment of offenders: The NFL needs to crack down on tackles involving helmetcontact with stiffer monetary and suspension penalties. These punishments should bereserved for flagrant, violent hits that endanger the safety of an opponent intentionally.

Increase awareness: The NFL also needs to educate players on how to tackle in a safemanner. Investment in youth initiatives to ensure safe tackling practices would better

ensure that professionals in the future establish proper mechanics to protect player health.

Consistency: The NFL needs to ensure consistent application of the concussion guidelinesevaluation, diagnosis, treatment, clearanceacross the 32 teams. Whether they elect tofund independent neurologists for each team or permit the discretion of the team doctors,franchises must be held to a consistent standard of expectation with disciplinary measuresfor team personnelplayers, coaches, etc.who ignore the rules.

ImplementationIn order to implement the recommendations above, the NFL will have to consider several factors,

including: the cost and logistics of adding neurologists to franchises; the cost and benefit ofresearch investments to better qualify the long-term health effects of repeated concussive injury;the practical limitations of implementing of concussion-prevention practices; and the best means bywhich to develop, implement and enforce effective tackle guidelines. Every recommendationshould be evaluated from a cost-benefit perspective, as all have limitations, before the NFL rendersa decision and implements revised policy.

ConsequencesIn implementing the recommended course of action, the NFL may potentially encounter certainunintended consequences:

External Revenue Loss: Several parties may be affected by sidelined players forconcussive injuries, namelysponsors, retailers, and local economies. The potential lossin revenue experienced from benching high performance/ star players due to leaguereturn to play policies, may result in lawsuits by impacted parties against the NFL.

Internal Revenue Loss: Similar to the situation described, restrictive league policies oneligibility may unfairly impact franchise owners and players ability to earn revenue. TheNFL may face lawsuits from players willing to accept the long-term health risks associatedwith repeated head injuries. The franchise owners have a vested business interest inreturning star players to the field; thus, they may be inclined to file suit against the leagueif their return on investment is unfairly impacted by restrictive league policies.


7/16

5

Issue: Antitrust

BackgroundIn 1961, Congress granted the NFL an exemption from antitrust laws for the negotiation ofbroadcast television contracts. The current network broadcast contract between team owners andthe television networks guarantees income to the owners, even during the event of a lockout, whilethe players receive nothing (Bedard, 2010). During the recent Supreme Court case, AmericanNeedle vs. The NFL, the NFLs single entity argument for exemption from the ShermanAntitrust Act was questioned by players and coaches. Both entities were concerned that the NFLwas using this rationale as a Trojan horse, encouraging antitrust expansion so that interpretationof the protection could extend to the area of labor relations.

American Needle, Inc. vs. National Football LeagueIn May 2010, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision that the NFL would not begranted broad antitrust protection, thereby rejecting the leagues contention that it should beconsidered a single entity rather than a coalition of 32 separate franchises for all purposes. Thisruling was based on a case brought by American Needle, Inc., an apparel company that had beenpreviously produced hats and other merchandise with NFL team logos for many years. When theNFL entered into an exclusive 10-year agreement with Reebok, American Needle brought suitagainst the NFL for antitrust violations. In the decision, the justices set forth a standard, the ruleof reason, by which all future antitrust claims will be judged; according to the opinion of theCourt, each of the teams is a substantial, independently-owned and independently-managedbusiness. (Liptak, 2010). So, while the Supreme Court decided that the NFL does not have a

blanket antitrust immunity, the decision does establish precedent in stating that the lower courts canstill grant antitrust exemptions on a case-by-case basis. Based on the justices reasoning, the lowercourts will likely grant such exemptions in situations when collective decisions are made by theteams that meet the rule of reason test and cannot be considered unreasonable restraints on trade.

StakeholdersAntitrust implications for the NFL affect a variety of stakeholders, including the following: theNFL, franchise owners, NFLPA, team coaches and the local supporting economies. ReferenceExhibit 1 for a more in-depth analysis of each stakeholder, their interests/power and potentialcoalitions.

OpponentsThepotential opponents to the NFLs strategy on antitrust include the current players, the playersunion, and Congress.


8/16

6

The current players are a potential opponent to the NFLs strategy on antitrust. Theiraction would be to lobby against the existing NFL antitrust exemption to strengthen theirnegotiating position and/or prevent a lockout. They could potentially give up on this issue,as they are not strongly vested in the NFLs current exemption, which maximizes leaguerevenue and benefits players. The players could also form internal alliances (NFLPA) orexternal ones (Congress), if they could be convinced to join the players side.

Congress is another potential opponent to the NFLs strategy on antitrust. They would beunlikely to act unless the economic impact of lockout or other negative publicity becametoo strong. As they are unlikely to act, giving up would not be an issue. If they were toact, their obvious alliance would be with owners, who are the primary beneficiaries of theantitrust exemption. They would only form an alliance with players if the economicimpact of a lockout or other negative publicity against the owners became too strong.

Life CycleWith the issuance of the Supreme Courts decision, the contentious question of a blanket antitrust

exemption based on the single entity argument has been resolved. The NFL does not possessblanket antitrust immunity. However, the American Needle case will now return to the lowercourt, which will apply the rule of reason test and determine whether the NFLs agreement withone apparel supplier (Reebok) is an unreasonable restraint on trade as determined by the SupremeCourt. Going forward, the NFL will have to consider vendor agreements in the context of thisrule of reason test, to best ascertain the likelihood of the business arrangement surviving judicialscrutiny. Additionally, the actions of the Court in rejecting a blanket antitrust immunity for leagueactions reduces the chances that the league will attempt to extend that previous assumption to labornegotiations, unless compelling justification exists.

AlternativesThe NFL has several courses of action available in light of the recent Supreme Court decisionregarding antitrust immunity:

One alternative would be to accept the current ruling and await the outcome of futurecases. Since the American Needle case has been returned to the lower court, it will bedecided by the application of the new standard. The NFL currently enjoys some antitrustprotection and would not want to risk losing all protection by again asking for too muchfrom the courts.

Another course of action would be to pursue a blanket antitrust exemption via thelegislative route by petitioning Congress, who granted the initial exemption for

television contractsto extend the provisions. Unfortunately, this legislative avenue hasnot always been successful in the past. Since the NFL and team owners already contributeheavily toward the campaigns of many Congressional members, some speculate that thismight be the best path to success.


9/16

7

RecommendationsGiven the possible actions available to the NFL with respect to the antitrust issue, we wouldrecommend the following strategy. The NFL should wait until the lower court makes a decision onthe American Needle case. If the decision rendered finds in favor of American Needles

contention of unfair trade practices, then the league should be prepared to appeal. If the decisionrendered finds in favor of the NFLs argument that antitrust immunity extends to vendor apparelagreements, then the league should be prepared to respond to an appeal from American Needle. Itwas risky for the NFL to seek complete antitrust exemption, as both Congress and the SupremeCourt have rejected a blanket exemption. The NFL should marshal its resources for future courtcases on this issue and to continue to lobby Congress for additional antitrust protection.

ImplementationIn order to implement the recommended strategy from above, the NFL should wait for theAmerican Needle decision by the lower courts. There is limited human impact to this strategy,

other than to the plaintiffs in the case. There is relatively limited short-term financial impact, otherthan the costs of litigation. Technology is not at issue here. The most relevant impact and potentialconsequence is that at some point the courts or Congress could completely reject the notion ofantitrust protection for any actions taken by the NFL.


The lower court could find against the NFL in the American Needle case, in which case

the NFL would need to appeal the case. Since this issue is unlikely to return to theSupreme Court, it is unlikely that the NFL would suffer any significant impact from thislitigation.

A significant potential impact of the NFLs strategy would be if Congress moved torevoke the existing antitrust exemption. Such an action would most likely only occurcombined with other events, such as a lockout. The best way to manage such an eventwould be to continue lobbying of Congress (under the NFL PAC) to maintain a legislativeadvantage.


10/16

8

Issue: Labor Negotiations

BackgroundIn March 2011, the current 5-year Collective Bargaining Agreement between the NFL franchiseowners and the NFL Players Association (NFLPA) will expire. Current negotiations have reachedan impasse, with disputes over compensation, cost and revenue allocation, and season length. Ifowners and players cannot reach a compromise, one of the nations favorite sports could face theabsence of a 2011 season. Currently, the players have expressed a willingness to renew theprovisions of the 2006 CBA, but the franchise owners are demanding considerable changes. Sincethe players are willing to play, but the owners are not willing to establish employment, the situationcould result in a lockout of the players by the franchises. This possibility has far reachingimplications for many stakeholdersthe league, players, owners, broadcast networks, and the localbusinesses, whose jobs and revenue stream rely on professional football. Direct support personnel

for the 32 NFL franchises number approximately 125,000, with the figures of additional supportindustry positionsretail, hotel, restaurant, etc.numbering in the millions. Local economies inthe areas around a NFL franchise will suffer significant financial impact with the decreased tourismrevenue and potential unemployment. (LeMieux, 2010) The economic ramifications of a lockouthave already incited the interjection of Congressional involvement, more than 9 months prior to theexpiration of the CBA. In fact, the players started lobbying for legislative intervention more than15 months prior to contract expiration, in February of 2010.

Players currently receive close to 60% of NFL revenues, an allocation determined in the 2006CBA and agreed to by both parties. The owners argue that this share is excessive and is causingthe leagues to go into debt from the cost ofbuilding new stadiums, financing the NFL network, andother capital activities; thereby, rendering many franchises unprofitable (NFL, 2010). Most

franchises refuse to engage in any sort of financial disclosure during the labor negotiations tofurther substantiate this assertion. The league would also like to reduce the percentage of revenuefunding players costs from 18% to 9% (La Canfora, 2010). In addition, the owners suggestextending the season length by adding two more regular season games (from 16 to 18) andreducing the preseason scrimmages (from 4 to 2), with no additional compensation to the players.The NFLPA has rejected this suggestionnot based on an aversion to the longer season, rather adisinclination to incur greater risk to safety without adequate compensation. Players can vote todecertify the union (as was done in 1989), thereby allowing them to file suit against the owners inthe event of a lockout (NFL, 2010). Another impasse is the request by players to review thefinancial operations of the NFL, which the NFL has refused to share. As the only publicly ownedteam, the Green Bay Packers makes its financial information public. With the fiscal year ending onMarch 31, 2010, the team reported a net income of about $5.2 million, up from $4 million. Players

see this as further proof that teams are not as unprofitable as they claim (NFL, 2010).

The NFL PAC (NFL Political Action Committee) has contributed almost $250,000 in campaigncontributions in 2009. While players, as a whole, have contributed less, both sides are seekingsupport from Congress to intervene in the event of a lockout (Eichelberger, 2010). Furtherevidence of this reliance on Capitol Hill to help resolve the dispute is the unions hiring ofDeMaurice Smith, a lawyer at Patton Boggs, LLP to lobby on behalf of the organization(Eichelberger, 2010). In addition, Congress is inherently involved in this issue because of itspower to revise antitrust issues, including the antitrust exemption the league currently enjoys.


11/16

9

StakeholdersNFL Labor negotiations affect a variety of stakeholders, including the following: franchise owners,players, support personnel, local economies, Congress, and the media. Reference Exhibit 1 for amore in-depth analysis of each stakeholder, their interests/power and potential coalitions.

OpponentsAlthough there are many stakeholders in the lockout issue, there are relatively few opponents. Noentity with a vested stake in the outcome of the NFL labor negotiation issue benefits more from alockout scenario than if the 2011 season were to be played. A truly jaded individual might profferthat other professional sports with overlapping seasons baseball, hockey, basketball mightbenefit from a lockout with increased viewership and fan base.

LifeCycleThe current labor dispute will continue until the parties can reach a resolution; depending on thetiming of that resolution, the NFL must seriously consider the possibility of a player lockout if acompromise cannot be established before April 2011. Given the complexity of the contentiousissues and the absence of common ground, it will likely take some compromise by both ownersand players in order to reach a consensus. One positive mitigating factor acknowledges that noentity would benefit more by the lockout scenario than playing the 2011 season, so all parties haveincentive to resolve the impasse. Potential economic ramifications for so many communities urgestimely resolution and a variety of forces will attempt to generate compromise.

AlternativesThe NFL has several courses of action available with respect to the current labor negotiationsbetween the players and owners:

Avoid interference: The NFL can refrain from becoming embroiled in the current conflictand permit the two entities to resolve their dispute. Eschewing involvement will probablynot hasten resolution and will probably render the possibility of a lockout more probable.

Independent negotiator: The NFL can hire an independent negotiator to mediate thedisagreement between the players and the owners. With this alternative, the league hasadditional options does the NFL, in sponsoring the negotiator, attempt to advance itsown agenda when brokering labor negotiations? Does the NFL allow the independent

negotiator the latitude to establish the best compromise for both parties, independent ofleague concerns? Does the NFL hire a mediator (dependent on voluntary consent of bothparties with a non-binding agreement) or an arbitrator (compel both parties to presentarguments so that the intermediary can render a binding decision)? Prior to pursuing thisalternative, the NFL would have to agree on the capacity and authority of the negotiator,and then be reasonably assured that the two entities would accept the leagues suggestion.


12/16

10

Mediation: The NFL can serve as the primary mediator between the owners and theplayers. This alternative presents potential issues with bias (or perceived bias); dependingon how closely the leagues interests are aligned with one side or the other.

Contingency Plan: The NFL can accept the overwhelming likelihood of a player lockoutand season-ending impasse, by attempting to establish a replacement league now. The

logistics and costs associated with this alternative render the option highly unlikely forserious consideration.

Government Intervention: The NFL can pursue government intervention to assist withdispute resolution, an option that can take many forms. Should the NFL petition Congressto extend blanket antitrust immunity to the league for purposes of labor negotiation?Should the NFL lobby Congressional members to interject themselves into the dispute andplace pressure on the entities to reconcile their differences? Should the NFL request afederal mediator to broker compromise? Significant cost-benefit analysis is required foreach of these options under the governmental intervention alternative before selecting acourse of action.

RecommendationsBased on the available options to address the issue of labor negotiations, we would recommendthat the NFL should implement the following measures:

Financial: The NFL should encourage banks financing league franchises to extend graceperiods for loan defaults through the 2011 season, to allow teams to remain solvent. TheNFL should lobby Congress for additional tax subsidies for stadiums constructed withtaxpayer dollars, to reallocate the cost burden away from the owners. The NFL shouldestablish reserve accountsperhaps financed with team performance bondsto ensurecompensation and healthcare coverage to affected parties (players, league personnel) in the

event of an owner-caused lockout.

Legal: The NFL should discourage players from decertifying the NFLPA, whichencourages a player lawsuit in the event of a lockout a situation not conducive toreconciling differences. The NFL should refrain from lobbying Congress to extend theantitrust immunity to cover labor negotiations, since its a battle that they stand littlechance of winning. Additionally, the league should operate in accordance with existinglabor law provisions, not some perceived assumption about blanket antitrust immunity.

Mediation: The NFL should pursue governmental intervention to the extent of requestinga negotiator from the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, an independent agencycreated to promote labor-management peace in the private and public sectors and offers

mediation, arbitration and other dispute resolution services. The negotiated agreementsare non-binding and rely on voluntary consent by both entities.

Public Relations: The NFL should take steps to avoid a public backlash against the leagueitself, in the event that the possibility of a lockout becomes reality. Shoring upCongressional support to encourage resolution might help. Devising measures to assistthe impacted third parties support personnel, local businesses would also be well-received.


13/16

11

ImplementationImplementing a course of action will require the NFLs consideration of a multitude of factors, asmentioned above. Devising strategic league priorities will be critical at this juncture to dictate theNFLs level of involvement over the next 6 months to insulate itself against a tide of resentment by

affected parties, should a lockout occur. Detrimental financial impact to every stakeholder isreasonably certain with the advent of a lockout, so all parties share the common interest of reachingconsensus and playing the 2011 season. The NFL should use this mentalitya shared interest inplaying footballto guide their recommendations and associated courses of action.


Public Backlash: If the NFLs steps to resolve the current labor dispute do not produce

consensus, then the organization might face wrath from the devout fan base and loss offuture revenue from disgruntled fans. Given the loyal adherents of the sport, any negativepublicity and loss of support should be short-lived with the resolution of the dispute.

Restrictive Labor Law: In light of the estimated detrimental economic impact of a lockoutsituation, its entirely plausible that Congress might elect to become more involved. TheNFLs $8.5B industry creates a tremendous number of jobs and supporting businesses. IfCongress perceives the interests of their constituents to necessitate involvement, then theNFL might face the possibility of more restrictive labor policies to encourage continuationof the industry.

Conclusion

Currently, the NFL is facing three major issues. Although intertwined, the issues have diversebackgrounds and the NFL should consider different approaches to each. Player health and safety isbecoming a heated topic, particularly as the public raises awareness of player health and safety inyouth-level athletics. The NFL should respond to this issue by making player health and safety a

number one priority. The antitrust issue has been temporarily resolved with the recent SupremeCourt ruling in the American Needle case, but future antitrust actions will be determined by lowercourts on a case-by-case basis. The NFL would be wise to accept the current antitrust protection itenjoys and not to overreach for more than is reasonable. The labor dispute between the owners andplayers requires resolutionpreferably before the lockout scenario becomes a reality. The NFLwill need to monitor labor negotiations closely and assist both sides in reaching a mutually-beneficial compromise.


14/16

12

References

Bedard, P. (2010). NFL Football Players Lobby Congress Ahead of Lockout. U.S. News & World Report. RetrievedOctober 20, 2010,http://politics.usnews.com

Bichelberger, C. & Salant,J.D. (2010, February 4). Both Sides in NFL Labor Showdown Lining Up Allies in Congress.Bloomberg. Retrieved October 20, 2010, fromhttp://www.bloomberg.com

La Canfora, J. (2010, January 20). Owners, playersfar apart in CBA talks, but time is their ally. NFL. Retrieved October 20,2010, fromhttp://www.nfl.com

LeMieux, G. (2010, August 6). Personal correspondence between George S. LeMieux (U.S. Senator) and Roger Goodell(NFL Commissioner).

NFL. (2010). Players presented first detailed proposal for 18-game season. Retrieved October 20, 2010,http://www.nfl.com

NFL. (2010, October 5). Union head Smith: NFL owners gearing up forlockout in 2011. Retrieved October 20, 2010, fromhttp://www.nfl.com


15/16

13

Exhibit 1NFL Stakeholder Analysis


16/16

14

Exhibit 2NFL Concussion Poster

National Football League Corporate Political Strategy - Robert Paul Ellentuck

Documents

Transcript of National Football League Corporate Political Strategy - Robert Paul Ellentuck