ATHLETIC VOICE: Let play continue during disputes


I would ask the question, “Does the sports market make enough money?” But I think I know the answer.

If you follow the NFL, you know the referees were recently on strike for a better retirement plan.

After the replacement officials miscalled numerous plays throughout the first weeks, most notably the play to end the game between the Seattle Seahawks and Green Bay Packers, the striking referees succeeded in their holdout.

In the nature of lockouts and strikes, let’s take a minute to reflect on athletes and management when it comes to money.

The 2011 basketball season was on lockout because owners and players could not decide on a reasonable salary cap, luxury tax and revenue agreement.

What did this do to the 2011 NBA season? Players could not be traded or signed, and most importantly, the season was cut from 88 games to 66.

As a result of this holdout, players agreed to receive 49 percent of the basketball-related income after the 2012 season, among other agreements.

The NHL is currently in a similar situation, with the owners’ organization seeking to cut hockey-related revenue for players.

So is it necessary for athletes to stop an entire season just to get what they desire?

I think athletes should continue playing. Let the lawyers do their jobs and the players do theirs.

The financial power athletes have is enormous, which is the reason they usually succeed in lockouts.

But this is teaching an immoral value. The cliché that hard work pays off is no more.

If I worked at McDonald’s and decided I would not work until I received a raise, I would be fired.

The same accountability should be held to athletes who choose to not play until their “needs” are met.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *