July 31, 1974

Professional Football High Priced Slavery

With the picket-line cry of "No freedom, no football," 1,300 famous athletes are on strike against the National Football League for a host of high priced demands.

Higher salaries and pensions are under negotiation; but the key issue is whether slavery is legal in these United States.

If you thought that the Civil War abolished slavery, then you have a narrow view of the ancient practice of holding men in bondage.

The system of professional sports is based on all the legal trappings of slavery even though Congress, athletes and fans have overlooked this in the past.  "The good of the game" required arbitrary balancing of skill and strength amongst several teams.  All involved approved.

The evils customarily associated with slavery are hidden under tons of money and adulation.  The privilege of being enslaved is eagerly sought by high school and college athletes.

Yet, the legalities remain.  Players are held by bond and thus are property.  As with all other property, bonded athletes are sold and exchanged without their consent.

Indeed, their owners and the U.S. government recognize the status by depreciating athletes in exactly the same manner as industries depreciate machinery, This depreciation factor, alone, constitutes one of the main forces to continue the practice.

High salaries are subsidized by the tax payers and thus cost owners substantially less than the highly publicized salaries of near astronomical size.

John Doe, who gets fearfully upset over paying part of the tab on wheat for Russia or free loans to African mini-states, remains blissfully unaware that he also foots a sizable chunk of those million-dollar pro-sport salaries.

It is ironic that the generous attitude of Congress - which specifically exempted professional sports from anti-slavery laws - has brought the entire system to near collapse.

When salaries were higher than average, but not fantastic, the joy of playing still was a strong motivating factor for athletes

As salaries soared under free-and-easy government encouragement, greed gradually replaced the last few vestiges of personal fun.

"We want to choose our employer, and our place of employment," says Bill Curry of the Houston Oilers, president of the NFL Players Association (read that "union").  "We think we should have that right just as everyone else has."

Translated, this means that the best players-want the right to sell their services to the highest bidder.  And with tax write offs backing up the owners, the bidding could be expected to skyrocket.

NFL executives have conceded that money is no object to them.  Art Modell, owner of the Cleveland Browns, says, "We can compromise on dollars and other things, but not on something as sacred as the 55-year-old structure of the game.  I'm talking about the system in which we conduct our business."

As in all other complex issues, both sides of the NFL controversy are partly right and partly wrong.

It seems un-American to hold a man in bondage, even in willing and luxurious servitude.

Yet, experience with the limited relaxation of contract rules in recent years indicates that the freedom demanded by players would quickly concentrate talent in a couple of wealthy clubs.  The all-important championship would remain forever the achievement of a single team.

Witness the several-year baseball monopoly of the New York Yankees which nearly killed the game.  Only the application of anti-trust rules broke up the strangle hold on talent.

Baseball Star Curt Flood carried the issue of player freedom all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court a few years ago, but he lost the case.  The court agreed that the limited amount of athlete talent available justified continuance of the owner's exemption from slavery laws.

This time, the pro athletes have taken their case to the fans.  There has been much brave talk about "forcing" the owners to 63 concessions.

As a former sports writer, I've followed professional athletics for many years and have concluded that the various rules to "balance" talent between clubs is essential.

However, it is hard to work up much sympathy for over-rated athletes who draw fabulous salaries and sweet-heart pensions for a few years of seasonal effort.

Sure, the legs give out too soon and sports careers are of short duration.  But it is the same for the rest of us.  I'm on my third career change.  Very few of us can make outstanding contributions to one job all our lives.

Neither can I work up much sympathy for NFL owners who make fat profits from the special privilege of law.  My business, and that of all other productive enterprises, is heavily restricted by government taxes and red tape.

Professional sport has become too much big business.  The players have become too self interested.  The fans sense all this and have become too cynical.

It is time to remove the tax depreciation write off for owners, so their resolve will stiffen against excessive money demands, so the players will be content with realistic salaries, so they will re-discover the fun in playing, so the fans will enjoy sports more.

Author: Lindsey Williams