After listening to a video of an interview of Drew Brees of the New Orleans Saints, I immediately realized that we should be strong and not narrow-minded when it comes to understanding the issues of the NFL lockout.
The Raider Nation is strong and vocal. Some of us certainly don't want the NFL or owners to disrespect the contributions the players make to the entire enterprise.
Brees indicated that there was a 50-50 agreement in sharing the profits, I assume, of the NFL with the players. It seems the owners want more.
It sounds like the owners are making an attempt to bully the players, the guys who get bumped and busted on the playing field.
Aren't there other options to resolve the matter? For example, if owners think they are losing money, then why not ask the owners to reorder how they spend the money they have? Cost-effective methods and efficiency are ways of making better use of those billions of dollars. Cutting back on the players does not seem to be a good option.
Although most of us love a particular team—for example, the Oakland Raiders in my case—we also love personalities on our teams. Certain collections of personalities on a team helped to inspire fans to attend games and to do all of those auxiliary activities that go with the game. Fans are paying for the game and they are paying for the images and personalities certain players bring to the game.
The paradox may be that many of us want the lockout to end, but we also want a fair deal for the former and current players.
It's difficult to measure who is worth more to the fans: the owners or the players? Most fans don't get too upset if an owner is changed, but they do get perturbed when their favorite player is hurt, cut or retired.
It's a bit confusing, but when you rake through the issues, you realize that the collective value of the players is at least as valuable and marketable as the collective value of the owners who are good managers, leaders and administrators.
Let's just say that some of us are thinking out loud.