Appealing Bountygate Suspensions Puts NFL Players Association on Thin Ice

I am not a union man—I never have been. There is something about terms like "collective bargaining" that have always scared me and reeked of communism. That being said, I can understand why they were necessary at one point in history. Workers were abused, forced to work without protection from tyrannical managers, and had little-to-no vacation time or days off. They were needed at one point.

The same goes for professional sports and players unions or associations. At one time in history, these players worked without protection, at the will and whim of owners, who paid them a pittance and offered nothing in the way of medical protection or long term health insurance.

In the formative days of professional sports, players were forced to hold jobs during the offseasons just to make ends meet. So I do understand why they were started and that at one point in time they were necessary.

That time has changed, though. In today´s day and age, the need for multimillion dollar athletes to have unions represent their interests has passed. Today, the unions are doing what most unions end up doing: forgoing the benefits of its members and looking out for its own needs and desires.

There is no case more in point then the NFL Players Association planning on fighting the suspensions of the four New Orleans Saints players—Jonathan Vilma, Will Smith, Scott Fujita and Anthony Hargrove—for their involvement in the Bountygate Scandal.

The suspensions handed down today are harsh. There is no denying that. And it seems that Commissioner Goodell is once again wielding his axe as he sees fit. I will not argue that point. The penalties seem harsh, but then the guilty parties were active participants in a bounty program designed to systematically hurt other players. Among the alleged victims were Peyton Manning and Brett Farve.

If the players or their agents want to appeal the suspensions, then have an independent arbitrator listen and pass judgment and either uphold or overrule the punishment.

The union is on thin ice because it is supposed to be representing and protecting the best interests of all the players. All the players, not just the ones in trouble because of this or any other on-field issue. The players will now see that the union is going to bat for people that could have crippled or maimed them. How is that looking out for the best interests of all the players?

What these players did was criminal: It went against competitive balance and crossed a line to willful attempts to injure others. The players union is wrong in this, with 50,000 documented pages of evidence. They need to protect the majority of players, especially those that were targeted by the bounty scandal, not work to fight the suspensions of those guilty.

How many players are going to be angered by this? More importantly, how many are going to look at the 10-15 thousand dollars they are paying annually in dues and wonder what it is for?

After losing money in the prolonged lockout and seeing the union do everything it can to protect these four players, maybe many of the players are going to figure that the cost and benefits are not worth it and demand massive changes to its structure and mission.

Maybe they will even realize that much like the single-wing offense, the union is something best left in the past.

You can follow me on twitter at @matt_f_rogers