DeMaurice Smith Is the Top Reason To Side Against the NFL Players

DeMaurice Smith has done it again.

He recently delivered a commencement address to graduating University of Maryland students who may or may not care anything about the NFL or the current lockout. He turned his address into a political speech concerning the recent legal issues between NFL players and NFL owners.

In front of the students' parents, grandparents, young children, family and friends he encouraged the students to tell their detractors "You suck." It seemed to be a clear dig at Smith's personal and business opponents.

If Smith wanted to tell the Maryland students about his positive experiences working with NFL players, that would have been great. Even talking about the players' passion as much as he did was fine. He crossed the line when he took a political dig at his opponents while using a term that many still consider to be vulgar.

Commencement addresses should celebrate the hard work and successes of graduating students while encouraging them to succeed in their future lives and careers. They should not be used as a podium for political messages. This is where the NFL players are making a major mistake.

The thing is that the players have some great arguments to make against the owners. Almost everyone is in favor of safety and so opposing an extension of the regular season or advocating health benefits for retired players are great positions to take. Certainly one can see why players would want to be treated like equals and be able to review the financial records of NFL franchises.

Even the nasty business of trying to obtain more money wouldn't be a sin under normal circumstances. The blunder that the players make which jeopardizes their case in the court of public opinion is that they are overreaching. 

The players and their advocates, especially DeMaurice Smith, fancy themselves crusaders in a great war of good versus evil. The rhetoric they use implies that the owners are slave-driving masters who lord over their minions. Smith might give an uninformed listener the idea that players are fighting for basic human rights.

Here's a large portion of what the players are actually fighting for: money. Insisting on a 50-50 split of revenue between players and owners has helped to hold up the proceedings and is threatening the existence of the 2011 season.

It's a nasty negotiation like many that are made throughout the country year in and year out. They are unpleasant but an inherent part of business. The owners are properly treating it as a business negotiation. If the players did the same many people would side with them. Athletes are naturally more popular and charismatic than big business.

However, Smith and others like him have inspired the players to adopt a self-righteous tone. They are telling everyone who will listen that NFL players are oppressed workers who need to feed their families and pay the medical bills.

Here's the thing: The minimum salary for rookies, players who had never played a down of professional football, in 2009 was $310,000. The median annual HOUSEHOLD income in the United States is around $50,000.

That means that a most-likely dual-income household earning $50,000 a year earns more money than half of all other households. In contrast, a 21-year-old kid straight out of college who has never played a down in the NFL will earn a base salary at least six times that much. I'm not including bonuses, commercials or endorsements. Keep in mind that the minimum salary increases dramatically as your tenure in the league increases.

The takeaway is that NFL players are not martyrs. If they are in financial trouble, it often comes as a result of poor money management, not insufficient pay.

Millions of Americans have fought and, sometimes, died for the right to earn just enough money to feed their kids. It seems to be a slap in the face to those workers and labor unions when professional athletes use that terminology to get the NFL to ensure them a good lifestyle no matter how bad they are at handling their money.

There is no reason why an NFL player can't support a family and make a fair living on even a portion of their current income. So to invoke human rights and workers' rights is a mistake.

The players have enough legitimate issues with the NFL that they could easily win the battle for popular support if they would just acknowledge that their battle for more revenue was simply a business dealing. People are turned off when the players take an arrogant and patronizing tone.

A demagogue like DeMaurice Smith may pump up the athletes and a few of the more rowdy University of Maryland students. However, off on the sidelines, millions of Americans who have had to deal with real discrimination, real labor strife and real economic hardships look on and see only a bunch of spoiled jocks.

Whether this perception is fair or not, and however legitimate the NFL players' other stances may be, their overbearing moral rhetoric when it comes to revenue sharing, salaries and benefits are only hurting them in the public eye.