This week the US Supreme Court upended a 100-year precedent that made it more difficult for politicians to be influenced or financed by corporations. This week Dave Zirin of The Nation wrote about the possibility of the NFL being granted "single entity" status by the same court (if the case gets there). According to Zirin "the NFL's collective bargaining agreement expires in March 2011. There will be no salary cap or salary floor in the league if a new deal isn't reached by March 5, 2010. If the Supreme Court rules that the NFL is a single entity, that changes the way the league negotiates--or doesn't negotiate--with the players. Teams could slash payroll, violate labor law, and the NFL Players Association would have no recourse."
Though players in the NFL presumably make much more money than anyone in our class at the moment each year, consider the notion of the athlete or athletic body as a commodity. If an athlete is a laborer how can we use Karl Marx's concepts of class, capitalist, and proleteriet to describe the relationship that exists within the NFL between players, owners, and the NFL? Depending on your location in the sport involvement model, where do you fit into this relationship as consumer of sport? How would your sport experience change if the NFL can be treated as a single entity? Relate this to Michael Moore or George Sage's explanation and critique of capitalism and the "commodified sports industry" (152).
Please post your response as a comment so that it is easier for everyone to see this original posting.
NFL SINGLE ENTITY
ReplyDeleteIt is very clear that if this were to happen the NFL would be what Sage refers to as the Capitalist class. This is true because "they would hold extensive control of the economic system" of the NFL. (Sage,37) The NFL would become a capitalist firm because they would "exist to pursue their own profit maximization, not the collective aspirations of people."(Sage,152) The players as laborers would become under Marx classification as the proletariat class. The players as well as the owners would have no control over the means of production which Marx classified as proletariat class. According to Zirin the NFL is a “single entity” made up of 32 individual teams with individual profits and losses.
If the Supreme Court rules that the NFL is a “single entity” the teams could slash payroll, violate labor law, and the NFL Players Association would have no recourse. They could also raise prices on everything from tickets to fan merchandise. This would drastically change the way a lot of people’s relationship as a consumer of the sport. Every “die-hard” fan that buys all the merchandise and goes to all the games would be directly affected.
I do not think the Supreme Court should grant that kind of power to the NFL. The sport would turn into a business with one and only one purpose which is to make money. Although that is a huge objective with the way the NFL is run now, it isn’t the objective in my opinion. My relationship as a consumer personally wouldn’t change much because I am both a secondary and tertiary consumer since. If they were to make the games pay per view on television then I would be affected but since I do not buy merchandise or go to live games it wouldn’t directly affect me.
Concerning Karl Marx’s concepts, the players and coaches would fall under the proleteriet category since their bodies are a working commodity for the NFL. The owners also qualify as proleteriets since they themselves must also answer to the league executives; who are termed the capitalists since they have ultimate power and control over everyone involved with the NFL. In other words, the league itself is the capitalist class, the owners the middle class, and the players and coaches are the working class.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the sport involvement model, I am a secondary or tertiary consumer when it comes to the NFL. On occasion I will watch a game on TV (secondary consumer) but usually will only hear about it later in the paper (tertiary consumer). If the NFL were to become a single entity I do not think my sporting experience would change that much since I am not a committed fan of the NFL. However, fans and players alike would be affected since the league would be purely profit driven and would want to cut the salaries of players while raising the prices for its fans. Through this notion of capitalism, the NFL is only looking out for itself (Sage, 152). If anything I would be less inclined to follow games and scores from a secondary standpoint since the league would have the authority to raise prices (like watching games on TV), which would cause me to be even less of a fan than I already am.
Using Karl Marx's theory, the NFL is like a giant corporation. It owns everything and that means that the the players, coaches, and even the owners are governed by league officials. The league becomes the capitalist figure here while the other three are in the proletariat group. Marx said that factors such as prestige, lifestyle and so for are derived from class conditions and class conditions alone (Sage, 33 "1st Edition"). This matches up with how the league operates. There is the players union, owners meetings, and so on and so forth The only true person who is a medium between all three would be the commissioner who randomly meets with players and owners and the higher league officials.
ReplyDeleteAs a secondary and tertiary consumer of the NFL my view wouldn't change too much. In my mind as long as football is being played it's going to be interesting to watch. However the older in age I get I would assume that I may begin to go to games myself and if ticket prices are being raised this will deter many people from going to the event itself. For it to be treated as a single entity would just be too much power on something flawed. To me the league should be controlled by the players and coaches because the players are considered "the working class" of the NFL and know what players are looking for and what the fans are looking for as well.
According to George Sage, there are three levels of American class sructure: capitalist class, middle class, and working class. The NFL would be considered the capitalist class because they "hold extensive control over the economic system"(Sage, 37). The middle class is the owners of the teams and the players and coaches are the working class. The NFL is then considered capitalist because they "hold power over those who produce the goods and services" (Sage, 38). The players and coaches are deemed the proleteriet because of their lack of control. If the NFL became a single entity, the little power that the coaches and players have now would be taken away. All the money would be made at the capitalist class, eventhough the working class is, in realty, earning all the money.
ReplyDeleteSince I would consider myself a primary, secondary, and terterary consumer, I would be greatly affected by the change. The ticket and merchandise prices would go up. Also, the NFL could make the games only be seen on TV if they were paid for by the consumer. Finally, it would take the fun out of watching Brett Favre go from team to team until he found the right fit. If this happens, I know I won't spend the extra money to go to games or purchase the merchandise. The power should be given to the players since they are doing all the work.
Marx's class example is a perfect fir for describing the NFL, albeit with much more wealth involved. The owners of the 32 franchises make up the capitalist class, as they control the majority of the wealth and are responsible for all of the major decisions, from the budget to personnel decisions. The players, coaches and other employees of the team make up the working class, as even though they are highly paid, they are still subject to the owner's wishes and he can terminate their pay at any time, as contracts in the NFL are not guaranteed. If the NFL became a single entity, it would be destructive for the sport was we know it. Owners would move to reduce payroll in order to maximize profit and ticket and merchandise prices would go through the roof. The players would be locked out until they were willing to accept a lesser agreement than they had before the CBA expired. The lockout could prove to be dangerous to the league as a whole as interest could dwindle and television contracts could be lost. The Supreme Court ruling that the NFL is a single-entity could be extremely destructive to the league.
ReplyDeleteI consider myself a consumer of a primary, secondary, and tertiary consumer so a change would affect my life in a big way. If a lockout occurred, I would lose entertainment on Sundays and Monday nights as the games would cost money to watch, or there would be no games on cable at all. It would affect my interest in sports shows, as the NFL is my favorite league, and I would find a lockout to be detrimental to my enjoyment of the NFL. It would be very hard to enjoy games in person, as ticket, concession, and merchandise prices would be much higher than they are currently today. I believe that the power does not need to shift from the owners to the players, but I do think that it needs to shift more to a middle ground like the NFL enjoyed in the 1990's. Salaries do need to be reigned in, and there does need to be a rookie wage scale, but players should not have to be subject to the owner's wishes of dramatically reducing payroll in order to maximize their profit.
The NFL divides perfectly into Marx's capitalist and proletariat classes. When using Marx's concepts, the team owners would be considered the capitalists, while the players would fall into the proletariat class. The way the NFL and Marx's system relate is that the capitalists (owners), who have the majority of the wealth, hire the proletariat (players) by singing contracts and agreeing to salaries. After the players are signed, the goal of the owners is that the players will play well enough to bring a profit to the organization. This is why I believe that sports have become commodified. It seems that every year sports are stretching farther away from what their original intention was, whether its competition or entertainment. It seems that the players are in professional sports because they happened to be fortunate enough to be born with the necessary genes and now they can use their talents to make easy money. The owners, on the other hand, seem like they are in sports because they're so insanely rich it sounds like a fun hobby.
ReplyDeleteAs a "seasoned" tertiary consumer of the NFL, I would hate to see the NFL become a single entity. Players would get paid less, although in some cases may be a good idea, and the total cost of consuming a sport would go up for fans like myself. Games would have chances of being "blacked-out" from national television if the stadiums don't sell enough tickets, which can easily ruin any Sunday for a fan like myself.
The NFL flows relatively easily with Marx's Theory of class. The players are the working class (or proleteriet), based on the fact they are the workers who produce the entertainment that millions of people buy. Even though the players are working class they probably have more of a say in their pay than any other wage earner in another occupation. The owners are hard to set into any specific category, so I think they should be considered lower-capitalist class. As Sage points out, "subcategories" have been placed into each class including "upper, middle and lower" (Sage,37). The reason I consider ownersto be the lower-capitalist class is because they still have elite power, wealth and control (Sage 37), but the NFL has power over them. The owners may suspend or fire a player, but the NFL can just as easily enforce its power on owners. With the NFL being able to stamp its' name on all team merchandise, fire/suspend/fine coaches, owners or players (as evident in "Spygate" with the New England Patriots) and rake in wealth from the work of others, I consider the NFL to be the capitalist class.
ReplyDeleteThe sport model for consumers encircles a major part of the American population. It's hard to watch the local news without seeing a clip on sports at any level. However, there are those consumers, like myself, who don't accidentally run into sports. I would classify myself as a primary, secondary and even tertiary consumer. I'm a primary consumer because I attend sporting events, like NFL games. By being a primary consumer of NFL games I help pay the NFL and owners, who in turn pay the players as workers. As a secondary consumer I watch live games on television that are in different geographical locations, making it hard to get to in person. Finally I consider myself a tertiary consumer because I participate in sports blogs and listen to sports news.
If the NFL is granted permission to become a single entity, thus being able to eliminate the salary cap or salary floor, I believe my sport experience could change drastically. One way my experience may change is if the salary cap is removed. This could cause one of two things. First the players may want more and be given more, which would raise ticket prices and I couldn't afford to go. Second is that the owners wouldn't want to pay them as much as they wanted and the players would go on strike which would ultimately lead to no more NFL games to be watched. If there were to be no salary floor I could see owners trying to pay less, which may make some players sit out and eventually lead to a strike. Finally, and what I hope happens, is the possibility of removing the salary floor and players being okay with that. From there ticket prices would drop and I could go to more games.
If the NFL were granted single entity status, according to Marx's concepts of class, capitalists, and proletariat, I believe the NFL league would be considered the capitalist, while the owners, players, and coaches would be the proletarians. As stated by Zirin, "If the Supreme Court rules that the NFL is a single entity, that changes the way the league negotiates--or doesn't negotiate--with the players. Teams could slash payroll, violate labor law, and the NFL Players Association would have no recourse." Thus the NFL would become more of a profit maximizing enterprise where commercial interests would "undercut much of the genuine meaning behind athletics as a form of recreation or entertainment (Sage, 153)."
ReplyDeleteI will watch games on TV occasionally if my roommates are watching them, but I usually hear the results of the games from friends or through other forms of media such as newspapers; therefore, I am both a secondary and tertiary consumer of sport. As I often don't watch the games directly, I would not be greatly affected if the NFL were granted single entity status and all NFL-related prices increased. I would be affected if the games were no longer free to watch on TV, as then I would not be a secondary consumer of the NFL anymore. Although I would not be greatly affected by this change, I do not think it is right for the NFL to be granted single entity status. I believe this would be considered a monopoly of power and further undermine the values of the sport.
Using Karl Marx’s concepts, the NFL would definitely be considered capitalistic. The way that it is run is all based on money and the NFL could be in control of all of that. With this new change that could occur it would make everything different. The players would become the proletariat instead of people that work very hard to make the large amount of money they do. They could be totally taken advantage of which could lead to much bigger problems for them like Zirin says “Teams could slash payroll, violate labor law, and the NFL Players Association would have no recourse. Lockout, here we come.” This could not only cause problems for the players but for the fans too. I’m usually a secondary or tertiary consumer but there are times when I like to be a primary consumer and with the passing of this law the NFL could make it almost impossible for everyday fans like myself to attend the games that we love to watch. They’ll have power to change whatever they want. The passing of this act could also promote the idea of sports as a commodity. The players and skills will become less important and more replaceable. Overall I think this new idea will not be good for the sports industries fans and players.
ReplyDeleteAs the NFL sits. To me the owners are of the bourgeoisie. They do not do any labor but due to the fact that they own the team, they make a profit. A very large profit considering 20-30 owners from the NFL are in the top 400 richest people in the U.S. each year (sage 49). Coaches and players are of the proletariat because they do the labor, and do not make near as much money as the owners. If the NFL were a single entity i feel that the owners would turn in to the proletariat as well.
ReplyDeleteI do not watch the NFL. I had rarely watched it before i came to college but now i never really do. i would be a tertiary consumer and only because i do hear about the games later. If the NFL turned to single entity it would not change my involvement because i am not involved to begin with. The only difference may come if the games were no longer on television and i never saw clips or anything.
The NFL fits perfectly into Karl Marx's theory of class. The class system is divided into two groups, the capitalist and proletariat. The NFL and team owners are the capitalist class, and the players are the proletariat. The capitalist is divided into two subdivisions, upper class and lower class. The NFL is the upper class and has what Sage refers to as "extensive control over the economic system." The team owners are the lower capitalist class because they are what Sage describes as the "elite in terms of wealth, income, ownership, and power." The NFL still has power over the owners, which makes it the upper class. However, both groups have power over the proletariat, or the players. These skilled players do all the dirty work to bring in money for the capitalists. If the NFL becomes a single entity then the capitalists will gain more wealth and power and the players will suffer.
ReplyDeleteAlong with the players the fans will suffer also. The NFL will have the power to increase prices of tickets and merchandise. Since I am only a secondary and tertiary consumer, I will not be affected by the change. If the NFL does become a single entity I believe it will prevent me from ever becoming a primary consumer, along with many other fans. The single entity will prevent the average American from enjoying our country's most popular sport.
The Owners are the capitalist right now they do own the means of production. But I see the players as capitalist of their own body. The can move from team to team to maximize their means of production. But if the NFL was to be shielded from the anti-trust laws the players would still be capitalist of their own body per say but the owners would have so much more power they would be the capitalist over the proletariat players.
ReplyDeleteI would consider myself a primary produce just because I run track here at the university. I am actively involved, an athlete. I would also consider myself a secondary consumer because I watch sports on TV all the time. I wish I could be more of a primary consumer as well but money issues prevent me from doing that.
My sports experience would change a lot because money issues in the NFL. The owners can charge whatever they want and pay the players whatever they want. A lot of players would change teams to keep or increase their pay. And if they were not so good when they got there they could get good and demand more pay or leave for a better team that will pay more. I think team with good weather year around that had the money to dish out to good player would dominate the NFL.
Michael Moore or George Sage have the same principle as karl marx. The owner which they say are the capitalist are doing what they have to do to make money.
The single entity debate with the NFL would have minimal impact on my life, I was not even aware it was going on. I am a tertiary consumer at best, for no matter how much I always mean to watch a game I usually don’t even remember to check the score the next day. Because of this, any change(or lack thereof) made in the league would not affect me at all, except possibly to evoke a frown at the thought that sports, which are supposed to be good, clean competition are becoming more and more corrupt.
ReplyDeleteHere the NFL players are labeled as the proletariat, working class. They do the work (or play, depending on how you look at it) that brings in the money, yet they are dependent and fairly at the mercy of the higher-ups. This essentially is true for their coaches as well, for while they do manage the team, they are under the control of the owners and people who run the entire NFL organization, who make up the capitalist class.
Sage has his own slightly altered version of the capitalist idea in his book. He includes a ‘middle class’. In this situation, the coaches, team coordinators, and the like could fall under this heading, as they are the “bridge between the other two classes” (Sage, 38).
The NFL is a perfect example of Marx's theory. The owners represent the upper class, they make probably the most money of anyone simply by owning and controlling many of the affairs of the time. The players and coaches represent the working class because they are the ones actually producing the product for us to consume, but are stil under the control of the owners. Having the NFL turn into a single entity would be very damaging to the league. Players would get lower wages, fans may get a lower quality product, and lower revenue teams such as the Bills could end up suffering huge losses because they will not be the profit maximizing unit the league wants. As a secondary consumer of the NFL, this would not be good because if my team happened to end up as a lower revenue team, it will be more difficult for me to watch a game, buy merchandise, and enjoy the product all together.
ReplyDeleteI would not like to see the NFL become a single entity enterprise because this would be unfair to the players and the fans. The owners would become the capitalist class and have complete control of the NFL. The players would in turn, become the working class and lose all the privelages that they have and lose all say in their own career path (Sage,37). Although the players make a ton of money as it is, this change would be unfair to them, it is simply not right for a player to lose their rights.
ReplyDeleteThis change would be bad for the fans as well. As a secondary consumer, I would stop watching the NFL because it would lose its prestige and become only about business. That takes the fun out of the sport.
Because “power is unequally distributed among social classes” (Sage 37) there is reason to believe that if the NFL was granted single entity status, our society would struggle to adapt to this new view on professional sporting business because of the fluctuation in power. The single entity structure has been previously proven to function when Karl Marx “first articulated” (Sage 37) the idea. However, there is no evidence that this would benefit our society today. It is clear that in this specific situation the NFL would become the capitalists and obtain the “wealth, income, ownership, privilege and power” with “extensive control over the (NFL) economic system” (Sage 37) as a whole. Resulting, players and coaches would become the proletariats.
ReplyDeleteI would consider myself mostly a secondary consumer of this particular sport and if the NFL was granted single entity status it would affect not only me, but our society because players in the NFL are looked so highly upon as role models for aspiring athletes as well as providing continuous entertainment for individuals. With out classifying these athletes at such prestigious professionals I believe it will ultimately decrease the fan involvement with the sport as a whole.
THe NFL as a single entity well lets look at the facts stated this action would remove the salary cap and change the way players are paid (sage 37) states Teams could slash payroll, violate labor law, and the NFL Players Association would have no recourse." Regardless of how much these players make they still work very hard for their money and keep in mind the NFL isnt even the highest paid sports assocciation. It could almost be like the workers in the unregulated meat plant of the early 20th centry where the capitalist ie owners get tones of money and live very well and the managers ie coaches get paid pretty well but its nothin to gloat about and then you got the workers ie players who work in crappy conditions, work long hours, may get hurt and not know if they have a job to come back to so they work even hurt or sick and in the end they get paid just pennies on the dollar or way less than wat they make now. Then you have the consumer ie fans who dont really know what goes on behind closed doors but we want this product without understanding the true sacrifice the workers are giving for our entertainment. So I would have to say I like the way The NFL is now because as it is its a win win for everybody owners, coaches, and players are all payed well and the fans get to enjoy a great product that was reulated by the government.
ReplyDelete