Expect expansion issue to drag on

PRO FOOTBALL

January 10, 1993|By VITO STELLINO

When Pittsburgh Steelers owner Dan Rooney was asked last week what the "other side" thought of the new labor deal, he said, "I think Jim Quinn is happy. I think Gene Upshaw is happy. I can't speak for Al Davis."

Quinn, of course, is the players' attorney and Upshaw is the head of the NFL Players Association.

The fact that Rooney was including Davis, owner of the Los Angeles Raiders, on the "other side" was a not-so-subtle reference to how divided the owners are these days.

The hard-liners such as Davis finally ratified the new deal last week -- but only when federal judge David Doty virtually held a gun to their heads and threatened to give the players free agency himself.

The settlement still didn't answer the question of whether the owners can agree on anything else these days without a federal judge threatening them.

The amazing thing is that this settlement doesn't even settle all the lawsuits. The owners want to press on and try to overturn the $30 million judgment they lost in the 1989 price-fixing case when they signed practice squad players for $1,000-a-week. You would think the owners would want to put all the litigation behind them. No matter how many times they get bashed in court, they keep paying those legal fees.

It's just another indication that even though the owners grudgingly agreed to a new labor contract, they're still not eager to move ahead on any other issue.

That's why expansion should be a good litmus test for the owners. Unfortunately for the expansion contenders, Doty won't be involved in expansion. He can't push them. They owners are on their own.

They're back to trying to get 21 votes to approve anything, and that's always a struggle. When the expansion resolution was originally approved in Minneapolis in May 1991, it passed with only 22 votes.

If eight owners want to use the TV contract or any other any excuse to block expansion, they can do it.

The fact the league is so fragmented also makes it almost impossible to handicap the expansion race because there's no consensus among the owners on any issue right now.

On HBO's "Inside the NFL" last week, Gary Myers called St. Louis and Baltimore the front-runners. Last year, he called St. Louis and Charlotte the favorites.

The success of Camden Yards and Charlotte's problems in financing a new stadium make it logical to jump Baltimore ahead of Charlotte in

the speculation derby, but logic rarely fits into any NFL equation.

TC Baltimore's only real negative seems to be that it doesn't have the united front that St. Louis and Charlotte have. In those cities, the NFL can deal directly with the potential owners, James Orthwein and Jerry Richardson. In Baltimore, things are cluttered with three ownership groups. But the attractive stadium situation in Baltimore may overcome that.

If the NFL had any foresight, it wouldn't be thinking about only two cities now that it has a new labor agreement. It would be thinking about at least four.

But foresight isn't the owners' long suit or they wouldn't have twice rejected a deal with a salary cap. They're too busy just trying to figure out which side ther're on.

Nuts and bolts

Now that the two sides have agreed on the framework of a deal, they have to get down to the business of putting together the nuts and bolts of how free agency will work before the signing period starts on March 1.

For example, the top four teams won't be allowed to sign free agents, unless they lose players, until the 67-percent cap kicks in. The next four teams also will have restrictions, such as being allowed to sign only one player for $1.5 million. Those are some of the things that have to be worked out.

The owners also have to decide the formula for how teams that lose top players will be given extra draft picks as compensation.

The way it's apparently going to work, the Philadelphia Eagles, for example, would get a first-round pick if Reggie White jumps ship.

What the owners seem to have overlooked is this could encourage bidding. For example, if the Redskins sign White. They could then decide to let Wilber Marshall go if they're going to get an extra first pick for him. In effect, they'd be trading Marshall for White and a first-rounder.

The owners never seem to think out the long-term implications of their actions. They wanted a signing window because they said the lack of one would encourage holdouts. But it's not the free players who'll be holding out. Those players will sign deals and if they don't get them, they won't have much leverage.

The players who'll be holding out are the players who aren't free, such as Gary Clark, Barry Foster and Emmitt Smith. Don't look to see

those three players in camp next year.

Saying goodbye

Before Chicago Bears owner Mike McCaskey fired Mike Ditka last week, he should have called Art Modell, the owner of the Cleveland Browns.

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.