Skip to content

Nationwide poll puts greater blame for lockout on owners

200191457-001 Getty Images

Though recent polling at PFT has shown a dramatic spike in support for the owners in the current labor dispute, a new nationwide poll conducted by the Suffolk University Political Research Center of likely presidential voters finds that 32 percent blame the owners, and only 19 percent blame the players, per the Boston Herald.  A full 30 percent were undecided.

The initial story doesn’t say when the poll was conducted, which given the up-and-down realities of the lockout could have an impact on the reactions of the folks who responded.

If you haven’t made your feelings known in the latest PFT labor dispute poll, feel free to do so now.

Permalink 111 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories, Union
111 Responses to “Nationwide poll puts greater blame for lockout on owners”
  1. killxswitch says: May 18, 2011 9:41 AM

    The pro-owner dorks love politics, they don’t love football. Both sides are children fighting for more desert. As any other right-thinking fan should, I just want them to shut up and play football. I am not going to be swayed by spin and half-arsed logic from either side. If both sides could somehow lose in the process, great. Screw both of ‘em.

  2. 90ragtop says: May 18, 2011 9:41 AM

    Sorry, but unless the were polling members of the NFLPA*, I’m just not buying it.

  3. ballen7 says: May 18, 2011 9:41 AM

    Something very fishy about these PFT polls.
    Just Sayin.

  4. AlanSaysYo says: May 18, 2011 9:42 AM

    It’s a bit misleading to run a story concerning which side people *blame* and then immediately run a poll after it asking which side your readers *support.* Sure, any idiot who can read should be able to tell the difference, but the way it flows could lead to some unintended poll responses.

    But the owner shills are totally killing on the poll right now anyway, so I guess it doesn’t matter. It’s pathetic that they think they can shape public opinion by slanting internet polls and posting their talking points from fake comment accounts. That’s just insulting to the fans, and I for one will not forget it anytime soon.

  5. spectre14 says: May 18, 2011 9:43 AM

    Of course the greater “blame” for the lockout is on the owners… they’re the ones who locked the league out. That would be like asking who is to blame for the labor dispute going to the courts.

    The real question that needs to be asked is who is to blame for this situation still being unresolved and bitter at this point instead of resolved through mediation. To THAT question, I think the answer would overwhelmingly be the players and De Smith’s big loud mouth.

  6. jlneil30 says: May 18, 2011 9:46 AM

    The first thing I’d like to know is where is the remaining 18-20% (depending on fractions of a percent) missing from the answers above? 32 + 19 + 30 = 82. Hmmm.

    Also, the results reported surprise me because most of the polls I’ve seen favor the owners over the players in support.

  7. getyourpopcorn says: May 18, 2011 9:46 AM

    Why did my comment not post. It is a conspiracy.

  8. nj22 says: May 18, 2011 9:46 AM

    This is complete BS. The difference with their “Nationwide poll” is they are probably polling house wive’s not football fans. People on this site are here every day because we are the real fans! The fans that spend the money, every year! This site is the real measuring stick. The players, are unwilling to bend at all to get a deal done. They think the owners should just suck it up and eat the awful deal that they already had. The players think the fans are idiots. Bottom line is the owners have made 2 offers now and I have seen exactly ZERO counter offers from the players….That is all the proof I need to know who is really trying here.

  9. redwillie30 says: May 18, 2011 9:47 AM

    I don’t know who they had participate, but it wasn’t NFL fans. I’ve been through scores of forums and not one of them has members that are even remotely in favor of the players.

  10. geniusesq says: May 18, 2011 9:47 AM

    Anyone who pays attention knows what this is about. It’s a lockout, not a strike.

  11. geemoney713 says: May 18, 2011 9:48 AM

    The people that read this site know a lot about what’s going on and why. The common public “presidential voters” probably don’t have a clue what’s going on and; therefore, shouldn’t give their opinion.

  12. alphaq2 says: May 18, 2011 9:48 AM

    I guess the sheep actually believe Smith that the league is suing to not play football. Can the league sue Smith for slander or defamation? Is it legal to just staight up lie?

  13. hendawg21 says: May 18, 2011 9:49 AM

    I side with neither however, if I had to i’d say it’s more DeSmith and his rhetoric…a majority of the players probably have no clue they are just following along thinking he’s doing the right them for them.

  14. redwillie30 says: May 18, 2011 9:49 AM

    Another poll of those same voters would show that 65% have no idea who Roger Goodell or Demaurice Smith are.

  15. duster1982 says: May 18, 2011 9:50 AM

    Their poll had only 1,070 people?! and Im sure most arent as familiar with whats going on as they should be.

    PFT’s is already over 18,000.

    Wonder which one Ill believe.

  16. topshelf1988 says: May 18, 2011 9:51 AM

    It’s only here at PFT that most favor the owners. Hmmmm, wonder what’s happening at this website.

  17. southmo says: May 18, 2011 9:52 AM

    Not a surprise. They polled “likely presidential voters” not football fans. So they polled a lot of people who don’t know much about the NFL except what they hear from the pro-player ESPN-esque crowd. And they polled people who are like some here that have an opinion based on the politics only.

    A real measure would poll NFL fans, not just “likely presidential voters.”

    Unfortunately, expect D.Smith to use this as an excuse to not to negotiate.

  18. bmac187 says: May 18, 2011 9:54 AM

    Most polls I’ve seen have people supporting the players. Which leads me to believe there could be something to the idea of league shills on this site. Where better to go to try and influence players than a site that players openly admit to reading?

  19. johnabis says: May 18, 2011 9:56 AM

    The Difference between the Nationwide pulls is asking the average Joe what they think Versus the PFT pull is asking way above average NFL fans who actually know whats going on.

  20. villagoo says: May 18, 2011 9:57 AM

    there’s obviously going to be a stark contrast of polling presidential voters and football fans. i’d argue that the political poll is really only telling you who supports republicans vs. democrats, whereas informed football fans here realize that politics/courts are an inefficient joke to society

  21. touchdownroddywhite says: May 18, 2011 9:58 AM

    I have yet to see or hear one representative of the Brady suit say anything conducive to getting a deal done. All I have seen in regards to the players side is whining, complaining, and deceiving.

    Then you have somebody like Drew Brees, a named plaintiff, complaining that they have no idea how things will unfold in the legal system, or when it will end.

    This whole scenario seems like it was far more impromptu than it should have been despite the amount of time they claim they have been expecting a lockout.

    At the same time the owners could have NOT opted out of the deal since I believe it only had a couple years left, and spent that time negotiating what would be a fair long term deal. That’s what I would have considered ACTUAL good faith.

    In the end though, all the players had to do was not disband and sue and made it easier for the league to allow football operations to continue under last years rules while the new CBA was negotiated, while still holding the potential for a lockout over the players heads.

  22. comeonnowguys says: May 18, 2011 9:58 AM

    I’m wondering if some the poll results isn’t simply fatigue from you constantly beating us over the head with your conspiracy theory, and people are voting with the owners in part to piss you off.

  23. rmiller517 says: May 18, 2011 9:59 AM

    I was not undecided, i chose to support neither. both sides are being asshats.

  24. 3octaveFart says: May 18, 2011 9:59 AM

    “Nationwide poll puts greater blame for lockout on owners”

    Well, duh.

    A lockout by its very definition is an action taken by the owners.
    Had the players walked out we’d be talking about a strike.

  25. Southpaw says: May 18, 2011 10:01 AM

    Theres a difference between asking “Who do you blame in the lockout?” and “Who do you support through the lockout?”

    I BLAME the lockout on the league – they’re doing it. But I also support the league and the lockout for what it’s accomplishing.

    I think that there is also a subliminal difference that some people may not consciously acknowledge

  26. dryzzt23 says: May 18, 2011 10:02 AM

    As a business owner and anti-union advocate, I fully support the owners. I listened to Maurice Jones-Drew on NFL sirius dadio last night, he was all about talking around the real points and dissing fans who opposed his views. I have lost any and all respect for MJD.

  27. southmo says: May 18, 2011 10:03 AM

    Here’s why it matters more who the ACTUAL fans of the NFL who frequent this site support: We pay the ticket prices.

    Some “likely presidential voter” who doesn’t like football and hears that the owners locked the players out is about as relevant as going to war with the French as an ally.

  28. bronco1st says: May 18, 2011 10:06 AM

    Keep voting if you don’t like the results. This pitiful “poll” lets you vote as many times as you want. I just voted another 25 times! Hilarious!

  29. jbcommonsense says: May 18, 2011 10:06 AM

    Of course national polls find Americans blame the owners. Owners ARE NOT entitled to a rapid growth rate in their profits, at the expense of players, who are clearly sacrificing their bodies for a lucrative salary. Just what are the owners sacrificing?

    The owners are making great profits now on a relatively simple investment with practically NO risk. That’s probably why they refuse to open their books.

    People here have tried to make the argument that the owners’ position is about the sustainability of the game. How so? Both sides have agreed to a team salary cap — http://nfllabor.com/2011/03/11/exclusive-summary-of-nfl-proposal-to-nflpa/

    Polls show that PFT was right about bored, resentful league employees flooding posts here. Real fans understand the facts described above. They are not buying the owners’ distortions.

  30. duanethomas says: May 18, 2011 10:07 AM

    The only place the owners are not blamed is on this site, but in reality every poll that has been done the blames is squarely placed on them. This people who post on here are shills who have been accused of being NFL plants. The owners opted out and started this fight and only the 1K plus anti-player pro owners shills on here do not believe that to be true. They HATE the players with a unhealthy passion, which tells me their jobs or careers are being affected. So you can stop the poll, the owners will win….ONLY on here.

  31. commentcentral says: May 18, 2011 10:07 AM

    Pollsters can get any answer they want.

  32. ravensfan4life52 says: May 18, 2011 10:08 AM

    @killxswitch

    i support the owners and i love football which is why i support the owners. how long is the average player gonna be around? 3 years? 4 years? 5 if they’re lucky? how long are the owners gonna be around? 10 years? 20 years? 30 years? the owners will have a greater impact on this game then the players because they’ll be around longer. think before you speak. from my experiences in talking to people generally the people who support the players believe everything the nflpa says and has on their website and don’t do much more research on their own than that, that’s not everybody that’s just what i gather from those i’ve talked to personally. i’m sure their are some who support the players who have done plenty of research. i’ve done my research and i dont’ give a d@mn about politics. think before you speak. the players are the ones who wanted politicians involved not the owners.

  33. mightygiants says: May 18, 2011 10:09 AM

    This website has a subtle bias toward the players. So it’s not surprising that a website that is supportive of the owners would have skewed results when polling its readers.

  34. igglesfan9 says: May 18, 2011 10:10 AM

    Is this some sort of trick question? The owners unilaterally ended the CBA two years early and then locked the players out. Clearly the owners are responsible for the lockout. D’uh.

  35. clintonportisheadd says: May 18, 2011 10:11 AM

    The fact is that the PFT “polls” are about as scientific as a Fox news call in poll after one of their hilarious GOP debates (the ones Ron Paul always wins)

    PFT polls are not random and are skewed completely by NFL employees voting over and over and over….

  36. carson9 says: May 18, 2011 10:11 AM

    I wonder where this “random pool” of participants came from. I have a feeling they were family members of De Smith or some of Antonio Cromartie’s baby mama’s wanting a check….

  37. ytnewton says: May 18, 2011 10:12 AM

    I’m sure the poll was taken in a big union state. Just another example of unions continuing to erode this country.

  38. mightygiants says: May 18, 2011 10:13 AM

    The comment by dryzzt23 shows why the players are unfairly blamed for the owner’s greed. Some people put their ideology ahead of reason or the facts and will side with the owners no matter what horrible things they do.

  39. grandpoopah says: May 18, 2011 10:15 AM

    @duster1982, clearly you have no idea how statistics and polling work. A large sample size that is not randomly selected (such as the ones posted on PFT) is useless. A small, randomly selected sample can be extremely accurate. Sample size is generally less important than the quality of the sample.

  40. bronco1st says: May 18, 2011 10:18 AM

    Yep, just hit your “refresh” button on your computer’s toolbar and the vote again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, HAHAHAHAHA! Watch the numbers change before your very eyes!

  41. puregreed says: May 18, 2011 10:19 AM

    Neither one will be getting my money for the 2011 season, so I guess I support neither.

    I follow my team not a player, I havent had a favorite player since I was a CHILD.

  42. macgee10 says: May 18, 2011 10:19 AM

    I think both sides have had their faults for this. It’s hard to not slide your way into the owners favor though because they want to keep negoitating but the players want to fight a losing battle in court which will take longer whenever a decision is made. Plus De Smith just seems like he just doesn’t have a clue at all.

  43. whathappenedtovox says: May 18, 2011 10:19 AM

    I’m not in favor of either, and I’m not sure how anyone can “support” either side. BUUUUT… I place far more blame on the owners. I think the “pro-owner” faction is either forgetting or ignoring one very simple truth – The players are not on strike. The owners locked them out.

  44. thevolcanokid says: May 18, 2011 10:20 AM

    Pro-Owner is actually just support for pro football. We want the competition. As fans, we want every year to be our year.

    No draft. No free agency. (or a FA that is truly scary) No salary cap. That’s a recipe for no fun and no fans.

  45. commoncents says: May 18, 2011 10:22 AM

    Why would you ask people who don’t watch or follow football their opinion on who is to blame?

    You don’t do a poll here at PFT, asking us if we think the Miss America pagent is fair do you? Because you can vote, doesn’t mean you follow football enough for your opinion to matter does it? I don’t care what America thinks about the NFL labor dispute, it’s clear by the poll here that football fans clearly are blaming the players at this point, and more specifically De-dick Smith.

  46. nj22 says: May 18, 2011 10:22 AM

    It is funny to see how people on here think PFT is swinging the numbers towards the owners. All we did was kill Fl0ri0 for siding with the players way above and beyond early on. He was all about the players side when this started, but I think he can see how they are not willing to negotiate and D Smith convinced the players that he will get to court and make sure the owners stay stuck in the $hit deal they signed in 06. He is failing but he has no reason to give up as he is auditioning for his next career in politics and could not care less if football is ever played again!

  47. bronco1st says: May 18, 2011 10:23 AM

    It works if you hit your back button also. Gee, I’m beginning to feel like an owner. Get as many votes as you want.

  48. lostsok says: May 18, 2011 10:27 AM

    The opinion of the fans does not matter in court, and barely matters in the court of public opinion. The verdict is irrelevant in the latter instance.

  49. realitypolice says: May 18, 2011 10:28 AM

    PFT polls are irrelevant.

    Not because I disagree with the results, but because the methodology is absurd.

    Any poll that allows a person to sit in front of their computer and vote over and over and over again is too ridiculous to even be discussed. It has no more credibility than the voting on American Idol.

    Any reasonable person can find accountability for the current state of affairs on both sides.

    Putting 100% of the blame in one direction or another is completely irrational.

  50. straitalk says: May 18, 2011 10:29 AM

    So the light of truth is finally shining. The NFL’s paid PR firm hired to slant public opinion can only prostitute themselves for so long before honest NFL fans have their day in the court of public opinion. Whether supportive of the owners, fans, or neither; I find it disgusting that paid shills hide among us pretending to voice our opinion, when in fact they are reading from scripts written and approved by high stakes PR executives. It’s like a nightmare scenario from the ‘Invasion of the Body Snatchers’. They act like us, and talk like us, but they are really are nothing at all like the real football fan. Something is a little off in their opinions, just a little too scripted, just a little too similar in script and verse to the other pod people. They hide among us! :)

  51. albanyhawker says: May 18, 2011 10:31 AM

    Mike – try this poll one more time, but change the perspective of the question to “Who do you BLAME for the continued labor dispute?” and give the choices of Players, Owners or BOTH.

    My guess is that BOTH will get most of the votes.

    The owners are originally to blame for the lockout, but both sides are to blame for their inability to come to the table and work out an agreement, without fighting things out in court or pissing and whining through the media.

  52. realitypolice says: May 18, 2011 10:35 AM

    @southmo:

    So you are saying that people who are true football fans don’t vote in presidential elections?

    I don’t mean to pick on you personally- I wonder if all of the people on here realize how they sound when they accuse “likely presidential voters” of not knowing enough about football.

    As if you can’t follow football AND have an informed opinion about things that actually matter in the world.

    Stop being hung up on who did this poll or who they asked.

    Try something that I am sure is very alien to most people on this. Open a new tab, go to google and search for polls on this issue.

    You’ll find, if you actually visit some sites other PFT, that an overwhelming majority of the polls will have relatively low percentages of support for either side, and the largest percentage will assign blame to both.

    Which is, of course, the only conclusion that can be rationally, not emotionally, drawn.

  53. chapnastier says: May 18, 2011 10:36 AM

    I personally think the PFT poll is more accurate. I mean we are probably the most educated on the topic and we engage each other in discussions on a daily basis. I wouldn’t think that is the same in this national poll.

  54. bsandcs says: May 18, 2011 10:39 AM

    If the NFL cared so much about the effort of
    “planting shills”, why would they only do so on this one site? if there really was a campaign, you would expect to see the heavy slant of “shills” on message boards across other major sports sites as well. I doubt the NFL said “hey guys let’s denote a portion of our resources to post comments on messages boards, but only do it on PTF”

  55. bsandcs says: May 18, 2011 10:43 AM

    The PTF polls DON’T allow you to vote more than once. I know because I thought the same thing too and was annoyed. So because I never sleep, i voted in the middle of the night and noted the number of total of votes for the side, then i voted for the same side again and again but the total votes did NOT change. It only changed for my initial vote. so calm down.

  56. goawayeverybody says: May 18, 2011 10:49 AM

    Ha ha ha ha ha let all the mindless idiots’ heads explode. When I say “mindless idiot” I’m referring to the people on this site who are slavishly devoted to the owners, no matter how counterintuitive that position is.

  57. goawayeverybody says: May 18, 2011 10:50 AM

    This is the second scientific poll on the subject and the results are equally clear: the American public has sided with the players.

    Deal with it, Republicans.

  58. larryfinfan says: May 18, 2011 10:52 AM

    It’s amazing to me that people always follow the “big guy is the problem” card. It was the players who quit negotiating. And the bottom line is that until the two sides negotiate again, nothing will happen that makes any sense… Whether or not the owners got a bad deal a few years back the bottom line is that the PLAYERS walked out from the negotiating table and chose to try their hand at litigation…

    At any rate, just as some above have intimated, it takes two sides…both are just as guilty for killing the goose that lays the golden eggs…I’d like to say that it’ll take years to regain the trust of the fans, but that’s not true either, it’ll take one, maybe two games and they’ll be back.

    Time for the greedy players and owners to get off their high horses in this time of economic strife and get back to work…I know if I had the chance, I’d choose work over unemployment any day of the week….

  59. jimr10 says: May 18, 2011 10:52 AM

    Based on comments i read on here and other sites, and now reading your poll, i do not believe the “national” poll. I think you pro-player types would say anthing to validate your own opinion.

  60. dbellina says: May 18, 2011 10:54 AM

    I still think this whole lockout mess is somehow Gregg Rosenthal’s fault.

  61. deadeye says: May 18, 2011 10:56 AM

    Who cares about polls? The 8th circuit isn’t gonna let the sham decertification stand, that’s what matters.

  62. jeff061 says: May 18, 2011 11:01 AM

    Not even close in my world – players are short timers who are looking for the gravy train – led by an idiot pop-off

    Owners are trying to create a sustainable model that works in good times and bad. I give my season ticket checks to the owners…they are responsible for assembling a team, the facilities and marketing the sport. The players are jersey #’s that pass through this game year on year…,whether the QB is Dan Fouts, Ed Luther, John Freiz or Phillip Rivers….I’m in

    Players are all about themselves and the hear and now…throughout all of this they’ve shown themselves to be a bunch of clueless idiots who whine like babies and don’t understand the basic principles of business

  63. nahcouldntbethat says: May 18, 2011 11:07 AM

    I’m guessing that some entity is directing responses to your polls and to the site in general on the lockout issue.

    That’s the only way to explain the swing in your polling from pro-owner, not reflecting the other polls taken, to pro-player, which does.

    The entity redirecting to you was caught napping this morning. I expect the numbers to even out as it begins to channel pro-owner votes towards you today.

  64. oldbyrd says: May 18, 2011 11:08 AM

    Sorry Marxists just not so. The minnie commie DDDDD Maurice is loosing badly

  65. brownsbigshot says: May 18, 2011 11:11 AM

    If I buy a team or start a business, it is MY money that is at risk. My employees work for me, but if the business goes under, they don’t lose the initial investement, I DO. Because I am the one who put my neck on the line, I am the one who will profit the most. That is the way it SHOULD be.

    How dare the players try to take additional profits from money they are not risking. They get paid well enough.

  66. chapnastier says: May 18, 2011 11:16 AM

    clintonportisheadd says: May 18, 2011 10:11 AM

    The fact is that the PFT “polls” are about as scientific as a Fox news call in poll after one of their hilarious GOP debates (the ones Ron Paul always wins)
    —————————————————–

    Why do people like you always have to interject politics and Fox News blah blah whenever something is discussed? This has to be more irritating that those who throw out the race card. Neither has anything to do with the lockout or this poll. For the love of everything holy, keep it to your political blogs!!!

  67. cappa662 says: May 18, 2011 11:32 AM

    Unless it’s a scientific poll… no one cares. The PFT poll is unscientific, and the people that are clicking are prolly people from the owners payroll.

  68. olcap says: May 18, 2011 11:32 AM

    Of course your site’s polls side with the owners – you have here a place where these shills for the owners have created accounts and are faithfully doing their crinkled, greedy masters’ bidding.

    What’s worse, is that this site’s OWNER has allowed this charade to go on since the shills all created their accounts, and even tries to give credence to the garbage polls that are tainted by the shills voting, when the site OWNER knows that once this is settled, the shills will all disappear.

    Maybe a lot of the rest of us will disappear too, seeing as how your wink-nod attitude with the NFL owners seems so cozy.

  69. kcfanatic says: May 18, 2011 11:33 AM

    It doesn’t say where the people were polled from. I was never asked, neither was anyone I know and we are in the middle of the country. Please define National Poll. Was it open to all to take or just those people that would support the outcome they wanted? Sometimes a scientific process isn’t very scientific at all. Just ask the scientists at Phillip Morris.

  70. tednancy says: May 18, 2011 11:34 AM

    topshelf1988 says: May 18, 2011 9:51 AM

    It’s only here at PFT that most favor the owners. Hmmmm, wonder what’s happening at this website.
    ==========================

    I’ll tell you what’s “going on” here: fans read PFT. They are far more informed than a sample of “likely presidential voters” who may or may not even know who Roger Goodell is, let alone DeMaurice Smith, Susan Nelson, etc.

    It seems that the more informed you are, the more inclined you will be to support the owners; the less informed, the more likely you are to support the NFLPA.

    And the more narcissistic you are, the more likely it is that you will attribute the results of the PFT polls to a conspiracy.

  71. dontouchmyjunk says: May 18, 2011 11:38 AM

    It’s pretty obvious that the NFL is phishing these polls on PFT. A fan would have to be a special kind of stupid to blame the players for the lockout.

    On every other poll around the web I’ve seen, fans either support the players or blame both. None except PFT polls do the owners come out on top. And here, it happens consistently.

  72. CKL says: May 18, 2011 11:39 AM

    geniusesq says:
    May 18, 2011 9:47 AM
    Anyone who pays attention knows what this is about. It’s a lockout, not a strike.
    –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
    If you are trying to imply that whoever does a certain action is “to blame” and hence not worthy of support, leave me out of that mindset.
    I was 100% in favor of the players getting REAL FA when that happened…and that was a strike.
    I still think the owners need to give a little more on player movement as well as a few other issues like giving up the 18 game idea. But I am also in favor of their being able to keep a majority (meaning more that 50%)of their revenue.

  73. goawayeverybody says: May 18, 2011 11:40 AM

    Can someone please explain to me why the owners are justified in asking the employees to take a pay cut during the most profitable time in NFL history?

  74. childressrulz says: May 18, 2011 11:41 AM

    Anyone that supports the owners after they started this is fing retarded. They voted out of the CBA before anything else happened.
    ______________________________
    I agree with Chapnastier. Keep the politics off this site. Did someone just call people “Marxists?” Not entirely sure supporting a union means you are a Marxist or a Communist. I am also reasonably sure your great grandfather would disagree (if he was even in this country).

  75. goawayeverybody says: May 18, 2011 11:42 AM

    I love how Republicans always trash polls that they don’t like. I suppose they didn’t like the results of the biggest “poll” in history, which was the 2008 Presidential election.

    Bwwwwahahahahahahaha.

    I wonder if there are any Republicans out there who actually believe they will defeat Obama in 2012? Bwwwwwhahahahahahahahaha.

  76. goawayeverybody says: May 18, 2011 11:44 AM

    jlneil30: which polls are you refering to? The non-scientific internet polls where people can vote as often as they like?

    There have been only TWO actually valid scientific polls on this NFL situation and they both came up in support of the players. Not. Even. Close.

  77. tednancy says: May 18, 2011 11:50 AM

    bronco1st says: May 18, 2011 10:18 AM

    Yep, just hit your “refresh” button on your computer’s toolbar and the vote again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, HAHAHAHAHA! Watch the numbers change before your very eyes!
    ===================================

    Totally untrue. And you know it. Amazing that you would plant this nonsense idea in the forum just to discredit a poll that has a different result than you want it to.

    In one breath you accuse the NFL of paying people to vote on PFT polls (but only on PFT, not on other sites – yeah that makes sense) and in the next you plant false information about the poll to discredit it.

    How freaking stupid and small of you.

  78. stull60060 says: May 18, 2011 11:56 AM

    The Boston Herald pole is B.S. Just part of the Marxist / Socialist main stream media propaganda machine. Unions and the people who run them are corrupt. Anyone who doesn’t know this is either stupid, ignorant or corrupt themselves.

  79. bigtrav425 says: May 18, 2011 12:00 PM

    Im siding with the Owners on this one 100 percent

  80. clownburger says: May 18, 2011 12:04 PM

    The people backing the players are NOT football fans. They’re more like casual fans or superbowl party fans.

    The bottom line is that the people backing the players do NOT care about the future of the sport.

    Until the Players decide to negotiate, THERE WILL BE NO FOOTBALL.

    The NFL is trying. They keep offering up deals and the Players NEVER respond! They never counter offer.

    The Players DO NOT WANT TO NEGOTIATE.

    If you back the players, you’re backing the lock out.

  81. aquanorange says: May 18, 2011 12:09 PM

    @childressrulz says: May 18, 2011 11:41 AM

    Anyone that supports the owners after they started this is fing retarded. They voted out of the CBA before anything else happened.
    ______________________________
    I agree with Chapnastier. Keep the politics off this site. Did someone just call people “Marxists?” Not entirely sure supporting a union means you are a Marxist or a Communist. I am also reasonably sure your great grandfather would disagree (if he was even in this country).

    While I support the owners moreso than the players, I agree that the politics should be kept out of this. Talk radio has nearly destroyed the ability to disagree politically without resorting to ad hominem attacks. I support the owners for 2 major reasons:
    1. Their capital is at risk. If players want to be owners, let them take a portion of their compensation in shares.

    2. The NFLPA isn’t really a Union. Despite the talk radio talking points, Unions have done a lot of good for very many people in this country. Ever read ‘The Jungle’ by Upton Sinclair? Or just about any Charles Dickens novel? Problem is, anytime, major sports unions have had the opportunity to show solidarity with their “brethren”, be it hotel workers or what have you, they’ve politely declined. Being in favor of the mere existence of unions is not the same as being in favor of union abuse.

  82. blkmanwtan says: May 18, 2011 12:27 PM

    Why pick sides? Both the players and owners need each other.

  83. icuwoot says: May 18, 2011 12:35 PM

    Dear stull60060, actually learn what those words mean before you use them. Anyone who spits out the main-stream media/socialist/marxist bs is just an ignorant extremest troll. Everyone knows the msm sucks, but idiots like you can’t figure out that it’s crap for everyone.

    Need some type of intelligence test to weed out the people like this. Opinions from both sides are great, it’d just be nice to keep these fools out.

  84. nahcouldntbethat says: May 18, 2011 12:44 PM

    You can’t keep fools out of politics or it would turn into a totally left-wing endeavor leading us directly to scialiasm/marxism/dictatorship/hell.

  85. galvestontexans says: May 18, 2011 1:00 PM

    I still support the TEAM. I just wish the two sides would get out of the courts and back to the negotiation table.

  86. deadeye says: May 18, 2011 1:32 PM

    “Can someone please explain to me why the owners are justified in asking the employees to take a pay cut during the most profitable time in NFL history?”

    ================================

    The owners are justified in asking for anything they want, they own the business. The players are equally justified in refusing to work for anything less than they want. The result will be something in the middle, frequently refered to as a compromise.

    Gee wiz, to believe that asking for something you want during negotiations is unjustified is simply moronic.

  87. duffer58 says: May 18, 2011 2:05 PM

    Clownburger you are dead wrong. Players are trying Owners want them to give back at a time game is doing well. Owners must prove they have financial problems. They have not.

  88. lucky5934 says: May 18, 2011 2:06 PM

    Duane,

    Sounds like you have a strong “unhealthy passion” for the owners in your own right. Yes the owners locked the players out. It is their company and they have that right. It is a privilage to play in the NFL, not a right. And these players have lost sight of that. The NFL has been successful for many decades. And many of these teams carry a rich history that dates back to before any current NFL player was a glimmer in his parents’ eyes. But the players aren’t interested in the history. They aren’t even interested in the pioneers who paved the way for these current players to make their marks as well as they excellent pay. The owners may be selfish to a point, but they are protecting their own investment. The players are simply out for themselves. And that is why people are siding with the owners on this site. And as far as I am concerned, the only poll that should matter is on here. A site where most, if not all major football fans visit.

  89. leib15 says: May 18, 2011 2:19 PM

    This poll is a win for the owners as well. Of 30% “undecided” many probably supported the players several weeks ago. As the mediations (hopefully) continue, more and more of those people will join the owners side. The reality here is that the players love to portray themselves as the common layperson. We aren’t dealing with luggage handlers at the airport. NFL players are making tons of money (many in the millions) for half a years work, not to mention all the perks that come with being a professional athlete. The story PFT ran yesterday about the player taking a loan at 23% (!) interest tells the story. Of course players are going broke, what do you expect when you make decisions like that?! The NFLPA expects us peasants to relate to their side, when in reality there are no similarities at all!

  90. cacaw420 says: May 18, 2011 2:21 PM

    Super misleading poll…

    If the Suffolk University poll you referenced asked whether you BLAME the owners or the players, why would you then ask in your own poll if you SUPPORT the owners or the players?

    I’m sure a lot of people assumed that the two polls were asking the same question, when in fact they were asking the opposite question.

    If the poll wasn’t unreliable from the jump then this back-asswards question surely pushed it over the edge.

  91. mediasloppy says: May 18, 2011 2:24 PM

    I can no longer trust any polls from media outlets as they are owned by the elite who control what they want to be viewed as. Including PFT since it’s the most vocal NFL outlet on the Internet.

    You don’t keep your financial books closed if you want to work out a deal with your employees.

  92. bronco1st says: May 18, 2011 3:04 PM

    How freaking stupid and small of you.

  93. tjrubleysaudible says: May 18, 2011 3:36 PM

    Polls? They’re irrelevant. The public/fans aren’t voting on anything.

  94. urlacher2000 says: May 18, 2011 4:07 PM

    How can this poll not include the option of BOTH. Pretty sure the majority of the “undecided” voters would probably say BOTH.

  95. aquanorange says: May 18, 2011 4:31 PM

    When you hear apologists for the players meekly make the case that “the players are happy with the current deal”, and the “players aren’t asking for anything more than they now have”, you know that the players are acutely aware they robbed the owners blind the last time. These phrases are the tell. The owners caved. But rather than look at that period as a windfall, they want the gravy train to keep on rollin’. For the most part, the owners are shrewd people, not accustomed to getting snookered twice. The players are employees, and unless they sign contracts that stipulate that they will accept lower compensation in the event of operating losses or a lower-than-expected return on invested capital, they have no business demanding an outsized share of what everyone knows will be giant revenue growth. Let the 2 sides:
    -Agree to split the difference on % revenue sharing.
    -Agree to a salary cap, indexed to the rate of revenue growth. This will keep the players wealthy beyond their dreams, and is needed to avoid the MLB disaster, where it’s the Yanks, Bosox, and a couple others as the Harlem Globetrotters and the rest of the teams play the role of the Washington Generals. This means isolating guys like Jerry Jones.
    -Maintain a reasonable FA period, for reasons stated above.
    -Fix a rookie cap, with the windfall proceeds going to proven vets and retired players.
    Last but not least, football fans need to understand that the interests of the fans and players are not aligned-it’s pure myth.

  96. stanklepoot says: May 18, 2011 4:38 PM

    lucky5934 says: May 18, 2011 2:06 PM

    Duane,

    Sounds like you have a strong “unhealthy passion” for the owners in your own right. Yes the owners locked the players out. It is their company and they have that right. It is a privilage to play in the NFL, not a right. And these players have lost sight of that. The NFL has been successful for many decades. And many of these teams carry a rich history that dates back to before any current NFL player was a glimmer in his parents’ eyes. But the players aren’t interested in the history. They aren’t even interested in the pioneers who paved the way for these current players to make their marks as well as they excellent pay. The owners may be selfish to a point, but they are protecting their own investment. The players are simply out for themselves. And that is why people are siding with the owners on this site. And as far as I am concerned, the only poll that should matter is on here. A site where most, if not all major football fans visit.
    _________________________
    I’m sorry, but if I hear another comment about the owners protecting their investment, or the risk to their investment, I might have to start beating my head off a damn wall. There is zero risk to their investment. To begin with, over a third of current owners (11) never made an investment. They inherited the company. So, I guess you could say the invested wisely in the right womb to descend from. As for the other owners, name one who has ever lost money no matter how poorly they ran their front office? The fact that teams like the Lions (doing better now, but horrible decisions in the not-too-distant past), Raiders, and Bills have all made a profit is undeniable evidence that owning an NFL franchise is pretty much idiot proof. Additionally, quarterly profit is not the key determinant of a large company or corporation’s success. For a corporation it’s stock price. For an NFL franchise, it’s the value of the franchise itself. Look at it this way. If you bought $10,000 and the value of that gold rose to $15,000 would you say there was no return on your investment simply because you weren’t getting a monthly check? Of course not. The value of NFL franchises has risen to the point that the median value of a franchise is $1 billion or more. So, even the most poorly run team is making a profit and the value of that franchise has risen. So, again I ask, what’ the risk? Besides, if an owner did find it too risky, all they’d have to do is announce that they were willing to sell the team. They’d have at least 10 potential buyers/groups ready to make an offer in no time flat.

  97. stanklepoot says: May 18, 2011 4:44 PM

    leib15 says: May 18, 2011 2:19 PM

    This poll is a win for the owners as well. Of 30% “undecided” many probably supported the players several weeks ago. As the mediations (hopefully) continue, more and more of those people will join the owners side. The reality here is that the players love to portray themselves as the common layperson. We aren’t dealing with luggage handlers at the airport. NFL players are making tons of money (many in the millions) for half a years work, not to mention all the perks that come with being a professional athlete. The story PFT ran yesterday about the player taking a loan at 23% (!) interest tells the story. Of course players are going broke, what do you expect when you make decisions like that?! The NFLPA expects us peasants to relate to their side, when in reality there are no similarities at all!
    ________________________________
    No, you always have a sizable “undecided” group in these kinds of polls. They tend to represent your more middle of the road fans/voters who figure both sides are pretty much the same or share the blame pretty equally. As for us peasants, screw off. I’m no one’s peasant. Maybe that’s why I have a problem assuming that simply being an owner makes you brilliant or some great defender of the league. 11 out of 32 owners inherited their teams. You want to talk feudalism, then you’re talking the owners not the players. So, if I were going to relate to either side (not likely), at least with the players I could identify more with their beginnings.

  98. easyeddie says: May 18, 2011 4:47 PM

    If it’s unknown when the survey was taken, it doesn’t mean much.

  99. bronco1st says: May 18, 2011 4:57 PM

    bronco1st says: May 18, 2011 10:18 AM

    Yep, just hit your “refresh” button on your computer’s toolbar and the vote again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, HAHAHAHAHA! Watch the numbers change before your very eyes!
    ===================================

    tednancy says: May 18, 2011 11:34 AM

    Totally untrue. And you know it. Amazing that you would plant this nonsense idea in the forum just to discredit a poll that has a different result than you want it to.

    In one breath you accuse the NFL of paying people to vote on PFT polls (but only on PFT, not on other sites – yeah that makes sense) and in the next you plant false information about the poll to discredit it.

    How freaking stupid and small of you.

    ===================================

    bronco1st says:
    It is true, did you try it or are YOU too “freaking stupid and small” to figure it out?

  100. stanklepoot says: May 18, 2011 5:16 PM

    aquanorange says: May 18, 2011 4:31 PM

    When you hear apologists for the players meekly make the case that “the players are happy with the current deal”, and the “players aren’t asking for anything more than they now have”, you know that the players are acutely aware they robbed the owners blind the last time. These phrases are the tell. The owners caved. But rather than look at that period as a windfall, they want the gravy train to keep on rollin’. For the most part, the owners are shrewd people, not accustomed to getting snookered twice. The players are employees, and unless they sign contracts that stipulate that they will accept lower compensation in the event of operating losses or a lower-than-expected return on invested capital, they have no business demanding an outsized share of what everyone knows will be giant revenue growth. Let the 2 sides:
    -Agree to split the difference on % revenue sharing.
    -Agree to a salary cap, indexed to the rate of revenue growth. This will keep the players wealthy beyond their dreams, and is needed to avoid the MLB disaster, where it’s the Yanks, Bosox, and a couple others as the Harlem Globetrotters and the rest of the teams play the role of the Washington Generals. This means isolating guys like Jerry Jones.
    -Maintain a reasonable FA period, for reasons stated above.
    -Fix a rookie cap, with the windfall proceeds going to proven vets and retired players.
    Last but not least, football fans need to understand that the interests of the fans and players are not aligned-it’s pure myth.
    __________________________
    You know, judging by your recommendations, you’re actually making the players’ argument more or less. Let’s break them down.

    1. Agree to split the difference on revenue sharing.
    a. The owners worded it as more money off the top before revenue sharing, but it’s the same thing. The players did agree to allow for a larger pre-revenue split cut for the owners. It wasn’t all that the owners were asking for, but it was a nice chunk. They went on to say that if the owners opened their books (this is where that request came into play) that they might be willing to move even more on this issue. So, the players had already agreed to part of what the owners wanted, and were willing to negotiate further if they received what they viewed as necessary information.

    2. Agree to salary cap, indexed to rate of revenue growth.
    a. This is exactly what the players wanted. The problem was that the owners proposal wanted to link the salary cap not to actual revenue growth, but to overly conservative estimates of revenue growth. If the league did better than these estimates (and pretty much everyone figured the league would do MUCH better than those estimates), then the players would have been cut out of any additional revenue.

    3. Maintain a reasonable FA period.
    a. No one ever really attacked that. The only time this became an issue was in the uncapped year when the time it took to become an unrestricted free agent jumped from 4 years to 6 years. Many players don’t last 6 years in the league, and if they do, for many positions it’s believed that they have too much wear and tear to deserve a huge contract. The players want to be able to reach UFA status in a reasonable amount of time so that players who vastly outperform expectations at draft time can actually get a contract that pays them fair market wage for their skills. Is it fair for someone to forever be locked into a lower wage than their peers simply because some scouts underevaluated them at draft time? The current “attack” on the control of player movement is simply part of a general anti-trust issue aimed at giving the players more leverage in negotiations, not an actual attack on the system per se.

    4. Fix a rookie cap, with the windfall proceeds going to veteran players and retired players.
    a. Again, this is exactly what the players were willing to do. Two problems arose out of the negotiations of a rookie cap or scale, however. The first was that, while the owners were willing to redirect a portion of the savings to vets and retired players, they weren’t willing to indicate what percentage of the windfall would be reapportioned. The result was that the players were left with the idea that a large chunk of that windfall would simply be retained by the owners, which would make it simply another cut in the players’ share of the revenue. The other problem was that, while the current system puts way too much guaranteed money into the hands of unproven players, the owners proposal made dramatic cuts that would be applied to lengthy contracts that couldn’t be negotiated. If the owners want such dramatic cuts, then the contracts need to be shorter, so that the players who prove their value by their performance on the field actually have a chance to be paid like the elite players they are. Three years is plenty of time to prove if a player will be a boom or a bust. I have no problem with them being paid a reduced wage while they improve their skills and prove their worth on the field, but keeping them under such a restrictive contract for a period of time years longer than the average length a player’s career is just going too far.

    Finally, I agree that it’s ludicrous to assume that the interests of the players and fans go hand in hand. The same is true about the owners and the fans, however. At the end of the day, there are no good guys and bad guys here…and certainly no marxists or fascists. There are simply two parties whose collective efforts generate billions of dollars in revenue every year and who are fighting over what percentage of that revenue each side will get.

  101. aquanorange says: May 18, 2011 7:38 PM

    @Stanklepoot

    You make some good points. My conclusion is the same as yours, in that it’s ultimately about who gets more of the pie, and not ideology. Where we seem to disagree is on the standing of the players. I don’t believe they ought to share in the revenue growth to the same pro-rata extent as they have the past several years. While your point is well-taken regarding the likely profitability of an NFL franchise, there is risk, which isn’t shared by the employees. The level of risk is debatable, and if you want to bring the anti-trust exemption into it, I’m okay with that. As a fan, I’d like to see compromise from each side that prevents this from happening for quite some time, which is why my points reflected givebacks from both sides. In my view remedial action to correct an imbalance is required for that. If it means a 10 game season to get there, I’m for it. As for the inheritance factor(I think you mentioned it), I happen to agree with you, but understand that it’s a completely separate and societal issue, dealing with estate taxes and the wisdom of allowing a permanent overclass.

    Gotta go watch my Mets now….til next time.

  102. leib15 says: May 18, 2011 7:59 PM

    stanklepoot says:
    May 18, 2011 4:44 PM
    No, you always have a sizable “undecided” group in these kinds of polls. They tend to represent your more middle of the road fans/voters who figure both sides are pretty much the same or share the blame pretty equally. As for us peasants, screw off. I’m no one’s peasant. Maybe that’s why I have a problem assuming that simply being an owner makes you brilliant or some great defender of the league. 11 out of 32 owners inherited their teams. You want to talk feudalism, then you’re talking the owners not the players. So, if I were going to relate to either side (not likely), at least with the players I could identify more with their beginnings.
    ___________________________________

    Sorry you obviously missed my point about the “undecideds”. A similar poll several weeks ago would have had more votes blaming the owners and less people who were unsure. With the players lack of cooperation in the mediations, their refrain from any sort of compromise, and them constantly playing the blame game, fans are realizing just how spoiled the players can be. I believe Feudalism is the best term to describe the players/owners treatment of the fans throughout this whole ordeal. The knights (players) want a bigger slice of the pie, while the monarchs (owners) are hesitant to relent, each side ignoring the peasants (us in their eyes). Sure there is greed on both sides of the aisle, but the greed of the owners is why the NFL exists, the greed of the players will cause the NFL to cease to exist. My point is that Demaurice Smith and Co. keep on talking like the fans should somehow relate to the lives and predicaments of the players, and yet the players behave in a way that is unfamiliar to all of us.

  103. leib15 says: May 18, 2011 8:27 PM

    dontouchmyjunk says:
    May 18, 2011 11:38 AM
    It’s pretty obvious that the NFL is phishing these polls on PFT. A fan would have to be a special kind of stupid to blame the players for the lockout.

    On every other poll around the web I’ve seen, fans either support the players or blame both. None except PFT polls do the owners come out on top. And here, it happens consistently.
    ____________________________________
    Sorry to burst your bubble Mr. Junk, but just look at the comments and the like/dislike to this article. I see an overwhelming uptrend in support of owners. Sure when this ordeal started people were skeptical of the “corporate greed machine”, but the more the player are uncooperative in the mediation and the more they point fingers, the more spoiled they turn out to be. Now if I could just find my dang keys, so I could go pick up my check before the NFL offices close.

  104. imthepostman says: May 18, 2011 8:27 PM

    This is the only place on the internet where there’s more support for the owners because it’s being astroturfed by the NFL. Pro-owner comments are posted by league shills and upvoted to give a false impression of wide support for the pro-owner, anti-player views.

    It’s obvious to long time readers of the site because the number of votes for comments are out of whack compared to the usual news that goes on during the season. Too many votes for news stories in this off season when most NFL fans have tuned out and are just biding time until the lockout is off for good.

  105. Kave Krew says: May 18, 2011 9:21 PM

    Looks like the NFLPA blogger plants are finally making headway and will finally shut up about the owner’s planting bloggers for their side……

    Where are all the tin foil hat nut jobs now???.?.

  106. autumnwind999 says: May 19, 2011 3:18 AM

    I’m glad some others have noted the probable presence of owner shills on this site. I’ve suspected the same for months.
    I’ll trust a scientific poll over an easily rigged online poll any day. It’d be better if it were all NFL fans, but that’s probably why a third of the people polled were undecided.

  107. autumnwind999 says: May 19, 2011 3:23 AM

    The PFT poll question is highly misleading as well in this spot since you go from a story asking “who do people blame” to a question of “who do you support.” After reading the article I skipped past the question headline and voted for “The Owners” assuming it was the same “who do you blame” question.

    That’s a poor job by PFT for not calling attention to that discrepancy in the article when touting the poll below.

  108. bsandcs says: May 19, 2011 3:53 AM

    goawayeverybody says:
    May 18, 2011 11:40 AM
    Can someone please explain to me why the owners are justified in asking the employees to take a pay cut during the most profitable time in NFL history?
    ———————————————————

    Sure. you just sort of outed yourself as completely ignorant to the basic issues with that statement as nobody is asking the players to take a pay cut. read mike’s article from earlier, it explains it.

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/05/18/more-misplaced-rhetoric-from-de-smith/

  109. peelmybatwings says: May 19, 2011 6:44 PM

    ytnewton says:
    May 18, 2011 10:12 AM
    I’m sure the poll was taken in a big union state. Just another example of unions continuing to erode this country.

    Dude, unions are 11% of the entire U.S. workforce, how can you act like they are eroding anything? Will you anti-union only be happy when every last union is busted? While I don’t think unions are the answer to every workplace, I also think they are good for others. The middle class is almost gone in this country, and that’s scary, because it is what made us great. As this country has shifted drastically to the right ever since Reagan was in office, unions have been obliterated and the gap between the rich and the poor grows wider every year. I’d say if anything big business running roughshod has way more to do with this than unions.

  110. axespray says: May 23, 2011 2:09 AM

    So the guys that have had accounts on here for years are all of a sudden considered Pro-Owner Plants?

    c’mon, that’s like saying Jon Stewart is a Pro-Obama Plant……

    ooh wait!

  111. dwhitehurst says: May 24, 2011 3:33 AM

    Whether being a fan of Pro Football makes me pro-player or pro-owner or neither is not the main issue. I honestly could care less about whether the players or owners make more or less. Having said that, the increasing cost to a paying fan like myself is an issue, so with regard to that cost-to-the-fan issue, I’d have to say I can’t support either side, who both want more money for themselves, without regard for the fact that this money comes from the pockets of us fans!! Yet even this is not the top issue.

    The primary issue is preserving and protecting the vitality of the game of professional football itself–of what has made and kept us fans of the NFL as well as what will continue to keep us fans of the NFL. The very life of any game is simple: Competition on an equal, level playing field. Such is exemplified by such things as the salary cap. Also, to potentially become competitive in the future, as exemplified by the draft, is another precious tool by which fans of a currently losing team can still have a hope which springs eternal. Thus, aside from the question of which side is right or wrong in whatever they seek to gain in terms of a new CBA, if in the process we lose such tools as the salary cap and the draft (if not also revenue sharing), which have made the NFL the greatest fan sport in America, then both the owners and the players will be guilty for having screwed up a good thing (ala Baseball), and will have lost the majority of the fans, including paying fans like myself. I hope both sides consider the common good of the game from which all benefit, lest they’re self-seeking ends turn out to be their own undoing along with everyone else’s, and the fans are so disenchanted that they’re even considering professional soccer as an alternative! Wise up!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!