Unlike the defunct AAF, the NFL has more than enough money to make ends meet. As Eddie Murphy once said, “The ends are meeting like a mutherf--ker.”
So why would the NFL slash $20 million from NFL Network’s budget? The answer could trace to the reality that, within two years, the league’s revenue may run dry.
Yes, this could be the first step in a broader plan to cut costs in order to make it easier to absorb a work stoppage, whether it’s a lockout (initiated by management) or a strike (initiated by the players).
In 2011, the owners seemed more than willing to shut down the league for an entire season, if needed to force the players to agree to the league’s terms. This time around, the owners have been complaining far less frequently (actually, not at all) about the labor deal, which means that the NFL would be fine with the prospect of extending the current contract as is.
Of course, no business is content with what it has. The league, then, will strive for more. Or maybe the league will simply signal that it’s planning to strive for more, in order to fend off a zealous effort by the union to claw back some of the financial concessions made eight years ago.
While, in theory, the players could strike, that approach would require the players to be willing and able to make it through a full year without pay -- and without the ability to play football. In 1987, a strike quickly fell apart. In 2011, the union did the best deal that it could in light of the fact that the players would not miss game checks.
Regardless of whether the expiration of the current CBA would result in a lockout or a strike, the league needs to be prepared for it. And the decision of a thriving, multi-billion-dollar operation to cut $20 million out of the budget of its broadcast network could indeed be a signal of more cuts to come, as the league begins to prepare for a rainy day sparked by a storm cloud of its own making.
