Last night, I wrote that the first order of business for the NFLPA executive director will be to undo the damage caused by an eight-challenger circus fueled by the decision of some player representatives to nominate multiple candidates to square off against two-time incumbent DeMaurice Smith. He can now check that box.
The player representatives got it right, picking their leader unanimously. Regardless of who it was (and the 32 men who cast the ballots are in FAR better position than anyone in the media to make that decision), a unanimous outcome: (1) tells the NFL that its primary partner and adversary has its act together; (2) ensures the hundreds of players not directly involved in the process that their leaders are on the same page; and (3) advises those in the media who were agitating for change based on an incomplete understanding of the issues, personal animus toward the incumbent, and/or the hope/promise of special treatment from a successful challenger that they ultimately have no influence over the process.
And even if the first ballot wasn’t truly unanimous, as Tom Pelissero of USA Today reports, the decision to do a second ballot reflecting a 32-0 outcome after De Smith got at least 17 on the first ballot is exactly what the NFL would have done, in order to show the world that everyone is on the same page moving forward. Via Liz Mullen of SportsBusiness Journal, the entire process took roughly 15 minutes.
PFT’s goal throughout the campaign was neutrality, reporting nuts-and-bolts facts about the nomination and election process, giving all candidates an open invitation to appear on PFT Live to discuss their qualifications and ideas (even though most of the audience didn’t really care about the election), and avoiding the impression of trying in any way to participate in king-making and/or king-unmaking.
In a public election, it makes sense for the media to have a clear voice, since everyone has a vote -- including those in the media. In this specific union election, only 32 men had voices. Those 32 men know the issues. Those 32 men had information about the candidates. Over the weekend, those 32 men heard extensively from each of them.
The fact that none of the eight challengers said enough to merit even a single vote speaks volumes, on multiple fronts. It shows that the 32 men realized the status quo is safer than rolling the dice on promises that could be empty, flawed, or incomplete, that the 32 men understand that DeMaurice Smith didn’t dictate the outcome of the 2011 lockout but merely shepherded as best he could those representing a rank and file that ultimately had no desire to miss game checks, and that the 32 men understand, even though the CBA expires in six seasons, that the struggle against a league that wasn’t humbled but emboldened by one of its worst scandals ever continues, day in and day out.
The 32 men have at all times had much more information than the rest of us (although plenty of information about the NFLPA’s finances is available via public filings the union is required by federal law to make every year). The 32 men had the outcome of comprehensive background checks for all candidates, including one performed on the man they unanimously re-elected. And the 32 men were surely well aware of specific concerns raised on Friday by Nancy Armour of USA Today.
Jim Acho didn’t even go to Hawaii to make his presentation in person. Liz Mullen of SportsBusiness Journal reported over the weekend that Acho explained he has a trial on Monday. If Acho wasn’t able to negotiate a short continuance from the presiding judge given this job opportunity of a lifetime, how would he fare against the NFL?
John Stufflebeam, whose platform provided before the election to the NFLPA lacked specifics and details about what he’d do for the players, was (as Armour put it) “demoted by the Navy for lying about an affair that included allegations of having sex in the White House.” (Was that wrong?)
Sean Gilbert has “100 percent permanent disability as a result of a cumulative trauma injury to various parts of his body” but openly supported in his closing remarks an 18-game regular season. (Also, if he has 100-percent permanent disability, how can he work for the NFLPA?)
Jason Belser remained quietly in DeMaurice Smith’s inner circle until the final day for submitting nominations to challenge him, sending a potentially potent message of disloyalty that apparently overcame any damage to Smith from the attempted coup.
Robert Griffith, one of the two challengers who accepted the open invitation to appear on PFT Live, offered during that interview a small handful of talking points that lacked appeal. He justified the removal of DeMaurice Smith by pointing out that lawyers are hired and fired all the time, and Griffith explained repeatedly that he was qualified for the job because he had a vested interest, because he used to play in the NFL.
Arthur McAfee, a former in-house lawyer at the NFLPA, probably gained no traction against Smith because McAfee was directly involved in negotiating the current labor deal, making it hard for him to run on the notion that the current CBA is a bad deal.
Robert London seemed to simply be rolling the dice, a self-described agent who lacks the certification to negotiate player contracts with NFL teams.
Andrew Smith, a practicing lawyer, wanted to wage all legal fights against the NFL with in-house lawyers, an approach that overlooks the success the NFL has had over the years by relying on the expertise of Jeffrey Kessler and others who spend all of their professional lives litigating cases. Plenty of companies have learned over the years that this isn’t the best way to handle the ever-present docket of in-court controversies.
Ultimately, none of these eight men could muster even a single vote. Whether anyone agrees or disagrees with the person chosen by the 32 voters, the message sent by the unanimous outcome was clear and strong and important for the short-term (and arguably the long-term) interests of the NFL Players Association.
