Player power in the NFL

Last December, NBA superstar Lebron James referred to NFL owners as “old white men” who have a “slave owner mentality.” The statement is a lot to unravel, but James was trying to clarify that NFL owners hold players hostage, unlike the NBA, where players hold the power.

Every year the NBA has its free agency frenzy with franchises begging players with max-slot contacts. Look at the Clippers. They literally let Kawhi Leonard play general manager, and recruit Paul George via trade with Oklahoma City. After all, the only reason Leonard went to the Clippers is because they gave him what he wanted — the opportunity build a super team. 

But in pro football, who should hold the power? Well, like in every story… there are two sides. 

Last season, former Pittsburgh Steeler and current New York Jets running back, Le’veon Bell, didn’t play one down of football due to a contract dispute. Bell wanted more money than was on the table. He claimed that his elite status carrying the ball, and receiving skills upped his overall value. The Steelers didn’t buy it and let Bell become a free agent. The organization didn’t think Bell’s asking price was worth it, venturing the star running back was intending to “set the market” to become the highest paid back in the league.

Bell turned 27 in February, and with a few solid seasons under his belt, only time will tell how many more good years he has left carrying the rock. The Jets bit on the opportunity and signed Bell to a four-year, $52.5 million ($27 million guaranteed) contract, making him the second highest paid back behind the Rams’ Todd Gurley. Gurley signed for an average of $14.375 million annually, a smidge higher than Bell. The amount Bell signed for was actually less than what the Steelers had offered him initially, making his hold-out year a complete waste of time. 

Currently, running backs are some of the most underpaid star athletes in pro sports. Not that they aren’t making millions, but when you compare them to elite quarterbacks, or receivers, they still don’t get anywhere near the same amount. Nick Foles was the fairy tale story that brought the Philadelphia Eagles its first Super Bowl. Foles was the backup for Carson Wentz at the time, but when Wentz went down, Foles came in and led Philly all the way. Last season, Wentz tore his ACL for the second time, and Foles came in to lead the Eagles to a playoff win, proving that his Super Bowl run was no fluke. Foles signed a four-year $88 million deal with the Jacksonville Jaguars — a lot of money for a guy once viewed as a backup QB.

Most recently, the New Orleans Saints’ number-one receiver, Michael Thomas, signed a five-year extension worth $100 million with $61 million guaranteed. If Thomas lives up to all the incentives in the contract, he could walk away with $20 million in his pocket. The deal established the market for wide receivers, meaning that if teams want to keep their stars, they will have to break the bank to do so.

So why don’t running backs get the same options? It’s simple. Owners don’t want to pay for those who eventually will run out of steam.This is where James’s comments come in to play.

Top backs like Bell take a beating, and owners see them as expendable quantities when it comes down to the nitty gritty. We are seeing this unfold again this season with the Dallas Cowboys’ Ezekiel Elliot, who is refusing to play until a deal is done. 

Elliot has been the go-to option for the side that has the star on their helmet. He has led the league in rushing two out of his first three seasons, and would have led the league in all three years had he not been suspended his second season. Currently, Elliot is tied to his rookie contract that will pay him $3.9 million this season, not a lot for one of the NFL’s premier stars. The Cowboys said they do not intend to reset the market for running backs after Bell and Gurley’s contracts. They believe playing for the Cowboys, known as “America’s Team” is enough reward in itself.

Sounds like James had a point. Owners don’t want to pay the price stars ask because they feel their best years are behind them, and believe they can get another player just as efficient, and pay stars in other positions the higher asking price. But owners also have that right. At the end of the day, they are the ones plugging in the money to build up the franchise. So if they see a business option that isn’t the best going forward, and have other ways to use that money, they can do so. 

It seems James was on to something, because the Elliot fiasco proves owners listening to what players want is out the door if they don’t believe they are worth the price. It will be interesting to see how the Elliot dilemma unfolds, but one thing is clear: The owners control the power in the NFL. So if you are a young football player carrying the rock with a bright future, it may be best to switch up your position if you want to get paid one day.