NFL vs. NFLPA Slugfest Is Bad News for Fans

The obvious question stemming from last week’s breakdown in negotiations between the NFL and NFL Players Association is whether the suspension of talks signals an increased likelihood of not just a lockout, but an extended lockout. Our behavioral analysis suggests the answer isn’t a positive one for football fans.

With the suspension of talks, we saw a change in the behavior of representatives from both the NFL and the NFLPA. The commentary from both sides shifted from a focus on the actual issues, to what behavioral analysts refer to as “attacking behavior.” In essence, the slugging-it-out phase of the negotiation began. For example, after the breakdown in talks, NFLPA representative DeMaurice Smith said,

“I believe that the league has taken steps to effectuate a lockout for a very
long time. The players are committed to making sure that does not happen.”

With this statement, Smith is clearly trying to suggest that the current state of affairs is the league’s fault, and not the fault of the players.

Not to be outdone, the league on Monday filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board, alleging the union has not been bargaining in good faith.

While there appeared to be some hope on both sides going into last week’s negotiating session, the breakdown in talks, coupled with a clear behavioral shift by both sides in their treatment of each other, strongly indicates that not only will a deal not get done by March 3, but that this could be a long offseason for football fans. How long? Interestingly, the simple reality here is that, from a behavioral standpoint, the longer the slugging continues – that is, the attacking behavior -- the longer the lockout will be.