The year is 1993. The Dallas Cowboys are fresh off a Super Bowl win over the Buffalo Bills. They are lead by star running back and rushing champion, Emmitt Smith. They look to return to the Super Bowl and etch their names in history as one of the few teams to be crowned NFL champs back to back. But there was one glaring issue before the season kicked off: Emmitt Smith’s contract. The Cowboys would owe the best running back in the league $465,000 for the next year of his career, a pitiful amount for a player of his stature. Knowing how short a running back’s career can be, Emmitt Smith did the only thing he could to get the money he deserved: He sat out. His hold-out lasted two games into the regular season and was ended swiftly when the Cowboys dropped both games. Knowing no team at that time had ever started 0–2 and won a championship, owner Jerry Jones reluctantly gave him a shiny new deal that paid $13.6 million a year. And wouldn’t you know it, the Cowboys became the first team to win a Super Bowl after an 0–2 start with Emmitt Smith leading the league in rushing. This was a landmark win for all pro sports players, as history will show you cases of teams disregarding the wants of players for their benefit. Now the situation isn’t so bleak, as players have a solid handle on their future thanks to guys like Emmitt Smith. Despite the progress, history is about to repeat itself in Dallas with Ezekiel Elliot and now is a good time to discuss player empowerment.
In January 2019, New Orleans Pelicans’ star Anthony Davis had enough of the organization’s losing ways and demanded a trade. His decision shocked many; It wasn’t even granted until six months later, but the sheer audacity to request a trade was unheard of just a decade or two ago. Teams used to throw players around and make them play in the systems they were forced into. Rookies and most unessential players to a roster still deal with this. The overarching theme: Leverage. A player’s worth to their team can be the bargaining chip that gives them a massive raise or grants them a trade to another team. A lack of leverage means you have to keep at it in your current situation to get leverage and acclaim, it’s a natural motivator. But, after the Emmitt Smith situation, players started becoming more and more aware of their value and used it to get the money they deserve. It has evolved to the point where a player doesn’t need to wait out their contract to get a change of scenery, but rather flex their worth. This is fantastic news for pro athletes, but it has its stipulations for fans of the sport, such as:
· Super-teams become easier to form if contracts aren’t a factor, which hinders competition.
· Your favorite player could be gone in an instant if the organization isn’t making them abundantly comfortable.
· Hold-outs can cause missed games, which fans paid good money to watch.
So, what solutions do we have? Players can just leave whenever they please, and organizations can’t pay everyone a max deal. The answer lies in basic respect. Teams need to stop cheap-skating players to get ahead in the business. The salary cap was invented so that teams would not overspend, but it is not an excuse to be a cheapskate. Especially when they have salary-cap experts and accountants that can manage the situations regarding contracts. This means teams need to be content with the fact they can’t keep every player. It’s a business, and I see it as respectful when a team lets a player go to find a deal they can’t provide. Respect between the organization and player are at an all-time low, as players feel dispensable, and management feels like a joke when a player asks for a trade. This is a solvable problem and it is up to franchises around the sports world to respect the players that make them their money. In turn, we will have less off-field distractions like contracts and more competitive leagues.
