The NFL Players Association soon will be selecting a new executive director. Its players remain in the dark.
Per a league source, multiple players have attempted to get information from their team-elected representatives, but to no avail. At least one player representative has told the players on his team that any questions should be directed to NFLPA president JC Tretter, and that the representative in question has no information regarding the status of the process.
It shouldn’t be this way. There should be real transparency in the process of electing a new union leader, especially among the members of the union. The players vote for the representatives; the players are the representatives’ constituents. As the player representatives prepare to cast ballots on the next executive director, the representatives should know the names of the candidates -- and they should be able to share that information with the players.
It’s unclear who’s running the show. Some believe it’s being managed by Tretter and the union’s executive committee, which consists of multiple players no longer in the league.
For the vast majority of the players in the league, they have no information as to the current candidates to lead the union. Is it someone who currently works for the union? Is it an external candidate? When, if ever, will information be disseminated to players?
The union’s effort to keep the process shrouded in secrecy is aided by the fact that most players don’t pay attention to these matters. Beyond not knowing who the candidates are to become the next executive director, multiple players were not aware that the current executive director is DeMaurice Smith.
It’s unknown whether there will be any formal presentations from the candidates to the board of player representatives. It’s unknown whether they’ll even be given anything other than a couple of names (if that many) and a recommendation as to the person for whom they should vote.
While the people who are running the process might have good intentions (and there’s no reason at this point to think they don’t), the complete and total lack of transparency naturally creates mistrust.
In past elections, there have been too many candidates, and too much transparency. This is the other end of the extreme, with a complete absence of information for the players. They should know the names of the candidates, if they want. They should have a chance to do some research, if they choose. And their elected representatives should have basic answers to simple questions like “who are the finalists?” when the process by all appearances is coming to a conclusion.
Of course, if most players don’t care about this, most fans won’t, either. But it’s important for a healthy tension to exist between management and labor. If the process skews too far in one direction, there eventually will be a backlash. It’s better for the game for the league and the union to coexist when possible but to conflict when necessary.
One of the justifications we’ve heard for extreme secrecy is that the league would attempt to influence the process toward its preferred candidate, if the league was aware of the names of the finalists for the job. Ideally, however, there would be no finalists that the league prefers. The process would (and should) whittle down the universe of interested parties to those who will always stand up to Big Shield, when necessary.
Given the way the league does business, its pretty much necessary all the time.
