MLS Daily has a post up on comments made by Kasey Keller on his personal blog regarding the MLS CBA negotiations. Keller's tone isn't to cheery, and he described the sides as far apart on an agreement.
In fact, the exact words he used were "as players we have been told of a probable lockout date of Feb. 1st".
No exactly a confidence builder, that. Now I have a few questions about Kasey's comments, starting with the origin of that potential lockout date. Who exactly told the players to expect a lockout? Kasey doesn't say, though I'm guessing it wasn't the league that dropped that knowledge; if the two sides are so far apart that the word "lockout" is being whispered, then the owners aren't exactly going to give the players a courtesy call, now are they?
The other question involves that word "lockout". Now, I can't be positive Keller was being careful enough with "lockout" versus "strike" to be sure about the validity of his statement. But if we take his comments at face value, then Kasey's given us some insight here; after all of the talk about a possible strike, Keller is now telling us that it will be the owners and not the players who will decide to shut the league down come February 1st.
Despite the end result being the same, that the league will shut down during the labor action, there is a significant difference between a lockout and a strike. One implies that management sees labor's demands as unreasonable and shuts down the business to force them to concede; the other is done by the players to give management a clear message that change must be made in their favor. Neither is good, and it really depends on your point of view as to whether either is justifiable.
Nevertheless, I still haven't reached any level of frantic concern. It's mid-December, and there is still plenty of time before the season starts to get a compromise done (forget that January 31st date expiration date; it doesn't really matter). I'm slightly concerned that the season might not start on time, but I'm holding on the belief that the two sides will come together on something relatively satisfactory to both sides before any serious damage is done.
Eventually, one or both of the parties involved will need to drop the feeling of righteousness that they seem to possess at the moment. Fairly soon, meaning in the next sixty days soon, it won't matter who is right any more; it will only be about getting an agreement done so that a season of Major League Soccer isn't completely lost.
Again, and it's been stated in many quarters by many intelligent people, there's no way to know if the league and the sport can survive a lost year. The general sense is that MLS would be committing suicide if they abruptly stopped whatever momentum they've created, thereby risking the league's existence. Still, if the players demands are unreasonable (and they don't seem to be from here, but remember that none of us outside observers have all of the pertinent information), then the owners cannot afford to agree to a CBA that will ultimately affect the league's ability to do business as a marginal sports product in the United States and Canada.
