The season length is the first condition that the owners want to be adjusted by the players. In fact, they want two more games added to each season to reach 18 so that the level of profitability is maintained. By doing these it means more events are to take place to make more ticket sales, more television revenues, and more endorsements for the teams and so forth thus increasing the income made by the clubs in general. This will however not mean any increase in the players’ allowances or salaries. It is true that there has been a sharp drop of the revenues brought in by the games due to the economic crisis hence the decision to carry out this move (Herring). The players on the other hand feel that more games per season may lead to more injuries and extra commitments hence want a share of the money that is being realized by the extra events. This made the public and the media to take sides concerning this issue only to escalate it further. Since both parties seem to argue from their own perspective and believe to have the rational point it will surely put the stand of further.
Two, is the issue of salaries and players financial compensations. The owners want a salary cap or a limit to which a player can get paid. This they feel will bring more accountability for the players because there have been linking of the exorbitant salaries paid by the NFL to the players with gross misconduct and distractions from the league by the amount of money. In addition to that, the issue of how much increase or decrease of a salary, the latter being seldom, is being formulated so that that it can be renegotiated. This also has been criticized by the players.
Revenue sharing has is one interesting factor that is being put forward by the owner and the players. The owners want to increase the amount they take on credit from the pool from $1 billion to $ 2.4 billion from the total estimated revenue of about nine billion per annum. This has sparked controversy than it was expected since the negotiations held in 2004-2005 season bore nearly the same fruits. But more controversy is that the players want a 50-50 share of the money from the current already too much of 51-49 share. This has been seen by many commentators to be more than enough because the owners are responsible for facilitating the league and organizing the events on top of them being businessmen who need a profit. This labor dispute can be seen as being irrational from the players’ perspective. The increase of the credit by the owners from the revenue pool is justifiable because the money will likely go to other avenues of investment that are to be invested by them. In addition to that the players are not being sensitive to other employees benefiting from the league such as ticket salaries and so on.