The men charged with leading their respective sides through the longest labor impasse in NFL history each have their strengths and weaknesses. When it comes to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, I tend to think he genuinely cares about the league and the game of football but has done a very poor job of being anything other than a parrot for the owners, when he has claimed in the past to be a Commissioner for "all of football" - meaning he is supposed to represent the players and, yes, the fans as well.

Ed Bouchett of the Pittsburgh Post Gazette had an excellent blog post about this today, which came on the heels of a conference call Goodell had on Thursday with Steelers fans.

The whole thing is excellent. Below is just a bit:

It seems to me that if the NFL commissioner could take a more neutral stance, even if his beliefs lean more toward the owners, the sides could get more accomplished in negotiations.

As it stands now, the players distrust Goodell so much that even after this thing is settled, he will be an unpopular commissioner with them. An NFL commissioner is supposed to rule over all of sport, be considered fair to all, including the players.

I’ve known Roger Goodell for many years after I was introduced to him about 20 years ago at a restaurant in Denver, and I’ve talked to him many times since then. I consider him a good and decent man who has the best interests in the sport in doing his job. But taking the lead in doing the PR work for the owners has not enhanced his reputation, especially with the players. And, I believe, many fans can see right through it.

He continues to mention the 18-game season as he did on the phone with Steelers ticket holders yesterday. I was told that was virtually a done deal and even the union was ready to approve it until the players – led by many Steelers – forcefully, publicly and continuously objected to it. Dan Rooney came out on their side and it became a hangup to the point that management has now taken the 18-game schedule off the table for now.

Maybe it’s too late for the NFL commissioner to take a more neutral stance and try to bring both sides together rather than continue to carry the flag for just one, but if he did, this whole mess might be solved more quickly and more equitably than by him continuing what he has been doing.

As I said, be sure to read the whole thing.

Speaking of reading the whole thing, make sure you read this piece from Eric Edholm in its entirety over at Pro Football Weekly regarding the leader of the former players union, DeMaurice Smith. In all honesty, shortly after reading it I contacted Edholm and cursed him out (in the nicest possible way, of course)  - because I had been working on a very similar post and he completely covered what I was trying to convey and said it ten times better than I ever could have.

I started writing last night after getting the girls in bed. I knew De had spoken at Maryland's commencement ceremony yesterday and I had wanted to sit down and read what he had said.

I was not thrilled with the accounts I read.

I have no doubts Smith is a very good litigator. I have no doubt he wants to "win" this thing. What I don't know, and I'm starting to get a sick feeling in my stomach every time I think about it, is whether or not DeMaurice  Smith cares about the game of football - or, indeed, any of the people connected to it other than the people he is charged with representing.

It's hard for me to reconcile some of the rhetoric he chose to use yesterday with someone who claims to "want football".

From his address:

To anybody who thinks for one minute that passion is something is that is cheap and futile, I have two words for them: 'You suck". And for anybody who would ever think that it is the wrong thing to do to care so much that you're willing to risk everything because it is right, reserve those two words for them.

Ok. First of all, the "You suck" part is in reference to a cheer that students at the University of Maryland do. That's not my issue with Smith here.

What I do take exception to - what I find alarming, frankly - is Smith using the phrase "willing to risk everything". Really? You're willing to risk everything? Do you realize that "everything" includes thousands of innocent bystanders? Forget the fans for a second (because you probably already have) but what about the coaches and football staff who had absolutely no say in this?  Or the administrative staffs for NFL clubs that are being forced to take pay cuts or furloughs already? They had nothing to do with any of this, they are already caught in the crossfire - and you're saying you're willing to throw them under the bus to get what you want? Really?

From Edholm's superb piece:

Meanwhile, Smith is waging a different type of battle. He's making it personal and ugly.

"The players understand the fight that they're in," Smith said on WFAN (660 AM in New York City). "Right now they don't want to lay down and be forced to take a deal. They don't believe that it's fair. I can tell you that they resent being lied to. They resent being tricked. They resent the fact that the league has been found now twice to have violated the law. So those are the people that we're inextricably tied to."

And the players now are tied to Smith, for better or worse, to help them get back on the field. So far, I am not sure what he has accomplished. He's a tireless worker, union folks tell me, and I have no doubt that he wants a resolution that will benefit the players he represents. But some of his methods are highly questionable.

I won't go so far as to call Smith an interloper, but his lack of NFL relationships probably has hurt him. And without anything in the way of labor-negotiation experience prior to this battle, it's fair to wonder if he's the right man to be heading up the most significant collective bargaining agreement talks in sports history.

There's no "probably" about it. Smith's "new kid" status has definitely harmed not only him but the entire process.

Some will say "it's only rhetoric" and they would have a point. But we've been hearing this kind of talk from Smith since the infamous "it's war!" quote this past summer. The players have yet to make any kind of counter offer to the league's last real proposal back in March. Instead we're treated to, you guessed it, more rehtoric, with Smith labeling the league's offer "the worst deal in the history of sports." That's all well and good - but instead of offering a counter proposal, something that could possibly move things forward, Smith and the former players union have offered lawsuits and increasingly dangerous rhetoric.

The lockout is where the league has been aiming to get to for the past several years. It's one of the reason's Smith was hired, because his presentation to the players back in Hawaii convinced enough of them that he could and would prevail over Goodell and the owners.

Both Goodell and Smith will have their legacies defined by the outcome of this labor battle. Goodell is a football man who started as an intern in the league offices. Smith is a lawyer who, until a few years ago, had absolutely nothing to do with football.

Its time for these two men, from extremely disparate backgrounds, to start finding common ground before this lockout causes serious damage to those who had absolutely nothing to do with its making.