Snap Judgments

Musings, observations and the occasional insight as we await the start of next week's NFL annual meeting in Palm Beach , Fla. ...

? I can't believe we're here again already. Two short years later. It seems just yesterday that the NFL and the players' union -- after twice delaying the start of the 2006 free-agency period -- were staring into the abyss of a labor stand-off that centered on whether the two sides would extend their collective bargaining agreement or face the prospect of life without a salary cap in 2007.

Almost before the league and its fans collectively exhaled in relief upon reaching a crisis-averting, six-year CBA extension through 2011, someone bothered to read the fine print and realized that a clause allowed either side to opt out of the deal in November 2008, which would start the clock anew counting down to an uncapped NFL in 2010. No wonder commissioner Paul Tagliabue didn't waste any time in announcing his retirement after what was then seen as his parting gift of labor peace to the league he presided over for 17 years. He knew what the deal was, or wasn't in this case.

And so, here we are. Team owners are poised to do just that -- opt out of the deal in less than eight months -- and the rhetoric coming from both sides already portends a stare-down that could dominate the league's attention for most of the coming two years. You can expect to hear plenty of ominous labor talk from the owners at the league meeting in Palm Beach , after players' union chief Gene Upshaw got the saber-rattling festivities off to an emphatic start at the Super Bowl by dropping the magic words of "strike, lockout and union decertification'' into his comments at an NFLPA news conference.

And that, dear readers, is how a supposed six-year labor agreement can be made, in effect, to last only two. It's understood that as NFL fans, you don't really want to read about it. Rest assured, I'd rather not write about it. But it's an unavoidable subject that is more than just looming on the horizon. It's already here. Again. Cue up your gratuitous Groundhog Day reference of choice.

The coming dissection of revenue-sharing models, the disparity between higher and lower-revenue teams, and the thorny issue of how to equitably divide non-football income will not captivate anyone. It's enough to make you pine for another chapter in the Spygate files, or the debate over the players' personal conduct issue, or anything that doesn't have the letters C-B-A (in that order) included in it. We'd all much rather focus on PATs, or INTs, or even YAC (yards after the catch in the semi-new vernacular).

But unfortunately we're not going to be able to escape the league's labor issue. And it will be an ugly and protracted showdown, with both sides digging in up to their eyebrows and talking about it in terms of a battle that must be won. Many ultimatums will be fired off on both sides, and after a while, they'll all sound like so much "Blah, blah, blah.'' So everybody now, on three: Open palm, smack forehead. Repeat as often as necessary. If only we could opt out of the whole messy saga.

? Can I be the first to dub the new proposal to out-law a player's hair from obscuring either his name or number on the back of his jersey the " Troy Polamalu Rule?'' Though others have joined the parade, the Pittsburgh safety's wild mop of hair got this whole issue started. Three years ago or so, Dallas safety Roy Williams inspired the horse-collar rule, which outlawed his favorite style of tackling from behind. What is it about these precedent-setting safeties?

It's kind of amusing to hear NFL competition committee co-chairman Rich McKay of the Falcons say the rule proposal would not make anyone cut his hair, only stuff it up inside the helmet. I'd like to see Polamalu manage to keep his unruly mane inside a helmet without at least a trim. Same goes for the players who prefer the dreadlock look. There's only so much room in those helmets.

? Predicting the outcome of rule-change votes at an NFL owners meeting is a fool's game, but my sense is that the league's competition committee is firmly -- if not unanimously -- behind the push to re-seed the playoff field, allowing wild-card teams with a better record than a division champion to host a first-round game. Whenever the competition committee strongly recommends a proposal, it generally gets adopted by the full ownership.