Like most labor disputes, both sides are at fault. I tend to fall more in line with the owners' side than the players'. I know the owners are making hundreds of millions of dollars each season, but they are the business owners. That is their right to make money. The players think that they have a right to what the owners make. This drives me crazy. Why are they so entitled to this money? Is it because they are the ones out on the field making it possible for the owners to make the money? Is it because they can't manage their money properly so they need more and more to survive? I don't know the exact answer to these questions, but don't think they have that right to the money.
If it is because they are the ones making the money for the owners, then wake up and recognize their place in the working world. All businesses are set up so that the people that actually do the work that makes money for the owners of the company make less money. You work at McDonald's, you make a lot less than those that run the company. You work at most other places and you make less than the manager and you have no say in how much they pay you. Athletes think somehow they belong in a different category than everyone else in this world. That somehow their place is higher than everyone else. Some even make more than those that are in charge of them (coaches, general managers, etc...). Then when they don't get exactly what they THINK they deserve, they hold out and whine and cry about how they are somehow worth more than they really are. They infect the locker room and ruin a franchise instead of thinking of others and their team. It used to be that was the exception, but now it is quickly becoming the rule. Why should they be treated any different than you and I and others and then act like they are the same as you and I? If they put themselves on a higher plane, then stop acting like they are on the same plane as the rest of us. Don't tell me how they are in the same position as normal people (Adrian Peterson) because they aren't.
They make enough money to survive their entire lives off of one year's salary if they were good with the money. I don't buy into the notion that because they spend more because they make more, so it all works itself out. Somehow, if they managed their money, a lot of this labor dispute would go away. They want this and that and then some more, but if they managed their money during their careers, they would have sufficient for post career living. They get health insurance, pension, and other post-retirement benefits. Maybe instead of buying lavish houses, cars, flying first class, staying in fancy hotels, taking lavish vacations, try a 401k, a savings account (several since they make so much money), an IRA or 2 or 3 or 4. Live off of the necessities instead of wants. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
When players say this isn't about the money, but how they are treated by the owners, they lie. When it came down to it, revenue (money) sharing was the biggest reason the players walked away from the game. They wanted the owners to open their books (money) to prove why the owners wanted a larger share of the (you guessed it) money. When they couldn't have access to the owners' financial (money) books, they pulled the trigger to decertify. So it is about the money. They want more of it. Sadly if there really are issues with how owners are treating them, then they would let that continue for more money. I see it as the owners are only mistreating them because they don't want to pay them more money.
Owners are also at fault, but I think it is because they are a part of the upper class that everyone below them wants to take down. That is society's way of doing things. Take down those that have what we want. If we can't have it, then they shouldn't have it either.