Dexter Lawrence trade illustrates increasing player power

There was a time, not all that long ago, when the knee-jerk reaction to a player who tried to exit before his contract expired was to play hardball. To resist the player's prerogative. To refrain from setting a "precedent" that others could be tempted to utilize.

The showdown between the Eagles and Terrell Owens from 2005 arose directly from the team's refusal either to address his contract or to trade him to a new team after he had a stellar debut season in Philadelphia.

In the end, the Eagles "won" the battle of wills. But what did they really win? The 2005 season was undermined by the constant distractions that Owens created in an effort to get what he wanted.

Owens was, in hindsight, a trailblazer. He showed what can happen when a team chooses to stubbornly cling to a contract that applies unequal standards to the two parties. If the player isn't playing well enough, the team cuts him. If he's playing better than expected, too bad. You signed a contract.

The most encouraging fact is that Lawrence was able to get what he wanted without it becoming a bigger deal than it needed to be. To the point where the successful exercise of power by the player wasn't even a major headline.

We want volunteers, not hostages. The teams that embrace this message are more likely to accumulate and maintain a locker room full of willing participants. They'll be more likely to create an environment that will cause the best players to continue to be fully engaged.

It's an important point to keep in mind during draft week, when all teams will emerge with a new class of de facto hostages who have been conditioned (or, more accurately, brainwashed) into thinking it's an honor to be told where they'll live and work, regardless of their preferences. From the moment they show up in the building for the first time, the challenge becomes getting them to want to stay for as long as the team considers them to be worthy of roster spots.

Ultimately, all players will leave. It's always better, from the perspective of the employer, for the teams to be able to decide when it's time to end the relationship. The best way to get there is to ensure that the players will want to stick around even after the team has decided that it's in the organization's best interests to move on.