As a fan, please, please do not use this argument unless you also say "I am willing to become a long-term fan of the CFL and the UFL." Otherwise, do you see how that makes your point look silly?
Again, disclaimer: I am not trying to "take the players' side" on this one, so much as point out what an irritating argument it is. The point being that "NFL player" does not really compare well to "construction worker" or "factory worker" in terms of job mobility, and that really ought to be obvious to anyone but a complete dingbat. It's not a liquid market where you can just go find another comparable job -- you have ONE option.
Granted, it's not like it's a horrible option -- but essentially controlling the whole job market for the industry gives management a completely different kind of leverage than it would have in a lockout of, say, an auto plant. It's completely apples and oranges, yet some people are eager to make that comparison -- and even seem to think they're smart for making that comparison -- just because both jobs are "union." Please give everyone, including yourself, a little more credit than that.
Personally, I keep going back and forth on which side is more greedy, and have basically reached the conclusion that they just both flat-out suck.