|
this is a discussion within the NFL Community Forum; Twitter...
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#2 |
10000 POST CLUB
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,482
|
Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
That’s interesting as it pertains to a seemingly injury-prone Davenport. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
10000 POST CLUB
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,482
|
Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Hu Dat!
|
Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
I like the part about the expanding practice squad plus increased ability to transfer a player a few times back and forth from the practice squad without exposing to waivers. The practice squad could actually be useful now and allow teams to navigate patches of injuries. Much better to promote a practice-level guy that is learning our system to fill a short-term need rather than sign a replacement-level short-timer. More developmental opportunities, which have been sorely missing since the NFL Europe days.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
10000 POST CLUB
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cypress Tx.
Posts: 19,047
|
Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
Seems to be a misunderstanding about the CBA. The owners do not draft the CBA, they do not want the CBA, the CBA provides zero value to the owners. The players strike without the CBA, not the owners.
The NFLPA is a union and they are empowered collectively. The owners ‘might’ have representation there dissing the drafting. |
![]() |
![]() |