Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Ok so what do you guys think about this...

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Trying to fix something that isn't broken.

They expanded the playoffs in 1981 and it had terrible results.

The 17 game season is just down right stupid. It would mean one team would have one more home or road game, completely skewing the perfect balance of 16 games.

To put it simple, the owners of this league suck and are greedy as hell just trying to find more ways to make more money.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

here's an idea NFLPA, find a way to not allow Goddell to be judge, jury and executioner

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

He's not.

The owners are the ones deciding the CBA and drafted it.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Saints fans are known around the league as WHINERS!! :rofl: :rofl:

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Actually, that is part of the new CBA proposal.

CBA would hand most discipline decisions to neutral decision maker

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Wrong. The current proposed CBA was drafted by the owners AND the players' committee. It has been approved by the owners and is now going to be presented to the players as a whole for possible ratification.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

I love the idea of the 17 week season. It means more NFL football for me and that's a good thing. I laid out how it would work a few weeks ago and from what I am hearing it is almost identical to what I had proposed. The key is the extra game would be on a neutral site. Every team would have eight home and away games. The extra game would be against a team in the other conference, in a division you are not facing that season, that finished in the same divisional position.

The 7th playoff team is a win for the same reason. One more game to watch each Saturday and Sunday of wildcard weekend! And it won't water things down. In most years the extra team in has as good of or better record than one of the four division winner getting the automatic slot.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

I guess you have to "find" a way to let the damn Cowgirls in perhaps :rolleyes:.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

J.J. Watt Voices Thoughts on New CBA Proposal: 'Hard No'

https://www.si.com/nfl/2020/02/21/jj...oposal-hard-no

Watt is not alone in voicing his concerns on the proposal. San Francisco 49ers cornerback Richard Sherman supported the Texans' star on social media. Others, including Jaguars running back Leonard Fournette. Packers left tackle David Bakhtiari have also raised possible concerns.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Ok now this I do like...

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Well, duh! The NFL is a business. In business you look for ways to increase revenues. They have been doing this for decades. This is why it is the most successful sports league in the world.

And you apparently are oblivious to the fact that no team will have more home games than any other. The extra game would be on a neutral field thus giving more fans the opportunity to attend an NFL game in person. Every team will still play eight home and away. In fact, this would eliminate some of those "home" games being played in London, Japan or Mexico. Once again, a good thing for fans.

And what terrible results are you referring to with the expansion of the playoffs?

:confused:

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

The vocal minority. From my understanding most players are in favor as it will give them an extra paycheck. This isn't as important to the elite few like Watt and Sherman, but to the average player that may only be in the league for a few years it is huge.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

So do the players. I mean what would be so bad about extra weeks of having NFL football to enjoy?

One more thing, the proposed CBA will also eliminate testing for marijuana. Once again, another goal of the NFLPA.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Not eliminate, narrow the window for marijuana testing.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

It would be removed from the list of banned substances and "National Football League players would no longer face the possibility of being suspended from games just for testing positive for marijuana".

It might as well be "eliminated" if it is no longer banned and carries no suspensions, don't you think?

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

There are no details yet, but "two of the key terms in the proposed CBA are an overall reduction in on-field fines and a reduction in club fines."

Union says fines will be reduced in new CBA

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...-cba-proposal/

They should reject it.

Lockout incoming.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

It goes to a vote of the full union membership. The elite few players coming out vocally against are not the ones making the decision. The rank and file players are the ones that will receive the most good from the proposal. And it gets approved at one vote over 50%. We'll see. As for a lockout, there is over a year before an agreement needs to be reached. The current CBA remains in affect through the end of the 2020 season in March 2021.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

I'd like to see the NFLPA negotiate a little more. Get it down to 2 preseason games and up to 57/50 for the roster size and then it sounds alright.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

I haven’t heard a single player in favor of this.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

You've only heard from the top 5%, I assume. It is the rank and files that are in favor. They'll get an immediate 20% raise and given they only average four years in the game it is only four extra games in their career. Commentators on NFL Radio have said they are hearing from those players and they are excited about the possibility. Your Shermans and Watts are not the players being helped here. Yet they are the ones trying to shoot it down. The younger players, like Jamal Adams, have been very supportive so far and even got into a little twitter spat with Sherman.

In fact, don't forget the 6-5 vote by the players' executive committee. That means five high profile players voted to recommend it to the general membership. The other six okay'd it as a draft since they helped negotiate the terms to this point even though they didn't recommend it.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

The Detroit Lions union representative to the NFLPA is linebacker Devon Kennard.

Earlier this week, NFL owners voted and approved the principal elements of a new collective bargaining agreement.

The next step involved the NFL Players Association holding a conference call on Friday to discuss the potential changes to the collective bargaining agreement.

Collectively, the NFLPA has decided to hold off on voting until next week.

Kennard expressed on social media that he was unhappy some players in the league took a hard stance against the new agreement.

"I’m not going to lie a hard NO stance by some players that I’m seeing is surprising me. Not saying I like everything about the deal but it’s worth serious discussion IMO," Kennard tweeted.

Kennard is a respected veteran in the Lions locker room and wants to make sure that his teammates have all the necessary information prior to making his decision on how he will vote.

"All my teammates if you have an opinion on proposed CBA or want more information on it. Hit my line ASAP," Kennard tweeted. "I want to make sure my vote represents the majority of our locker room."

__________________________________________

As I mentioned earlier, it is a vocal few who are hard set against the proposal. Most of the players would benefit greatly, however. As would retirees who have no vote.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Well, that's a non-starter...

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

The other 90% would get get their 20% increased game check like the other 16 weeks. Of course, as the story points out, those 10% can negotiate for more than the $250K.

Those "non-starters" make up that 90% would benefit directly by the proposed CBA.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

There is nothing about the NFL that approaches the definition of socialism. Thank God.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

That player can still get his $1M game check. It simply has to be negotiated.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Renegotiate again? On a case by case basis? Well that's sounds like more corrupt socialism...

Well, guess we'll find out if the nuevo-millionaires will agree...

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

You can love this deal, if you wish. But to say it wouldn't water things down is just false. The more teams that get in, the more watered down it becomes, even if you personally like it. When you add more water to gravy, what happens? Nothing?

I can't imagine how one could say more playoff teams does NOT water it down. We've had teams with losing records win divisions, because the salary cap has already watered things down. Now you want more crappy teams in? You have to be literally addicted to football to want to watch, just for the sake of "it's football". When my team is out, or not affected in some way by a game that is on, I'm not watching.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

i just find it funny how 8 years ago the league crippled the Saints in the name of player safety and now they are going to add another game to the regular season and playoffs ..... money talks

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

I just heard on NFL Radio that the proposal has been passed on to general membership for a final vote and it is virtually a certainty that the players will vote to accept the proposal.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

Sounds like one of the vocal few (Sherman/Watt) trying to cause ****. The report that I just relayed said the committee had in fact endorsed the proposal now.

Re: Potential Changes in New CBA
 

There was a vote last night by the 32 team reps and they voted 17-14 with one abstention to pass it on to the general membership. It only takes 50% plus one vote to pass.