One thing to keep in mind ... the proposed CBA was not drafted unilaterally. It was drafted by committees of owners AND players. That's why it is called a "collective" bargaining agreement. The players would be getting quite a few concessions they have been wanting for years including a greater percentage of revenues, third party consideration of punishments, elimination of marijuana testing, further reduction of "in pad" practices, increased roster and practice squad sizes, an additional IR player that can be recalled, team option fifth year FULLY guaranteed (was just injury guaranteed), etc.

the purposed CBA was drafted unilaterally by the league... but sure YOU have the inside info...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Aka3jmdHsRU

The video you posted confirms that negotiations have been going on for the past ten months. Over that time the player union identified several key items that had to be included in any final agreement. The proposed agreement approved by the owners includes most of those items. That by definition isn't unilateral. Now it is in the hands of the player representatives to either accept the proposal crafted over those several months as is or introduce changes.

The CBA was drafted by the league, without player input, unilaterally by the league. Your making this sound like it’s a done deal but the players have yet to start picking it apart.

The proposed CBA does not favor the top 5% of the individuals economically, but for players drafted in rounds two and later it would mean immediate increases in pay and added incentives according to Mike Garafolo on NFL Network. The players coming out against the proposal are all in that upper 5% of the player economic structure ... unsurprisingly. According to Garafolo the union has been negotiating on behalf of that "rank and file" which make up that other 95%.