|
|
Post by jb456 on Feb 21, 2020 15:10:18 GMT -5
As a worker who has been without a contract the last 9 nine with the company I work for trying to screw the unions over I agree with the players. Adding an extra game the the season and another game to the playoffs is going to make the owners a ton of more money and they only want to increase the players money by one %. I was being sarcastic. It's a shit deal for the players and the owners haven't even really begun to pit the haves vs have nots players against one another. That's when it will all start to get interesting. what makes it a shit deal? 1) If they don't approve the extra regular season game, they get an additional 1% of the revenue, 1.5% if they agree to an extra game. 2) Most teams don't sign under-performing high draft picks to 5 year options and those first round players that outperform their contracts would get more money. This 5th year option is becoming more irrelevant every year with more and more players holding out. 3) Reduced penalties for blown tests. 4) The players are out of their minds if they think the owners are going to reduce the power of their sheriff Goodel... And LMFAO to anyone who compares their own unions, like Local 3, to the the ****ing NFL players union. |
|
|
|
Post by straightrazorman on Feb 21, 2020 15:12:53 GMT -5
I'm wondering how much this proposed CBA gives the commissioner power to ruin players' lives. Hopefully less than he has now. From the OP. 4. Commissioner Roger Goodell would have authority only over integrity of game matters. Personal conduct violations would go to a neutral arbitrator. |
|
|
|
Post by giantlegacy on Feb 21, 2020 15:15:48 GMT -5
I'm wondering how much this proposed CBA gives the commissioner power to ruin players' lives. Hopefully less than he has now. From the OP. 4. Commissioner Roger Goodell would have authority only over integrity of game matters. Personal conduct violations would go to a neutral arbitrator.Lol @ integrity of game matters |
|
|
|
Post by nygiantsfan1029 on Feb 21, 2020 15:18:56 GMT -5
I was being sarcastic. It's a shit deal for the players and the owners haven't even really begun to pit the haves vs have nots players against one another. That's when it will all start to get interesting. what makes it a shit deal? 1) If they don't approve the extra regular season game, they get an additional 1% of the revenue, 1.5% if they agree to an extra game. 2) Most teams don't sign under-performing high draft picks to 5 year options and those first round players that outperform their contracts would get more money. This 5th year option is becoming more irrelevant every year with more and more players holding out. 3) Reduced penalties for blown tests. 4) The players are out of their minds if they think the owners are going to reduce the power of their sheriff Goodel... And LMFAO to anyone who compares their own unions, like Local 3, to the the ****ing NFL players union. The 1/1.5% increase compared to what the owners are going to make off those extra games are peanuts. |
|
|
|
Post by Sarcasman on Feb 21, 2020 15:24:52 GMT -5
I was being sarcastic. It's a shit deal for the players and the owners haven't even really begun to pit the haves vs have nots players against one another. That's when it will all start to get interesting. what makes it a shit deal? 1) If they don't approve the extra regular season game, they get an additional 1% of the revenue, 1.5% if they agree to an extra game. 2) Most teams don't sign under-performing high draft picks to 5 year options and those first round players that outperform their contracts would get more money. This 5th year option is becoming more irrelevant every year with more and more players holding out. 3) Reduced penalties for blown tests. 4) The players are out of their minds if they think the owners are going to reduce the power of their sheriff Goodel... And LMFAO to anyone who compares their own unions, like Local 3, to the the ****ing NFL players union. I think it's light on health care, guaranteed injury care, long term health insurance for current and former players off the top of my head. It's increasing the number of games by 6% and the money by 1%....essentially it will continue to remove the middle class from the NFL and further exacerbate the economic inequities. I agree the players union is nothing like a local trade union, well except for the management corruption. The NFL PA looks very much like the US economy. Wealthy/Poor and almost no one in between. Real unions usually do a better job protecting its members than the NFLPA. |
|
|
|
Post by jb456 on Feb 21, 2020 15:36:49 GMT -5
what makes it a shit deal? 1) If they don't approve the extra regular season game, they get an additional 1% of the revenue, 1.5% if they agree to an extra game. 2) Most teams don't sign under-performing high draft picks to 5 year options and those first round players that outperform their contracts would get more money. This 5th year option is becoming more irrelevant every year with more and more players holding out. 3) Reduced penalties for blown tests. 4) The players are out of their minds if they think the owners are going to reduce the power of their sheriff Goodel... And LMFAO to anyone who compares their own unions, like Local 3, to the the ****ing NFL players union. The 1/1.5% increase compared to what the owners are going to make off those extra games are peanuts. If they don't agree to the 17 games, its just 2 additional wildcard playoff games. Also, it's a percentage increase of the entire bucket. For example, if the total revenue is $5,000,000,000, under the old agreement, the players would be entitled to $2,350,000,000 at 47%. Under the new agreement, the players would be entitled to 48% of $5,250,000,000 (Extra $250 Million) for 2 additional playoff games = $2,520,000,000 (An incremental $170 Million dollars or roughly the salary cap of 1 additional NFL team). So it's not just the 1% bro, it's the 1% of a bigger bucket. I work with numbers if you haven't realized..... |
|
|
|
Post by jb456 on Feb 21, 2020 15:40:12 GMT -5
what makes it a shit deal? 1) If they don't approve the extra regular season game, they get an additional 1% of the revenue, 1.5% if they agree to an extra game. 2) Most teams don't sign under-performing high draft picks to 5 year options and those first round players that outperform their contracts would get more money. This 5th year option is becoming more irrelevant every year with more and more players holding out. 3) Reduced penalties for blown tests. 4) The players are out of their minds if they think the owners are going to reduce the power of their sheriff Goodel... And LMFAO to anyone who compares their own unions, like Local 3, to the the ****ing NFL players union. I think it's light on health care, guaranteed injury care, long term health insurance for current and former players off the top of my head. It's increasing the number of games by 6% and the money by 1%....essentially it will continue to remove the middle class from the NFL and further exacerbate the economic inequities. I agree the players union is nothing like a local trade union, well except for the management corruption. The NFL PA looks very much like the US economy. Wealthy/Poor and almost no one in between. Real unions usually do a better job protecting its members than the NFLPA. See my reply right before this one. The owners are ceding 1%-1.5% of their take. The players are still getting 47% of the 6% (1 incremental game) + they are getting an additional 1% - 1.5% of additional revenue from the owners side of the bucket. |
|
|
|
Post by trueblueatnyc on Feb 21, 2020 15:50:56 GMT -5
For all of you who haven't been watching this matter closely the NFL owners approved the terms of a potential new CBA between the league and the NFL Players Association. Here are some key elements of the new agreement: 1. Moving to a 17-game regular season 2. Expand the playoff field to 14 teams starting in 2020 3. Players receive 48 percent of total revenue or 48.5 if a 17-game season is approved. (It was 47% under the previous agreement) 4. Commissioner Roger Goodell would have authority only over integrity of game matters. Personal conduct violations would go to a neutral arbitrator. 5. Fifth-year options would be fully guaranteed and tied to performance, not draft position. 6. Penalties would be reduced for players who test positive for THC, eliminating any game suspensions strictly for positive tests. The testing window for THC would also be narrowed from four months to two weeks at the start of training camp, and the nanogram limit would be increased from 35 to 150. Players have begun tweeting about the so called proposed agreement and none of them were praising the new agreement. For all the optimism there was about a potential deal getting done before the new league year, there is a strong possibility that it won't get done. I'm personally not in favor of having a 17-game season or expanding the the playoffs from 12 to 14 nfl teams. I think that if you expand to 14 teams where you now have 6 teams playing during the wildcard while one team has a bye your giving an unfair advantage to that team. Moreover, you also increase the likelihood of mediocre 8-8 and 7-9 teams of getting into the playoffs a place that is reserved for all the best of the best. What are your guys thoughts on the matter? Thats the whole point though. The #1 seed should get an advantage. Thats the reward for being the best team. Im ok with the 14 teams in. The 17 games is weird. Is it an alternating Home / Away game every other year? What teams is that extra game against? And is it based on how good you were the year before like the outside of divisional games now a days? Id rather them just move to 18 and give an extra bye week and increase the roster size. On the home games, they will likely end up having 16 offsite, or neutral site games in places like London, Mexico and Brazil and other places as well. The NFL knows that going international is really the only area where they can get a larger market share. |
|
|
|
Post by Delicreep on Feb 21, 2020 16:04:11 GMT -5
I was being sarcastic. It's a shit deal for the players and the owners haven't even really begun to pit the haves vs have nots players against one another. That's when it will all start to get interesting. what makes it a shit deal? 1) If they don't approve the extra regular season game, they get an additional 1% of the revenue, 1.5% if they agree to an extra game. 2) Most teams don't sign under-performing high draft picks to 5 year options and those first round players that outperform their contracts would get more money. This 5th year option is becoming more irrelevant every year with more and more players holding out. 3) Reduced penalties for blown tests. 4) The players are out of their minds if they think the owners are going to reduce the power of their sheriff Goodel... And LMFAO to anyone who compares their own unions, like Local 3, to the the ****ing NFL players union. If I were a top player...I would argue it like this: the revenue for 16 games is $1,000,000,000*, or $62,500,00 per game Therefore, the revenue for 17 games will be $1,000,000,000 PLUS an additional $62,500,00 for the extra game. That's a 6.25% increase...but that doesn't really matter to me all that much because... My salary is $16,000,000 for the season, or $1,000,000 per game...increase my pay by $1,000,000 for the extra game, or I am taking a pay cut. But at best, here's the owners offer: Take that $62,500,00 for the extra game, and give the union 48% or $30,000,000 Split that $30, over 32 teams, and each team gets $937,500...not even enough for what I would see as my fair share. I think, very roughly speaking, the increase for me would be $75K, as I get 8% of the cap and I deny doing any real math, but.... *fake number EDIT...and because I hated not knowing, the league revenue would need to be about 14 billion for me to be made whole here, and it's actually about 8. |
|
|
|
Post by TheAnalyst on Feb 21, 2020 16:11:30 GMT -5
I truly don't give a crap how they divide the money. My only concern is over the integrity of the game which has been getting worse over time.
But that's okay because I'm not part of the age group the NFL is targeting any longer.
Are you talking about the NFL? Or MLB? Or the NBA? Its sports now a days while targeting the generation with the attention span of a Basset Hound.  |
|
|
|
Post by Sarcasman on Feb 21, 2020 16:13:02 GMT -5
The 1/1.5% increase compared to what the owners are going to make off those extra games are peanuts. If they don't agree to the 17 games, its just 2 additional wildcard playoff games. Also, it's a percentage increase of the entire bucket. For example, if the total revenue is $5,000,000,000, under the old agreement, the players would be entitled to $2,350,000,000 at 47%. Under the new agreement, the players would be entitled to 48% of $5,250,000,000 (Extra $250 Million) for 2 additional playoff games = $2,520,000,000 (An incremental $170 Million dollars or roughly the salary cap of 1 additional NFL team). So it's not just the 1% bro, it's the 1% of a bigger bucket. I work with numbers if you haven't realized..... I'd agree with that math if the owners removed their operating skim. If not, it's obviously incorrect and then it's a question of whether the % is applied to the pre-skim or post-skim amount. I wasn't aware that the owners gave back their $1 billion dollar "expense credit". If that's the case then yeah, the deal looks a lot better. If not, then my original comment stands. That said, I continue to fully expect the players to eventually accept a worse one. |
|
|
|
Post by giantstepz on Feb 21, 2020 16:24:49 GMT -5
I would vote down a 17 game schedule if I were a player. The greedy owners just use these players as gladiator toys and don't care that the average time in the League is only 3 years. The injuries and concussions are unavoidable. These players all end up broken in various ways. What the Game needs to be adding instead of more games is more players than 53. Players get knocked out through attrition and the cap won't allow enough depth to field adequate replacements. How about a raise in cap space to field a 60-man team? Maybe then they'd stay healthy enough to endure a 17 game schedule.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roosevelt on Feb 21, 2020 19:28:04 GMT -5
I truly don't give a crap how they divide the money. My only concern is over the integrity of the game which has been getting worse over time.
But that's okay because I'm not part of the age group the NFL is targeting any longer.
Are you talking about the NFL? Or MLB? Or the NBA? Its sports now a days while targeting the generation with the attention span of a Basset Hound. Somebody and his friend likes peanut butter. |
|
|
|
Post by TEM on Feb 22, 2020 9:12:08 GMT -5
I would vote down a 17 game schedule if I were a player. The greedy owners just use these players as gladiator toys and don't care that the average time in the League is only 3 years. The injuries and concussions are unavoidable. These players all end up broken in various ways. What the Game needs to be adding instead of more games is more players than 53. Players get knocked out through attrition and the cap won't allow enough depth to field adequate replacements. How about a raise in cap space to field a 60-man team? Maybe then they'd stay healthy enough to endure a 17 game schedule. Rosters would increase to 48 players from 46 on gameday, with overall rosters going to 55 from 53; practice squads would increase to 14 players in 2022, and 12 this year, up from 10. Teams would be allowed to bring back 3 players from IR. |
|
|
|
Post by jaymas on Feb 22, 2020 11:14:44 GMT -5
No part of me understands this silly need for a 17th game or expanded playoffs.
|
|
|
|
Post by jaymas on Feb 22, 2020 12:59:35 GMT -5
No part of me understands this silly need for a 17th game or expanded playoffs. It's all about money , on both sides. The Owners actually want 18 games but ask for 17 and give up no money but after some negotiating and bargaining will go to a 18 game schedule with expanded playoffs and a reduction of "pre season games" time frame of the season would remain the same but everyone would make a shitload more money. TV rights and advertising ............cha ching!!!!!!!! All so the additional items like expanded rosters and practice teams can all be worked out those are not strike issues. Just to add no Commissioner in his right mind would give up power to run the league specially the NFL. Oh absolutely, same page there. My comment was more about the essence or core structure of the game. I think the NFL playoffs are the best in sports. It's definitely financial motivation. I'd be silly to think there would be some sort of balance between the both. I'd really hate to see the playoff field watered down. |
|
|
|
Post by nick030567 on Feb 22, 2020 17:42:28 GMT -5
No part of me understands this silly need for a 17th game or expanded playoffs. Exactly because there isn't any need at all. It's just all greed. The NFL wants more money and more of peoples time and attention.
The 16 game season, the playoff structure, all of that is perfect. Prior to when the nfl started talking incessantly about an 18 game season, less preseason games, etc....did any of us really extensively think about these things? I think the large marjority of us were fine
I think the only thing the NFL needs to do is turn back the clock on everything (their rules, not just on penalties but also on team practices) to where they were at prior to 2010 or 2011. I'd say from the late 90s until around 2010 is when the NFL was at its best. I mean it had an extensive passing game, smash mouth football was still smash mouth football, you could pretty much still play defense and hit QBs, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roosevelt on Feb 24, 2020 13:43:03 GMT -5
I'm wondering how much this proposed CBA gives the commissioner power to ruin players' lives. Hopefully less than he has now. From the OP. 4. Commissioner Roger Goodell would have authority only over integrity of game matters. Personal conduct violations would go to a neutral arbitrator.I thought Al Riveron is in charge of the integrity of the game, and I’d say he’s done one helluva job. The review of pass interference was handled brilliantly. Hopefully the NFL will allow Al to review every holding call as well. |
|
|
|
Post by DandyDon on Feb 24, 2020 13:53:26 GMT -5
From the OP. 4. Commissioner Roger Goodell would have authority only over integrity of game matters. Personal conduct violations would go to a neutral arbitrator.I thought Al Riveron is in charge of the integrity of the game, and I’d say he’s done one helluva job. The review of pass interference was handled brilliantly. Hopefully the NFL will allow Al to review every holding call as well. Were there any pass interference or no calls overturned? I don't remember seeing it in the games I watched. |
|
|
|
Post by Fletch842 on Feb 24, 2020 13:54:41 GMT -5
I thought Al Riveron is in charge of the integrity of the game, and I’d say he’s done one helluva job. The review of pass interference was handled brilliantly. Hopefully the NFL will allow Al to review every holding call as well. Were there any pass interference or no calls overturned? I don't remember seeing it in the games I watched. I think 3 or 4 were overturned, something like that. |
|
|
|
Post by Roosevelt on Feb 24, 2020 15:06:30 GMT -5
I thought Al Riveron is in charge of the integrity of the game, and I’d say he’s done one helluva job. The review of pass interference was handled brilliantly. Hopefully the NFL will allow Al to review every holding call as well. Were there any pass interference or no calls overturned? I don't remember seeing it in the games I watched.
There actually were as a few from what I heard but I didn't see any either.
The NFL needs to stop implementing additional rules every year which get overused in the preseason and then ignored in the regular and post season.
As an example, what ever happened to the helmet rule from 2 seasons ago? I saw guys leading with the helmet all year but nothing was getting called.
The officiating is just downright embarrassing now.
|
|
|
|
Post by DandyDon on Feb 24, 2020 15:08:54 GMT -5
Were there any pass interference or no calls overturned? I don't remember seeing it in the games I watched.
There actually were as a few from what I heard but I didn't see any either.
The NFL needs to stop implementing additional rules every year which get overused in the preseason and then ignored in the regular and post season.
As an example, what ever happened to the helmet rule from 2 seasons ago? I saw guys leading with the helmet all year but nothing was getting called.
The officiating is just downright embarrassing now.
I agree. Knee jerk reactions, badly implemented. |
|
theproblem
Special Teams
Formerly BJacobs aka The Problem
Posts: 406
|
Post by theproblem on Feb 24, 2020 15:15:26 GMT -5
My thoughts..
Don't mind the 17th game at the expense of the 4th pre-season game no one really watches/cares about that season ticket owners have to pay for.
Don't mind the extra teams in the playoffs because it provides more incentive to get the #1 seed. Also, there should be more drama at the end of the season because more teams should be vying for that additional wild card spot. This may(keyword is may) lead to a little more action during the trade deadline, but then again, it's really hard to plug in new players in the middle of the season for NFL teams.
Players should be getting more of the pie up to 50% being that the NFL and teams have found other avenues(i.e. subsidiaries and other companies) to increase revenue from their teams. There are things that the players do not get a cut from and that is not counted towards that pie.
Goodell just needs to stick to running the NFL and hand over all authority over any kind of stuff to a council designated by the NFL and NFLPA. It's just not a good look and the NFL has taken multiple hits over their poor handling of just about everything.
Fifth year options should go the way of the dodo. Player careers are way too short to have their ability to cash in stymied by owners and franchises who wish to maintain control. It makes no sense that a franchise should be able to control a new player with this option and then continue to have control for up to 2/3 years with use of the tag mechanic. Granted, the increase in salary amount is nice, but it doesn't give the player the ability to fully maximize their value with security because technically, only that year is guaranteed where as a player could potentially get the security of a multiple year guaranteed contract. It's really shitty for the players.
Can we just do away with this testing already? It's pretty much only being kept around for show and image purposes. All the players know the window of the testing and only the really really stupid ones fail it. Most people don't care anyways. It's stupid and it's being used as bargaining chip by the NFL against the NFLPA to get them to agree to a lower cut in revenue.
Things I wish they'd bake into the CBA..
Player salary cap and veteran minimum increase. These QB contracts are getting ridiculous. Teams are going to be hamstrung by them and it's going to have an adverse affect on the rest of the team and the quality of play. Seriously, cap player salary to a specific amount and increase the veteran minimum to compensate for it.
Remove the ability to trade a player that has been franchise tagged. The wording in current CBA is complete BS. It's purely worded on such a good faith basis that it's been abused. Matter of fact, just get rid of the franchise tag. It really sucks for the players and gives the NFL teams too much control. If you want to go the NBA route to offer an incentive for staying with your current team, fine, bake in some incentive to offer the current team a slight advantage.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nite on Feb 24, 2020 17:51:39 GMT -5
Its not bad as a first pass.. Players get more $$, playoff expands (but not the season) and the roster expands. I would have like to see 3 - 4 players added to rosters so as to lesson the impact of inevitable injuries. Pre-season cut to 3 games I'm ok with
BTW; Its really amusing to me reading the class warriors on the board bitching about the halves vs half nots...The have nots make more than 99% of the gen population and ppl here are offended about the 'injustice'
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarcasman on Feb 24, 2020 18:33:42 GMT -5
Its not bad as a first pass.. Players get more $$, playoff expands (but not the season) and the roster expands. I would have like to see 3 - 4 players added to rosters so as to lesson the impact of inevitable injuries. Pre-season cut to 3 games I'm ok with BTW; Its really amusing to me reading the class warriors on the board bitching about the halves vs half nots...The have nots make more than 99% of the gen population and ppl here are offended about the 'injustice' Since I'm one of the folks that used that phrase I'll assume I'm one of the class warriors you reference. Which is funny since I never mentioned class or injustice. I simply stated a fact about the demographic issue the NFLPA has amongst their ranks. It has nothing to do with how that population compares to the overall population. I would never say that since I can't think of anything more irrelevant than that. |
|
|
|
Post by TEM on Feb 24, 2020 19:14:19 GMT -5
Its not bad as a first pass.. Players get more $$, playoff expands (but not the season) and the roster expands. I would have like to see 3 - 4 players added to rosters so as to lesson the impact of inevitable injuries. Pre-season cut to 3 games I'm ok with BTW; Its really amusing to me reading the class warriors on the board bitching about the halves vs half nots...The have nots make more than 99% of the gen population and ppl here are offended about the 'injustice' It has nothing to do with class. It has to do with. Doing what is right for that individual. As I said For the majority. The player's time is a small window . For most 3 to 4 years. ( The rank and file. 2 thirds to 3 quarters of the players in the league ) They are not going to compromise a month or season of earning potential to placate to some big income's box of donuts request. This is not class warfare . It is the mind set of a 5th .6th .7th round pick, UDFA in year 2 of his contract doing what is best for him . That may be in direct contradiction to what a 7th year player making more per game that he does in the season. The 5th round players in year 2 and the big contract players in year 7 will have goals and needs. There are more players in the 5th round player's situation than there are in the year 7 player's. It s not class war to protect self interests. It is human nature. |
|
|
|
Post by Nite on Feb 24, 2020 19:29:59 GMT -5
Its not bad as a first pass.. Players get more $$, playoff expands (but not the season) and the roster expands. I would have like to see 3 - 4 players added to rosters so as to lesson the impact of inevitable injuries. Pre-season cut to 3 games I'm ok with BTW; Its really amusing to me reading the class warriors on the board bitching about the halves vs half nots...The have nots make more than 99% of the gen population and ppl here are offended about the 'injustice' It has nothing to do with class. It has to do with. Doing what is right for that individual. As I said For the majority. The player's time is a small window . For most 3 to 4 years. ( The rank and file. 2 thirds to 3 quarters of the players in the league ) They are not going to compromise a month or season of earning potential to placate to some big income's box of donuts request. This is not class warfare . It is the mind set of a 5th .6th .7th round pick, UDFA in year 2 of his contract doing what is best for him . That may be in direct contradiction to what a 7th year player making more per game that he does in the season. The 5th round players in year 2 and the big contract players in year 7 will have goals and needs. There are more players in the 5th round player's situation than there are in the year 7 player's. It s not class war to protect self interests. It is human nature. I was referring to people's reaction to the negotiations, not the players. |
|
|
|
Post by EliDaGoat713 on Feb 24, 2020 22:19:23 GMT -5
Hell no to 17 game seasons. Hell yes to adding a 7th seed to the playoffs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fletch842 on Feb 26, 2020 7:16:27 GMT -5
|
|
nyg2
Starter
Posts: 4,680
|
Post by nyg2 on Feb 26, 2020 14:28:52 GMT -5
For once I agree with Shannon Sharpe. I can't believe that some of these players thought that smoking marijuana was more important than getting more money and a larger portion of the revenue that comes in. I mean they didn't even negotiate down the franchise tag and how teams can theoretically can franchise you 3 times in a row.
|
|
