CBA deal progressing

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

Riverumbbq

Angry Progressive
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
May 26, 2013
Messages
11,962
Name
River
  • NFL Network's Tom Pelissero reports the NFLPA will not hold a vote today.
    Instead, the NFLPA plans to discuss the proposed terms into the weekend and potentially beyond. The owners have tried to push this CBA through as soon as possible with TV deals on the horizon, but the players are still sorting out what amendments they want to the current proposal. There isn't a CBA vote date planned at the moment, but expect the two sides to leak information throughout the entire process. Stay tuned.
    SOURCE: Tom Pelissero on Twitter
    Feb 21, 2020, 3:53 PM ET

 

Dodgersrf

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Mar 17, 2014
Messages
10,762
Name
Scott
they're talking about players who are already under contract. they agreed to terms when there were 16 games in the season. if there is an extra game every year they need to be compensated. the max extra payment they are proposing is $250k. that means every player that is under contract for more than $4m per year is getting screwed.

.
That makes a bit more sense.
Its seems like an easy solution, though.
Players under contract, should get an adjustment for the 17th game.
Assuming the tv revenue goes up for game 17
 

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
48,145
Name
Burger man
I want to embrace change, but the more I read... the more half-baked the 17 game concept sounds.

———


NFL plans to add 17th game to regular season: What to know and proposed ways to implement change in schedule
The NFL regular season will expand to 17 games under the new CBA, here are ways the league can add the 17th game

The NFL has expanded its regular-season slate three times in the 100-year history of the league, but they haven't added another game to the schedule since the league went from 14 to 16 games in 1978. The current 32-year streak between expanding games is the longest in league history, even though that will soon change if the new proposed collective bargaining agreement is agreed to by the players. The highlight of the latest collective bargaining agreement is the league expanding from a 16-game schedule to 17 games, which would be the most regular season games the league has ever had. There were also plenty of other changes that will be implemented with a 17-game schedule including an expanded postseason from 12 teams to 14.

So what do NFL fans need to know about the expanded schedule? Let's take a look:

The 17-game season won't be implemented right away

Even if the new CBA is approved, the change from 16 to 17 games won't take effect in 2020. The league could switch to 17 games as early as 2021 when the new CBA would start, but the league's proposal currently suggests this won't be implemented until 2022 (again that can change with the new CBA). While 2021 seems plausible, 2022 makes more sense (it's also the final year of the NFL's current TV deals while the ESPN "Monday Night Football" deal expires in 2021).

10 home dates in a season

The NFL's current structure has 10 home games for each team -- eight regular season games and two preseason games. That isn't expected to change under the new format. Going to 17 games means the NFL will shorten the preseason from four games to three, as CBS NFL Insider Jason La Canfora reported on CBSSports HQ Wednesday. With a three-game preseason, some teams will have nine home games in the regular season and one home preseason gamewhile other teams would have eight home regular season games and two home preseason games (per the Boston Globe). While that schedule seems imbalanced, the NFL would flip the schedule for the next year to accommodate the teams that had just eight regular season home games from the year prior.

An extra bye week

Going to 17 games would result in the reduction of the preseason, but also, another bye week would need to be implemented on the calendar. The NFL actually experimented with two bye weeks in a 16-game schedule in 1993 only to nix it and go back to just one bye week in 1994. With a 17-game schedule, the league would run 19 weeks and the regular season would either have to start Labor Day weekend (like it did from 1990 to 2001) or end past New Year's Day in mid-January. The NFL has toyed with the idea of having the Super Bowlon President's Day weekend in the past and an extra bye week would make that possible.

Playoff expansion

The NFL has had the 12-team playoff format since 1990, with the top two seeds getting first-round byes in each conference. The expansion to a 14-team playoff would drastically alter the current playoff format. Seven teams from each conference would make the playoffs with only the top seed earning a bye into the divisional round. Six wild card games would be played (No. 2 vs. No. 7, No. 3 vs. No. 6, No. 4 vs. No. 5) in a tripleheader slate of games on Saturday and Sunday. Having the No. 1 seed will be huge in this playoff format, especially since that seed will be the only team with a bye and that team will get home-field advantage throughout the conference playoffs. No team has won the Super Bowl that played on wild card weekend since 2013, even though more teams will have the opportunity to break that streak under this new format.

Now that we explained the expanded schedule, let's look at ways the NFL can be creative with this 17th game:

Neutral-site game

Instead of some teams playing nine home games and the others playing eight, why not spice the schedule up a bit? How about the NFL has a week with all 32 teams playing at a neutral site instead of in their home stadium? There are plenty of potential options for the league to consider, especially playing in cities that don't have a NFL team or playing a weekend game on a college campus. Imagine an Eagles-Steelers game at Penn State's Beaver Stadium or a Cowboys-Texans game at Texas' Darrell Royal Stadium? How about a Packersgame in Milwaukee or a Chargers game in San Diego (dare we dream)? The NFL could reach untapped markets and grow the game even larger in the United States than it already is.

International game

The NFL has floated around the idea of the 17th game being played outside the United States, which would divide the schedule with eight home games, eight road games, and one "International Series" game. Obviously some of these games would be played in London, but the league could also add games in Mexico City (which already hosts one NFL game a season). The league could also enter new markets in Germany and Spain (Berlin, Madrid, or Barcelona) or potentially try other countries such as Japan, Australia or Brazil (former American Bowl sites). The NFL once staged international games in Toronto, while other Canadian cities such as Vancouver, Calgary, and Ottawa could be options. If the league is committed to making football a global game, having NFL regular season games around the world would be a huge step in that direction.

Regional Rivalries

The NFL's current regular season structure has six games against division opponents, and a team plays against all four teams in one other division from each conference. The final two games on a team's schedule are against the two remaining teams in the same conference that finished in the same position in their respective divisions the previous season. That makes up 16 games, but what will the league do for a 17th game? How about this proposal from late Texans owner Bob McNair back in 2010: For the 17th game, the league could go to "regional rivalries" no matter the conference. An example would be the Eagles play the Steelers, the Jets play the Giants, and the Ravens play the Redskins every season instead of once every four years. Both teams could rotate home dates or play at a neutral site every year. The NFL needs to be creative with the 17th game, especially since this could generate even more fan interest and higher TV ratings.

TV changes

The league is adding more games, which means more opportunities for networks in the next television deal. The league could definitely change from the current Sunday 1 p.m., 4:25 p.m., and 8:20 p.m. ET format, "Monday Night Football", and "Thursday Night Football" structure with 19 weeks as opposed to 17. Thursday Night Football is likely to stay, but there is plenty of tinkering for the league on Sunday and Monday. The NFL could experiment with more Saturday games in December and January, as opposed to the one tripleheader they had in Week 16 of last year. How about a Monday Night Football doubleheader with a game on the East Coast starting at 7 p.m. and the West Coast game starting at 10 p.m.? The league does this on opening weekend with "Monday Night Football," but this could happen every week with more games and a longer schedule. With more international games on the way, the league will likely have more 9:30 a.m. ET starts. If the NFL really wanted to be radical, the league could change the start times on Sunday to 12:30 p.m., 4 p.m. and 8 p.m. for the Sunday regional window. With the expanded schedule, everything is up in the air.
 

pmil66

Starter
Joined
Jan 16, 2016
Messages
635
Name
pmil
I thought the extra game for each team would be an away game, in a non-NFL stadium, most likely international. So each team would play 8 games at their normal stadium, 8 normal away games, plus a game in Britain or wherever.

That would be even more upsetting.
Send exhibition season games, that do not count, overseas and give the fans another game that counts.
 

So Ram

Legend
Camp Reporter
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
14,204
The only thing I can think about with this deal is the NFL is not dead & The Rams make the Playoffs if it was 2019 season.
 

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
48,145
Name
Burger man

League, NFLPA agree to push back tag deadlines

Revised franchise and transition tag deadlines have been agreed to by the NFL and NFL Players Association, NFL Network's Tom Pelissero and NFL Network Insider Ian Rapoport reported on Saturday.

Tags can now be applied Feb. 27 through March 12, which is two days later than was the original plan.

Absent of a new collective bargaining agreement, teams are still able to apply both tags, Pelissero added. If players vote to approve the proposed CBA, which owners already have, it would revert back to one tag per team.

The NFLPA board and NFLPA executive committee are scheduled to meet Tuesday with the NFL Management Council Executive Committee in Indianapolis during the NFL Scouting Combine.

Previously, the tag window was scheduled to be from Feb. 25 through March 10, but has been pushed back two days later to start as well as two days later at the end.
 

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
48,145
Name
Burger man

Players may have more leverage than they realize

From the failed strike of 1987 to the 2011 lockout, which saw the players blink on the verge of losing real money, it’s become a given that, when it comes to the nuclear option of labor relations, the owners have the upper hand.

Work stoppages don’t really work in the NFL, from the players’ perspective. Football players want to play football — unlike most other unionized workers, whose day-in, day-out job is hardly the realization of a lifelong dream. Football players also make far more money than other unionized workers, creating financial obligations that become impossible to satisfy with a zero dollars a year salary plus benefits, babe. And whereas other unionized workers can count on overtime (and the money that goes with it) to make back lost money as management tries to catch up on pre-existing production obligations, lost NFL work is lost forever. With no chance to recoup a penny of it.

And if a full season is lost, the players would see $9 billion disappear forever, with no chance to earn any of it back.

Despite those realities, which may be impossible to overcome no matter what I type next, there are dynamics that potentially give the players more leverage if/when a work stoppage (lockout or strike) should happen in 2021. For starters, plenty of owners are elderly and older. Does, for example, 78-year-old Jerry Jones want to lose a shot at winning a Super Bowl by scrapping an entire season? Plenty of other older owners may feel the same way.

And plenty of owners, regardless of age, also may have no desire to deal with the inevitable litigation that would happen in the event of a lockout, with the union disclaiming interest, the NFL losing the antitrust exemption that applies to a league-wide unionized workforce, and the players challenging every attempt by 32 independent businesses to coordinate employment rules as a clear violation of federal antitrust laws. And even if the league would try its best to paint the players as the villains of a work stoppage, more and more media and fans seem to be realizing the folly of blindly siding with The Billionaires.

Meanwhile, the exponential growth in the value of NFL franchises since 2011 also has resulted in a dramatic increase in operating expenses. New stadiums have significant debt-service obligations. How, for example, would the Raiders and the Rams pay for their new stadiums without the revenue that comes from having a full slate of football games played there?

Then there’s the obsession with growing the game in London. More than a decade of momentum could be squandered if, suddenly, the four games to be played there in 2021 became none.

And as to the threat of antitrust litigation, let’s not forget that the union’s biggest gains came when it wasn’t a union, when Reggie White and company challenged the NFL’s free-agency restrictions via a landmark lawsuit that eventually was settled through the establishment of a system of veteran movement that the NFL successfully had avoided for decades. If/when the players commit to proceeding as non-union employees (thereby missing no game checks) and fighting each and every antitrust violation that is hiding in plain sight (the salary cap, the franchise tag, restricted free agency, and . . . wait for it . . . the draft), the players could eventually have the owners saying uncle, and not the other way around.

So as the players regroup to consider their options, they should be considering that, perhaps this time around, they may have more leverage. Perhaps the owners will, this time around, lack the collective resolve to shut the sport down. Perhaps the financial obligations for the owners will be as daunting as they’ll be for the players. (And they’ll definitely be daunting for the players.) Perhaps a commitment to abandoning the union model and compelling the NFL through the court system to act as 32 independent businesses that legally cannot coordinate regarding their work forces (no differently than McDonald’s and Wendy’s and Burger King and Arby’s and Taco Bell and KFC can’t coordinate regarding their own work forces) will be the thing that finally pushed the pendulum in the general direction of the players.

Or maybe simply the threat of these potential developments will be the thing that gets the owners to make just enough concessions now to ensure a continuation of long-term labor peace, and to allow the NFL to parlay stability within the player ranks into a cash bonanza that will make all owners and players significantly richer over the course of the next decade via the next wave of TV deals.
 

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
48,145
Name
Burger man

Perhaps.

We have 23 members currently with the "Stoned" banner/mood active.