NFL and NFLPA Updates

Two stories broke today regarding current NFLPA issues:


ESPN - "NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell says there could be a new labor agreement in place by the Super Bowl "if we all commit to it and work hard at it."


What the hell are they waiting for?  I have seen these words come from so many people.  Why do they even deem it necessary to say that?  What have they been doing?

Who will win out in the end?

In my opinion, both the NFL and NFLPA should have a committee whose specific goal is to get this thing figured out.  They should be working overtime.  At least ten hours a day.  This does not just affect the owners and the players.  This affects the coaches. The local communities.  Local businesses will be affected.  


Also, there is a different report from different parties every week.  The NFLPA told players last week to save their last few game checks because a "lockout is imminent."  DeMaurice Smith said yesterday he is still preparing for a lockout.  Robert Kraft a few weeks ago said that he was optimistic that a deal would be reached.  


This is all a game, everyone.  Each side is trying to manipulate the public's opinion.  There is certainly some gamesmanship going on here.  If they say one thing to the public, they can anticipate the move and strategies from the other side.


Don't read into anything until a deal is reached.


ESPN - "NFL players union head DeMaurice Smith held a conference call Tuesday with agents to discuss possibly changing the certification process and how agents are disciplined for violating rules."


There needs to be a MUCH bigger sense of urgency.  I don't think they should even consider looking at how agents are certified.  Who cares.  In this culture you can take the most honorable, smartest people and the only way to compete is to cheat.  


College football players get showered in money, gifts, cars, houses for their families, pretty much anything you can imagine an 18-22 year old kid would want.  It's outrageous.  


I, along with Jimmy, believe that NCAA football players should be paid.  However, right now the rule is that they aren't allowed to.  Yet the enforcement policies are ridiculous.


Any 18 year old kid who comes from a low-income background is going to take a nice check from a booster or an agent.  It's human nature.  Sure, there are a couple that may not take it.  Regardless, it makes no sense that the agents are HARDLY punished in these situations.  


I would love to see the NFL and NCAA collaborate and come up with a strictly enforced punishment system.  Something where it is not 100% frowned up to tell a person of authority when something happens against the rules.  


Regardless of what they could and would figure out, there is currently such a disconnect between the NCAA and NFLPA, something must be done.  NOW.  Please.  Save 


On the topic, watch ESPN's 30 for 30 on SMU football.  I don't think things are much different nowadays...

Roger Goodell

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell speaks about the proposed 18-game schedule, the potential lockout and more.

Six Reasons an 18 Game NFL Schedule is a Bad Idea

The NFL owners met yesterday and approved the sale of the St. Louis Rams to Stan Kroenke, but the hottest topic of the meetings was the advancement towards an "enhanced" schedule.  

This schedule, which the owners are shooting to have in place as early as 2012, would eliminate two preseason games in favor of two more regular season games.

The owners obviously would like to see this change to increase revenues, as fans are more likely to pay to see their team's meaningful games.  

However, this is a very big change to enact and must be thought through completely by the owners and the players' union.  

Here are five reasons that this schedule change is a bad idea.  There are reasons for the change of schedule, so feel free to leave comments about that, as well as additional reasons against the change.

6.  The Record Books

The format of the NFL schedule has not been changed for 32 years.  Statistical records are a staple of the NFL.  Individual and team records have been set, broken and broken again.

The process of a professional athlete breaking a record is one of the most captivating events for the American public.  Think back to Mark McGwire's chase for the home run crown.  Or the Patriots hunt for a perfect 19-0 season.  It was as if everyone who had ever heard of athletics was paying attention!

Now consider adding two games for players to accumulate stats.  A running back would have to average only 55.6 yards per game to break 1,000 yards.  This milestone is essentially rendered meaningless.  

In 2009, we saw Chris Johnson of the Titans set a record for yards from scrimmage in a season while becoming the sixth player in NFL history to reach 2,000 yards.  During the 2005 and 2006 seasons, if players were to continue their yards per game average there would have been four players reach the legendary 2,000 yard plateau.

5. Meaningless Games

The NFL owners claim that they are doing this for the fans.  They want the fans to be happy, and two more meaningful games will fuel their competitive spirit and keep them entertained.

What if exchanging two preseason games for regular seasons games didn't correspond with the addition of meaningful games?

Last season, the Colts got off to an incredible 14-0 start.  Then they threw in the towel.  Peyton Manning played one half in the last two games, the Colts lost to the Bills and the Jets, and the AFC playoff picture changed, as the Jets snuck in.

Now let's say in 2012 the Colts get off to the game start, while the Texans are at 9-5, the Jaguars are 8-6 and the Titans are looking at a 6-8 start.  What is the incentive for the Colts to play their starters?  They could lose the last four games by 100 points each and still win the division.  

Sure, they would likely play for home field advantage, but imagine if the rest of the league was very balanced that year with no other dominant teams in the AFC (every other team has five or more losses).  This is a very possible scenario, and Colts fans would certainly not be thrilled watching Curtis Painter lead the troops for a month.

4.  Evaluating Players

NFL General Managers and player personnel departments already have a difficult job in finding the best players for their team.  Now the owners want to only give young players two preseason games to showcase their talents?

Before every training camp begins there are players who know that they are on the roster bubble.  The general managers and coaches know who these players are as well.  Now imagine one of these players is buried on the depth chart, and for whatever reason does not get many snaps in the two preseason games.  

What if this player were to make a huge impact in the fourth preseason game and go on to be a special teams captain?  Or fill in for an injured player and have a great season?

The reality is, the personnel departments' jobs will be much more difficult, and there will be many more mistakes made.  Teams will be far less likely to put together their best roster, and the quality of play in the NFL could take a hit.

3.  Revenue Complications

NFL players are currently earning 60% of the revenue that NFL organizations earn.  This is one of the divisive points of the ongoing CBA talks.  The players are very happy with this umber, while the owners would like to see it decrease.

That's not too much to ask, is it?  I'm sure the players union and the owners could work something out.

Wait a minute, now the owners are asking the players to take a smaller cut AND play more games?  This is getting a bit unreasonable.

Sure, the owners could pay them higher salaries, but it just seems that they are getting greedy. 

It makes much more sense to me to stick with a 16 game season for the time being, at least until they can extend the CBA.

2.  Player Safety

In the last decade we have seen a number of rules to keep the players safe.  Such rules include numerous additions to the "roughing the passer" penalty, and the inability to attack a "defenseless" receiver.

Have the owners thought about safety concerns when instituting an 18-game schedule?  If players are required to play more games there is obviously a greater chance of a player getting injured.  

More important than the chances of a twisted ankle or even a torn ACL is the constant bashing of heads that goes on in the NFL.  With the advances of technology we are becoming more aware and more cautious in regards to concussions, which is a good first step.  Helmets are become more concussion-proof, but concussions still happen.  

Most recently, a Boston University study found a connection between head trauma and the onset of Lou Gherig's Disease.  

Former NFL players are experiencing all sorts of mental issues in their later years (and some times even in their forty's and fifty's).  Simply put, increase the schedule to 18 important games does absolutely nothing to improve players' safety, it only exacerbates the issues.

1.  "If it Ain't Broke, Don't Fix it!"

And finally, the most obvious reason.

Forbes.com published a slide show with the most valuable sports franchises in the world.  Of the top 30, 23 are NFL teams.  Twenty three!  

Why in the world do the owners need to expand the schedule for more revenue?

Last year's Super Bowl was the most watched television program EVER!  It was estimated that around 106.5 million people tuned in.

The NFL is full of history and continues to grow.  Why change the most popular sport in the United States?  

There is just so little to gain and too much to lose.

NFL CBA and Potential Lockout

What is the Collective Bargaining Agreement?
The NFL CBA is an agreement between the NFL Players Association (NFLPA) and the 32 NFL owners.  The CBA outlines various aspects of interactions between the two groups and the working conditions for the NFL players.

What has been going on with the CBA?
The current CBA was initially crafted in 1993 and has been adjusted and extended various times since, the last being in March of 2006.  In early 2008 the 32 NFL owners unanimously voted to opt out of the current CBA in March of 2011, one month after this year's Super Bowl.

When the owners opted out of the CBA, the 2010 season became a year without a salary cap.  Why haven't we seen owners offering much larger contracts to free agents?
First, two definitions:
Unrestricted free agent - A players contract has expired and he is free to negotiate with any team, and may choose a team based on the financials of a deal, chances for success, playing time, whatever the player most desires.
Restricted free agent - Essentially is a player whose contract has expired.  First, his previous team offers him a "qualifying" offer - an amount determined by the CBA (a minimum amount required to keep a player a RFA).  Any team is free to offer them a deal, but their previous team may match the offer and retain the player.  There are also guidelines to dictate the compensation the previous team would receive if an offered contract above certain levels.  Find a good explanation here.


In an uncapped season (2010), players must have at least six accrued seasons in order to become an unrestricted free agents, while in a capped season, players must only have four accrued seasons.  Because of this, we have seen the numbers of restricted free agents increase from past years, making it more costly to sign key free agents.

Also, there is no spending minimum, so owners also have the choice to limit their spending and build a team of undervalued players.

Why might there be a lockout in 2011?
First of all, the owners are not majorly concerned about a lockout and losing revenue as the NFL will still be pulling in billions from its network TV deals even if there is no 2011 NFL season.  Sure, they don't want the lockout, but it's a little more likely now with all of the recent TV revenue flowing in.
One issue is for small market teams - as most of the revenue comes from TV contracts (and small market teams such as the Jaguars do not make as much) and teams are required to spend around $112 million (in 2009) on player salaries the profits for these teams are not as high as the owners would like.  This is what enables any given game to be competitive and result in either team winning.  This floor is calculated as a percent of the salary cap, and that percent was going to keep growing under the previous CBA.  Essentially, many of the owners would like to see the salary cap and the salary floor gone.
Another issue is that of revenue sharing.  Under the last CBA NFL owners shared TV revenue, NFL merchandise licensing revenue and 40% of their gate receipts (ticket sales).  There is also a separate $100 million pool that the 15 teams with the highest gross income contribute to and the bottom 17 can draw from.  This assures players that they can make the same amount of many in any market, but the highest grossing teams are not in favor of this pool.
18 game regular season schedule - Another issue to be addressed is the format of the season.  Currently there are four preseason games and sixteen regular season games, but the owners are in favor of changing two preseason games into regular season games.  The players would need to be compensated fairly for an increase in games and they would like to see the studies about long term health risks of adding two more games.
Retirement benefits - Former and current NFL players would like their retirement benefits to be looked at, particularly their health care as the game can have serious long term effects.
Rookie wage sacle - Something that I am completely in favor of, I cannot understand why unproven rookies are getting $50 million guaranteed before they take a single snap!  Players that have proven their worth should be rewarded.

There are many other issues that will be discussed including player misconduct administration and drug testing.  Click the link for more info.

Essentially, if a new CBA is not crafted, signed and considered a done deal there may be a lockout in 2011 and no games played...  Get to work!