for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Questions about 17-game season....

Milton : 2/6/2020 12:31 am
If I'm reading it correctly, there's a proposal for a 17 game season that's been negotiated between ownership and the NFLPA executive committee that's going to be presented to the board of player representatives and if it's accepted will then be voted on by the union.

Which got me thinking...
If it's accepted in 2020, when would the 17-game season begin? If it's as early as 2021, what happens with previously negotiated contracts? Should players with long term deals be expected to accept the same annual salary for a 17-game season that was negotiated under the assumption of a 16-game season? Will this year's free agency have language included in all contracts that accounts for the possibility (i.e., salary x if it's a 16-game season and salary x+1 if it's a 17-game season)? Will Chester get himself some help at the Minister's group or will Chester help himself to the Minister's daughter?

from PFT - ( New Window )
17 game season, if agreed to, will not begin until at least 2021  
shyster : 2/6/2020 7:11 am : link
But additional playoff game could be put in for 2020.

This is per linked ESPN article.

Players will definitely get more money for agreeing to the 17 game season. There's no chance they would agree to it otherwise.




espn - ( New Window )
RE: 17 game season, if agreed to, will not begin until at least 2021  
jvm52106 : 2/6/2020 7:15 am : link
In comment 14804573 shyster said:
Quote:
But additional playoff game could be put in for 2020.

This is per linked ESPN article.

Players will definitely get more money for agreeing to the 17 game season. There's no chance they would agree to it otherwise.


espn - ( New Window )


More money- revenue sharing and two bye weeks. I think you can see it coming and with Jacksonville now going to do two home games in London this makes even more sense.
A player under contract  
Sneakers O'toole : 2/6/2020 7:59 am : link
won't see any individual benefit from the 17 game season until they renegotiate their next contract.

Unless some sort of provision is actually written into the new CBA dealing with this specific issue. Which, who knows, may need to happen to get it to pass.

Its also something that may gum up FA this season as agents look over the horizon. You might see some huge deals, or a lot of short term type deals.
RE: A player under contract  
Gary from The East End : Admin : 2/6/2020 8:43 am : link
In comment 14804591 Sneakers O'toole said:
Quote:
won't see any individual benefit from the 17 game season until they renegotiate their next contract.

Unless some sort of provision is actually written into the new CBA dealing with this specific issue. Which, who knows, may need to happen to get it to pass.

Its also something that may gum up FA this season as agents look over the horizon. You might see some huge deals, or a lot of short term type deals.


I think ownership will have to give players playing under existing contracts a bump, maybe six percent, for seasons with a 17 game schedule.

That's only fair and it's not going to be a lot of money, all things considered
I think it's implausible to think the union would agree to this  
Mad Mike : 2/6/2020 10:15 am : link
without a corresponding increase in player salaries. Whether it's a straight 17/16ths pro-ration or some other structure, they're not giving the owners something for nothing.
RE: I think it's implausible to think the union would agree to this  
jvm52106 : 2/6/2020 10:42 am : link
In comment 14804724 Mad Mike said:
Quote:
without a corresponding increase in player salaries. Whether it's a straight 17/16ths pro-ration or some other structure, they're not giving the owners something for nothing.


I think they are pushing for a bigger share of TV revenue..
With a 17 game season  
Des51 : 2/6/2020 10:55 am : link
I bet every team gets 1 game in London or Mexico, otherwise
some teams would have 9 home games and others only 8.
RE: I think it's implausible to think the union would agree to this  
Scyber : 2/6/2020 10:55 am : link
In comment 14804724 Mad Mike said:
Quote:
without a corresponding increase in player salaries. Whether it's a straight 17/16ths pro-ration or some other structure, they're not giving the owners something for nothing.


Its likely the cap will jump significantly. Which won't have an immediate impact on salary, but will help every player going forward. Its also possible they do a one time increase by 1/17 to account for the additional week of pay.
I wouldn't vote for it without a provision for immediate compensation  
Sneakers O'toole : 2/6/2020 11:18 am : link
I probably wouldn't vote for it at all actually
^^^  
Sneakers O'toole : 2/6/2020 11:19 am : link
If I was a player, obviously.
The players would be idiots to expand to 17...  
bw in dc : 2/6/2020 11:37 am : link
because it's just a layover to the ultimate goal by the owners - 18 games. The players have incredible leverage using the safety issue. They need to listen to Richard Sherman on this.

I would stand firm on 16 games because there is more money on the way with new distribution deals. It's time for the players to win for a change after agreeing to so many pro-owner issues over the last two decades...
It's a GD prime number  
NoPeanutz : 2/6/2020 11:40 am : link
Gonna look so fugly in the standings.
RE: It's a GD prime number  
bw in dc : 2/6/2020 11:57 am : link
In comment 14804888 NoPeanutz said:
Quote:
Gonna look so fugly in the standings.


LOL. Which is why it's simply a layover to the bigger goal - 18 games.
If Im the players union  
Sneakers O'toole : 2/6/2020 12:06 pm : link
I fight them hard on this in the public and don't let up unless I get huge concessions.

The league has been talking out of both sides of their mouths on player saftey and the union should hammer them on it. The league won't like that PR one bit and will want it to go away. They have no defense knowing whats known about CTE and at the same time pushing for players greater exposure to the game.
RE: If Im the players union  
bw in dc : 2/6/2020 12:46 pm : link
In comment 14804943 Sneakers O'toole said:
Quote:
I fight them hard on this in the public and don't let up unless I get huge concessions.

The league has been talking out of both sides of their mouths on player saftey and the union should hammer them on it. The league won't like that PR one bit and will want it to go away. They have no defense knowing whats known about CTE and at the same time pushing for players greater exposure to the game.


All good points. If the players give up their leverage here it just re-affirms that they are the complete opposite of their peers in the MLB union - dumb and vapid.
RE: RE: I think it's implausible to think the union would agree to this  
Mad Mike : 2/6/2020 1:41 pm : link
In comment 14804827 Scyber said:
Quote:
Its likely the cap will jump significantly. Which won't have an immediate impact on salary, but will help every player going forward. Its also possible they do a one time increase by 1/17 to account for the additional week of pay.

Right. I'm saying that's not "also possible", it's basically a given. Why would players agree to do more work (which also means greater injury risk) and increase the revenue pie now, but not share in that increase until they individually are up for new contracts, in some cases quite a few years down the road? I know people like to think of the NFLPA as a bunch of dolts, but that really strains credulity.
Insane.  
x meadowlander : 2/6/2020 2:09 pm : link
I recommend reducing to 14. Even 12.

You don't need 16 games to determine the leagues best teams.

The injuries are bonkers.
The latest from Florio....  
Milton : 2/6/2020 2:25 pm : link
Quote:
The NFL and NFL Players Association have negotiated an acceptable labor deal. The NFLPA now must officially accept it, or reject it. And the clock is ticking.

According to Adam Schefter of ESPN.com, the league has given the union a “rough deadline” of March 18 for accepting the current proposal, premised on a 17-game regular season. If the offer isn’t accepted, talks will be tabled indefinitely.

The message is clear: The league is taking the position that the deal isn’t getting any better, so don’t come back and ask for more. Take it or leave it. And if you leave it, a lockout may happen in 2021.
RE: The latest from Florio....  
bw in dc : 2/6/2020 2:38 pm : link
In comment 14805229 Milton said:
Quote:


Quote:


The NFL and NFL Players Association have negotiated an acceptable labor deal. The NFLPA now must officially accept it, or reject it. And the clock is ticking.

According to Adam Schefter of ESPN.com, the league has given the union a “rough deadline” of March 18 for accepting the current proposal, premised on a 17-game regular season. If the offer isn’t accepted, talks will be tabled indefinitely.

The message is clear: The league is taking the position that the deal isn’t getting any better, so don’t come back and ask for more. Take it or leave it. And if you leave it, a lockout may happen in 2021.



Definitely leave it - if they are smart. I believe the public will overwhelmingly be on the players' side.

The owners have a lot of stink with their fake interest in health...
My counterproposal would be...  
Milton : 2/6/2020 3:43 pm : link
Limit Thursday Night games to teams coming off their bye weeks (and that includes Thanksgiving).
The NFLPA...  
bw in dc : 2/7/2020 7:32 am : link
needs to hire someone currently in the MLB Union.

Any organization that can keep its players from getting punished for blatant, outright cheating- see the Astros- has exactly what the NFL needs to start to fight back and win over ownership.
Back to the Corner