Report: NFL could push for 18-game schedule in labor talks

[OmerV]

The NFL is shoveling the money down, and the players received a pretty small portion. This time, they will be prepared. They have been warmed by the Players Association, to be ready for a period without pay after next season. The word is out, to show up or shut up...

So, business owners make the bigger portion of the profits … isn't that the case with all businesses?

 

[CCBoy]

So, business owners make the bigger portion of the profits … isn't that the case with all businesses?

First off, who isn't aware of that role?

As to length of career and injury facts...a much fairer breakdown is very relevant. The owners are looking at billions instead of a max of $30 Million...any disparity apparent to you?

 

[LarryCanadian]

Foolish for the players great for the owners. These guys are already breaking down in many ways. Add even more games to it will create more injuries, blows to the head, etc. I feel like the NFL will oversaturate. They have with me already but I know I'm in the minority.

Agreed, UNLESS, they increase both the max roster from 53 to something significantly higher and the number of players allowed to dress for games also, to POTENTIALLY alleviate wear - that could lower the wear and tear, AND not only increase the number of players being paid, but also increase the length of careers of some players. Also, if you add 10% - 15% more games, then you need to up Cap by that or more too - increase medical benefits long-term, etc... REDUCE pre-season games - veterans don't need 4-5 of those. There are some positions that are gonna play almost every snap in 1-2 extra games though - which would be hard to avoid, but a larger overall and gameday roster could provide OPTION to split more snaps and have specialist roles to alleviate wear on some players (maybe you don't have your WR returning punts, and starters on special teams, and can carry an extra RB on game day (one big bruiser or one real quick scat type each to get a couple more snaps to rest your featured guy, etc)....

If they went 17 games, then every team could have neutral site game in a city with no current NFL team to promote the game and test future expansion teams. More playoff games means more money for all - TV and reward to home team in terms of gate receipts and parking/concession, etc... - that HAS to trickle down to players though.

Just my thoughts. If they can lower the physical punishment a bit more, without changing the nature of the game too much - it could be win/win - but most of these players are pretty much physically crippled by end of career as is, and some positions wear out so fast now as it is.

 

[JoeKing]

Start the season earlier by moving the last two preseason games into the regular season and add a second bye week to each team schedule. That will give us the 18 game schedule but only extend the season one week on the calendar, concluding with the SB the 2nd week in Feb. There are too many preseason games already so this resolves that problem as well.

 

[G2]

Sure preseason games are different, but they are not off days. It's not as if taking away a preseason game is the equivalent of taking away vacation time and adding work days. Besides, some starters do play quite a bit during preseason, and even those that don't still have to be there and could play every down if the team chose.

My point is they can't be compared, simple as that. It's Apples to Oranges however you look at it. "Some starters play all game" but not the entire team, they don't count, it's experimental, players that won't even be on the team can play an entire preseason. Preseason is for evaluation. the staff isn't going to let their elite talent get injured and be out when games count. Of course there are exceptions.
Put it this way, I know a couple players up my way and they wouldn't submit to the idea of extending the season and shortening the preseason. Of course fans dislike watching "meaningless" games, but coaches will tell you they're essential and short as is.

 

[OmerV]

First off, who isn't aware of that role?

As to length of career and injury facts...a much fairer breakdown is very relevant. The owners are looking at billions instead of a max of $30 Million...any disparity apparent to you?

Again, there is supposed to be a sizable disparity between what owners and employees make. That's just how business works in the US.

And the owners aren't just paying one player $30 MM, they are paying $100-150 MM in player salaries, plus paying a multitude of other employees and contractors and professional service providers (coaches, trainers, scouts, lawyers, accountants, marketing staff, maintenance at multiple facilities, concessions and on and on …). Plus they pay taxes and they pay bills on top of that. I'll bet ATT Stadium has quite the electric bill ...lol.

We have to remember that "revenue" is a gross number. The Cowboys (and Jerry) aren't adding billions to their net worth every single year (if that were the case the Cowboys would be worth $30 B instead of $5-6 B). And we also have to remember that far and away most teams are not as profitable as the Cowboys, and therefore could not afford the same kind of pay as the Cowboys could. Green Bay doesn't even have a Daddy Warbucks behind it at all.

 

[kskboys]

First off, who isn't aware of that role?

As to length of career and injury facts...a much fairer breakdown is very relevant. The owners are looking at billions instead of a max of $30 Million...any disparity apparent to you?

I'm not understanding your point.

 

[OmerV]

My point is they can't be compared, simple as that. It's Apples to Oranges however you look at it. "Some starters play all game" but not the entire team, they don't count, it's experimental, players that won't even be on the team can play an entire preseason. Preseason is for evaluation. the staff isn't going to let their elite talent get injured and be out when games count. Of course there are exceptions.
Put it this way, I know a couple players up my way and they wouldn't submit to the idea of extending the season and shortening the preseason. Of course fans dislike watching "meaningless" games, but coaches will tell you they're essential and short as is.

I'm not comparing the two beyond the fact they are both work days. I just don't see how a player can suggest a team should feel obligated to pay him more for working the same number of days just because the team had previously chosen to give them a lighter work load on two days out of the year. That would be like me telling my employer he has to increase my pay because that annual team building day we used to have has been eliminated and I will now have to work at my normal job on that day.

If teams were obligated to give players time off during preseason rather than it being at the coach's discreation, or if it were negotiated into a contract that a player was guaranteed time off during preseason, that would be different.

 

[G2]

I'm not comparing the two beyond the fact they are both work days. I just don't see how a player can suggest he should earn more for working the same number of days just because the team had previously chosen to give them a lighter work load on two days out of the year. That would be like me telling my employer he has to increase my pay because that annual team building day we used to have has been eliminated and I will now have to work at my normal job on that day.

If teams were obligated to give players time off during preseason rather than it being at the coach's discreation, or if it were negotiated into a contract that a player was guaranteed time off during preseason, that would be different.

Simple. It's not the same level of work, there's less risk by far standing on the sideline than the grind in a real game. They're not obligated to NOT play certain players, it's a matter of risk vs. reward.
Easy stuff.
Dude, your comparisons are way off. I have no idea why you would try to use your job as a point.
NFL players don't get paid the same for a preseason game as they do a regular season game. Preseason is set up through the collective bargaining agreement. Regular season is at a rate of 1/17 per week, not counting bonuses. The only other bonus during preseason is room and board. Not only that, preseason pay changes depending on how many years you've played.

By adding regular season games, players are going to want more money, why wouldn't they?

 

[OmerV]

Simple. It's not the same level of work, there's less risk by far standing on the sideline than the grind in a real game. They're not obligated to NOT play certain players, it's a matter of risk vs. reward.
Easy stuff.
Dude, your comparisons are way off. I have no idea why you would try to use your job as a point.
NFL players don't get paid the same for a preseason game as they do a regular season game. Preseason is set up through the collective bargaining agreement. Regular season is at a rate of 1/17 per week, not counting bonuses. The only other bonus during preseason is room and board. Not only that, preseason pay changes depending on how many years you've played.

By adding regular season games, players are going to want more money, why wouldn't they?

You don't think that level of work is in their job description? And you don't think the coaches have the authority to require them to put in that level of work even in preseason games? This isn't vacation being taken from them. The players aren't exempted from playing in the preseason. It is the coach's choice to play them or not, and the players are already absolutely required to play every single down of every preseason game if the coaches choose to go that way.

Let's put it another way. Do you think the owners get a price break on contracts because some players don't play much in preseason games, or do you think the players negotiate based on playing 4 preseason games and 16 regular season games, knowing that the coaches have the choice to play them and they could get injured even in preseason?

 

[Reid1boys]

The NFL is shoveling the money down, and the players received a pretty small portion. This time, they will be prepared. They have been warmed by the Players Association, to be ready for a period without pay after next season. The word is out, to show up or shut up...

Players are making serious money. The fact that the owners keep making more and more is irrelevant. Does a Dr negotiate his pay as a % of revenues from the hospital? Players are employees, and they get paid damn well to play. The salary cap is a % of revenues and thats it. Now if they want to try and hold out for more money, more power to them. But an NFL lplayer has a very short life, and sitting out a season will likely cost them more than they will make up. Just remember that there are far more ST players than there is Antonio Browns. The ST guys cant afford to miss a season.

It is comical to me why so many of you out there seem to be so angry that NFL owners keep making more and more money. Are you angry that whatever movie company that made Black Panther made so much money?

 

[G2]

Players are making serious money. The fact that the owners keep making more and more is irrelevant. Does a Dr negotiate his pay as a % of revenues from the hospital? Players are employees, and they get paid damn well to play. The salary cap is a % of revenues and thats it. Now if they want to try and hold out for more money, more power to them. But an NFL lplayer has a very short life, and sitting out a season will likely cost them more than they will make up. Just remember that there are far more ST players than there is Antonio Browns. The ST guys cant afford to miss a season.

It is comical to me why so many of you out there seem to be so angry that NFL owners keep making more and more money. Are you angry that whatever movie company that made Black Panther made so much money?

who's angry?

 

[Little Jr]

The NFL is shoveling the money down, and the players received a pretty small portion. This time, they will be prepared. They have been warmed by the Players Association, to be ready for a period without pay after next season. The word is out, to show up or shut up...

Again, they were warned last time and still caved because they didn't want to lose game checks.

The NFL was shoveling money last time, that's not new. They'll talk big and tuff but in the end they'll cave with some compensation from the NFL. Then a few years later cry about money, Goodell and other things they cry about and talk about how they need to stick together during the next cba.

Union's are dying and the player's have the weakest union in the country. The owners know this. Hell, the players know this. The only time the player's gotanything done in a cba is when they decertified the union

 

[CouchCoach]

Start the season earlier by moving the last two preseason games into the regular season and add a second bye week to each team schedule. That will give us the 18 game schedule but only extend the season one week on the calendar, concluding with the SB the 2nd week in Feb. There are too many preseason games already so this resolves that problem as well.

That doesn't work for the TV nets because Feb is a sweeps month, along with May, July and Nov. It would be better for them to start the preseason games (2) two weeks before regular season kicks off, the 2nd week in Sept, and then end the regular season in Jan and have the playoffs and SB end toward the end of Feb. Add it on the end when more audience is inside because it's pretty much winter everywhere.

Besides the revenue the TV nets generate, the real benefit of broadcasting the live games are the show promos and recycling the audience. They would be more prone to pony up more if they are doing that during a sweeps period.

 

[CCBoy]

Players are making serious money. The fact that the owners keep making more and more is irrelevant. Does a Dr negotiate his pay as a % of revenues from the hospital? Players are employees, and they get paid damn well to play. The salary cap is a % of revenues and thats it. Now if they want to try and hold out for more money, more power to them. But an NFL lplayer has a very short life, and sitting out a season will likely cost them more than they will make up. Just remember that there are far more ST players than there is Antonio Browns. The ST guys cant afford to miss a season.

It is comical to me why so many of you out there seem to be so angry that NFL owners keep making more and more money. Are you angry that whatever movie company that made Black Panther made so much money?

Oh...well, just sit on nothing matters, Pal...and that makes a qualified ring tapper and burn barrel buddy. Check out your own decoder ring.

As if street knowledge and excuses let's one's post off the hook.

 

[CCBoy]

Again, they were warned last time and still caved because they didn't want to lose game checks.

The NFL was shoveling money last time, that's not new. They'll talk big and tuff but in the end they'll cave with some compensation from the NFL. Then a few years later cry about money, Goodell and other things they cry about and talk about how they need to stick together during the next cba.

Union's are dying and the player's have the weakest union in the country. The owners know this. Hell, the players know this. The only time the player's gotanything done in a cba is when they decertified the union

If you don't care if someone else can stand his grounds and be right also...that's on you.

Prove that they won't...the Player's Association. Oh, and Eugene Upshaw, from here and Texas A&I, was their President for 19 years.

 

[CCBoy]

That doesn't work for the TV nets because Feb is a sweeps month, along with May, July and Nov. It would be better for them to start the preseason games (2) two weeks before regular season kicks off, the 2nd week in Sept, and then end the regular season in Jan and have the playoffs and SB end toward the end of Feb. Add it on the end when more audience is inside because it's pretty much winter everywhere.

Besides the revenue the TV nets generate, the real benefit of broadcasting the live games are the show promos and recycling the audience. They would be more prone to pony up more if they are doing that during a sweeps period.

Right now, top viewing shows approach number 38th top rated and viewed NFL games. Money? Not accountable?

Come knocking on this fan's door...and find out where the bottom line exists at my home. (A Missouri type, show me)

After World War 11, my dad was part of the Union at Celanese. They struck for the right of a Union, and won in Texas. They caused the rise of salaries in the Chemical Production Industry in South Texas. I was a member of the Postal Union for 17 years, including 5 years as a Union Official.

If one doesn't pay the price via the Union, then things revert back to Anti-Trust...and the NFL would lose a ton if they lost the protections from being a Sports affiliate. The Constitution still applies and appealable, if restraints of the Union no longer apply.

Oh, and ignored kskboys, pick up here...

 

[CouchCoach]

While most of us seem to be expecting fireworks this go around, it would not surprise me if this went smoothly. We don't know what the NFLPA is looking for but they know getting much more of the pie is pretty much not going to happen.

Last go around the NFLPA came up looking really bad and got their butt handed to them and there were some unhappy players. There's no way they can win this and they know it. And as far as who the fans side with, the owners could care less about that. I don't think the players care either. I think the fans care a hell of a lot more about the game than the owners or the players.

In a country with a growing chasm between the haves and have nots, who cares about a fight over money between millionaires and billionaires? When you consider Russell Wilson will make more in one football game than the average person will make in their lifetime, the absolute absurdity of this makes me want it to stalemate and they all lose out for a year. I could easily do without the NFL for a year but what good would that do? It would be the same ole same ole the next year. It just seems to be more and more about the money every year and less about the game I love.

 

[kskboys]

Right now, top viewing shows approach number 38th top rated and viewed NFL games. Money? Not accountable?

Come knocking on this fan's door...and find out where the bottom line exists at my home. (A Missouri type, show me)

After World War 11, my dad was part of the Union at Celanese. They struck for the right of a Union, and won in Texas. They caused the rise of salaries in the Chemical Production Industry in South Texas. I was a member of the Postal Union for 17 years, including 5 years as a Union Official.

If one doesn't pay the price via the Union, then things revert back to Anti-Trust...and the NFL would lose a ton if they lost the protections from being a Sports affiliate. The Constitution still applies and appealable, if restraints of the Union no longer apply.

Oh, and ignored kskboys, pick up here...

Always better to ignore when you have no cogent answer!!!!!

 

[TheStarInFLA]

If David Irving is representative of the general NFL populace, they may play 24 games with leather helmets in exchange for access to the stinky weed...

Obviously the OP has never sampled the Devil’s Cabbage. Lol. But seriously, I have seen great talent throw away their careers over this so why wouldn’t the opposite be true. The cost: two more games. Immediate large gain for far away long term pain. Guess which one the players will choose?