Twitter: Maurice Smith is confident players will approve CBA

[Hawkeye0202]

OK.......

 

[Bowdown27]

Hmm how the players have been so outspoken about this new cba I'm surprised demaurice is so confident in it getting done. We shall see.

 

[Reality]

Hmm how the players have been so outspoken about this new cba I'm surprised demaurice is so confident in it getting done. We shall see.

From what I have read, most of the players you hear coming out against it tend to be higher tier paid players and players with upcoming contracts, who I would assume would be negatively impacted by the new CBA in some way.

That is not to say their opinions should be discounted (to each his own after all), but because of that, the media is more likely to seek out and report quotes by those players.

From the media standpoint, no one cares what a second or third string journeyman player thinks so they won't report as much (if any) of those.

The majority of the players however will likely benefit from various changes more than the higher paid players. Not to mention, the lesser paid players and their families likely need and depend on their current money more than the wealthy players who likely have significant money in their accounts already after receiving large contracts and/or playing in the NFL for many years.

 

[Direwolf63]

Hmm how the players have been so outspoken about this new cba I'm surprised demaurice is so confident in it getting done. We shall see.

Some of the big money, high profile guys (JJ Watt, Aaron Rodgers) have spoken out against it. Because they are high profile, they get the press clippings.

But the vast majority of players make far less and have limited careers. And no press clippings. DeMaurice is probably thinking these are the guys who will vote in favor. They only need a simply majority for formal approval.

That's probably where he is coming from.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

Hmm how the players have been so outspoken about this new cba I'm surprised demaurice is so confident in it getting done. We shall see.

From my understanding, players mostly against it are the older vets who want nothing to do with a 17th game. But younger guys who make up the majority sees the 17th game as extra $$$$, not health risk.

 

[cowboyed]

From my understanding, players mostly against it are the older vets who want nothing to do with a 17th game. But younger guys who make up the majority sees the 17th game as extra $$$$, not health risk.

 

[cowboyed]

The availability of a 17th game certainly won't hurt our feelings. Youth will be likely served by an approved CBA.

 

[CouchCoach]

I don't think the 65% making <1M a year really care what guys making that much in one game check think. The CBA is not for those highly paid stars and the majority of the players are only known to that team's fans and their careers are short lived, often because of injuries. The sport is star driven but the game is not.

 

[jazzcat22]

Hmm how the players have been so outspoken about this new cba I'm surprised demaurice is so confident in it getting done. We shall see.

It required 2/3 vote to pass, but I seen recently the NFLPA invoked some rule and now only requires a majority vote.
Most player fall into that majority. Especially with the average NFL career being 3.3 years. most will get a significant increase. So they will take it and if smart invest it wisely.

 

[RoboQB]

From my understanding, players mostly against it are the older vets who want nothing to do with a 17th game. But younger guys who make up the majority sees the 17th game as extra $$$$, not health risk.

The players who make close to, or more than $1 milion a game are pissed
because the CBA caps the 17th game at 250k, I believe, for players currently
under contract for 2021.

I think that's what I read shortly after JJ Watt's "Hard no" tweet.

 

[John813]

At the end of the last CBA, the PA caved due to the "lesser" players wanting them to cave. The QB's, LT's DE etc making the big bucks at the time could wait it out, but the guys on rookie deals, min deals or smaller extensions were sweating about the realization that the follow years paycheck was in question.

Maybe the PA doesn't want that to happen again.

 

[Kingofholland]

If it's passed its either lack of knowledge around what it is, or they just don't care. Kind of reminds me of Brexit if it went that way, lol

 

[jazzcat22]

Also if they added a 17th game, the owners changed the extra game pay. I just seen it earlier but forget what that pay was.
However, they changed it, and all players will get the same pay per game as their current contract.

However it didn't make sense at the time, but I think the writer may have had it confused, but now since I think about it, maybe not. Said they will get the extra game check based on 1/17 of the contract per game. Maybe he meant 1/16, and they get extra game check for that. But actually not that much of a difference. But it is for the higher paid players.

A $1 million contract, for 16 games is $62,500 per game, so a 17th game would pay them that.
If 17 games, it is $58,825 (rounded up $2) per game average, so they would actually lose $3,675

So for a player making $10 million is $36,750. But we are only taking 1 game. So really not bad at all.

 

[jazzcat22]

The players who make close to, or more than $1 milion a game are pissed
because the CBA caps the 17th game at 250k, I believe, for players currently
under contract for 2021.

I think that's what I read shortly after JJ Watt's "Hard no" tweet.

I just posted about this I guess while you were posting. I seen where they changed that to a game check 1/17 of whatever their per game rate is.

 

[glimmerman]

I don’t want a 17th game because I will only make 250k. I am used to making at least double that. For some the game won’t count anyways so the starters will be rested for the playoffs or the season will be over and the game meaningless.

 

[NorthTexan95]

The salary cap on the 17th game was dropped. The player's vote only requires a majority, not 2/3.

 

[gjkoeppen]

Hmm how the players have been so outspoken about this new cba I'm surprised demaurice is so confident in it getting done. We shall see.

I'm sure than the vast majority of players like a lot about this new CBA, but every since the NFL last season first started to float the idea of expanding the schedule to 17 games there have many players that have spoken out against that and I think that one thing could end up being the straw that breaks the camel's back as far as getting approved. They all said that full payment as what they make per game for the first 16 games for that game even for players who's contracts don't show that would have to be done and the NFL's offer doesn't provide that. The NFL's offer does have extra payment for that game but not the same payment amount players make for the first 16 games. The NFL's offer has a max ceiling for payment for that 17th game which is less than many players make.
.

 

[glimmerman]

Are they shortening the preseason.

 

[cern]

this cba is more about helping the second tier players get fair share of the pie. for the elite/top tier, not so much. that's why guys like jj watt are already screaming how much they hate it. seems all the stars want is the money and don't really care so much about wins and losses.

 

[glimmerman]

this cba is more about helping the second tier players get fair share of the pie. for the elite/top tier, not so much. that's why guys like jj watt are already screaming how much they hate it. seems all the stars want is the money and don't really care so much about wins and losses.

Likely been that way for years. Wins matter more to fans I think.