PFT: The new offseason practice rules feature less practice, more offseason

[cowboyjoe]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...e-rules-feature-less-practice-more-offseason/
Posted by Mike Florio on April 15, 2012, 1:00 PM EDT
APWith more and more teams launching their offseason programs, now is as good a time as any to explain the new offseason rules, courtesy of Article 21 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

According to Section 2(b) of Article 21, it’s a three-phase, nine-week process. Phase One lasts for two weeks, and the activities are limited to “strength and conditioning” and “physical rehabilitation.” Only strength and conditioning coaches may be present; other coaches may not attend or observe in any way. Footballs cannot be used, with the exception of quarterbacks throwing to uncovered receivers. No helmets may be worn.

In Phase Two, which lasts three weeks, all coaches are permitted on the field. The workouts may include individual player instructions and drills, including “perfect play” drills — with offense or defense only but no offense and defense at the same time. Special-teams drills also may be conducted without opposing units on the field at the same time. There can be no live contact and no one-on-one competition, and no bump-and-run coverage of receivers by defensive backs. Also, no helmets are permitted.

 

[laythewood28]

Do they also get fitted for skirts and panties at these "drills"? Geez.

 

[burmafrd]

more money for less work. Sounds familiar

 

[Picksix]

What I find interesting, is I listen to Sirius NFL radio, and they have all these players -past and present - talking about the change in kick off rules, and with what Mara came out with this weekend, predicting that the NFL may be moving away from the kick off altogether. The general consensus is, by doing this, they're taking too much away from the game, that the game is supposed to be physical and violent.

Okay. However, at the same time, they negotiate a new CBA, in which the amount, length, and intensity of off-season programs are significantly curtailed.

So in the one sense, they want to keep things as they were. In another, they want them significantly changed. Seems contradictory to me. I know "we talking bout practice, man" as opposed to playing in the games, but if you're going to train for something, you don't go half-hearted. That's how we ended up with a team in 2010 that couldn't block or tackle, started 1-7, and we're basically a joke in the league. And we didn't have a significant decrease in injuries either (Phillips, Romo, Lissemore, Hatcher, Spears, Newman - all injured in preseason or first half). Then Garrett takes over, immediately puts them in pads, and they go into NY and handle the Giants. They had some injuries in the second half (Lee, Bryant), but the numbers weren't significantly different. In fact, it could be argued that the injury numbers went down in the second half.

Bottom line, they want to keep the physicality on one end, but remove it on the other. That, and they want to get paid as much or more, for doing less work.