Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    35,996

    NFL Player Vote Ratifies New CBA Through 2030

    http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300...gh-2030-season

    In a result that will reshape the NFL and bring about labor harmony for the next 11 seasons, NFL Players Association members voted to ratify a new collective bargaining agreement that was previously approved by NFL owners in February, NFL Network's Tom Pelissero reported Sunday morning.

    With a 1,019 to 959 majority vote that concluded at 11:59 p.m. ET Saturday, the players signed off on a new CBA that will begin with the upcoming 2020 season and extend through the 2030 campaign.

    Notable changes in the new deal include the expected addition of two more teams to the playoff field as early as the 2020 season, an option to increase the regular season to 17 games starting in 2021, and increases in minimum salaries, performance-based pay and player revenue.

    "NFL players have voted to approve ratification of a new collective bargaining agreement by a vote tally of 1,019 to 959," the NFLPA said in a statement. "This result comes after a long and democratic process in accordance with our constitution. An independent auditor received submitted ballots through a secure electronic platform, then verified, tallied and certified the results."

    Commissioner Roger Goodell released a statement shortly after the vote was released. "We are pleased that the players have voted to ratify the proposed new CBA, which will provide substantial benefits to all current and retired players, increase jobs, ensure continued progress on player safety, and give our fans more and better football," Goodell said in the statement. "We appreciate the tireless efforts of the members of the Management Council Executive Committee and the NFLPA leadership, both of whom devoted nearly a year to detailed, good faith negotiations to reach this comprehensive, transformative agreement."

    The vote was decided by a razor-thin margin of 60 votes, which was a matter touched on in a statement from the NFLPA Executive Committee. "We understand and know that players have been split on this deal, including members of our EC," the statement read. "Going forward, it is our duty to lead, however we may feel as individuals, to bring our men together and to continue to represent the interests of our entire membership."

    There will be an uptick in player revenue, set at 47 percent in 2020 and then at least 48 percent in 2021 with the ability to increase the percentage to a 48.5 share through a media kicker that applies in any season the league plays 17 games. Players who earn league minimums will get an increase in salary and there will be an increase in performance-based pay, beginning with an average 12 percent increase. The league estimates that as much as an additional $100 million will go to players immediately this season.

    Two additional active spots will bring rosters to 55 men, while there will be a decrease in padded practices at training camp, down from 28 to 16. Padded practices will be limited to 2.5 hours, down from 3.

    Retired players will also benefit from the new deal, as they will see an increase in benefits and boost to pensions.

    Changes to the drug policy include a reduction in penalties for players who test positive for THC (eliminating suspensions solely based on positive tests), an abbreviated testing window (from four months to two weeks at the start of training camp) and a significant increase in the threshold for a positive test (nanogram limit rises from 35 to 150).

    NFL owners first approved the terms of the new CBA on Thursday, Feb. 20, after months of negotiations with the NFLPA. However, the next day, the 11-member NFLPA executive committee voted 6-5 not to recommend the CBA proposal to its membership for a vote, delaying a wider vote by the 32-member NFLPA board of representatives that had been expected to occur later that day.
    Instead, the path to ratifying the CBA extended to the NFL Scouting Combine in Indianapolis. Backdropped by the annual scouting event, the board and NFLPA executive committee met with the NFL Management Council Executive Committee on Tuesday, Feb. 25, for roughly four hours. Pelissero reported at the time that that the NFLPA board of representatives voted 17-14, with one abstention, to send the CBA to its full membership for a vote to ratify. The board of reps forwarded the proposed CBA without a recommendation.

    Ballots to ratify the new collective bargaining agreement were sent to players March 5.

    With a new CBA in place, teams can set their sights on the start of the new league year, which is scheduled to open Wednesday at 4 p.m. ET. The deadline for teams to use either the franchise or transition tag on a player is Monday at 11:59:59 a.m. ET. Teams previously had the option to use both the franchise and transition tag under the old CBA -- a special rule in place for the final year of the deal -- but with the new agreement in place, clubs can now only use one.

    ~~~~

    As for this offseason and beyond, still not sure. But with a vote that was settled by just 60, and with implications of what we are going though with the coronavirus (in terms of uncertainty), this contract was very close, and probably widely in doubt.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    35,996
    Salary caps are up $10M this coming year, but will rise more when all facets of the Agreement are in effect.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    windsor, ontario
    Posts
    61
    Yes, we are very concerned about player safety....we all care.....letís have Thursday night games and throw in a 17th game and 2 playoff games more....said every nfl owner.
    What a bunch of hypocrites.

    Players all got duped. Itís all about the coin....All for a few bucks more for the majority of the players that wonít be around more than 3 years..bad deal for players as a whole.

    Love my broncos, but 16 is enough.. like the extra team in playoffs thatís it...

    Thatís my 2 cents......

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    35,996
    Quote Originally Posted by 309a View Post
    Yes, we are very concerned about player safety....we all care.....letís have Thursday night games and throw in a 17th game and 2 playoff games more....said every nfl owner.
    What a bunch of hypocrites.

    Players all got duped. Itís all about the coin....All for a few bucks more for the majority of the players that wonít be around more than 3 years..bad deal for players as a whole.

    Love my broncos, but 16 is enough.. like the extra team in playoffs thatís it...

    Thatís my 2 cents......
    I echo your thoughts about safety. NFL is all about revenue.

    I think this vote might have gone the other way if not for the gloom that has come due to the coronavirus, in which lesser paid players banded together to guarantee more salary, given they are not paid like the top players. I think they saw a chance to gain some short term money, and took it. I doubt they are excited about 17 games, for example.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    the gulf of mexico
    Posts
    16,506
    This new CBA continues to water down the product, even less practices with even less time to practice. I donít consider this an equal tradeoff for the extra games.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Nelson, BC
    Posts
    19,169
    Quote Originally Posted by 309a View Post
    Yes, we are very concerned about player safety....we all care.....let’s have Thursday night games and throw in a 17th game and 2 playoff games more....said every nfl owner.
    What a bunch of hypocrites.

    Players all got duped. It’s all about the coin....All for a few bucks more for the majority of the players that won’t be around more than 3 years..bad deal for players as a whole.

    Love my broncos, but 16 is enough.. like the extra team in playoffs that’s it...

    That’s my 2 cents......
    The majority of players said yes... so by your own logic.. they put their safety lower on the list too.

    Of course the owners care about money first... why is this an issue? They don’t invest billions into this sport to get nothing from it..
    http://s7.postimg.org/hjr8fcmaz/EM2.jpg

    Adopted Bronco: Andy Janovich

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Nelson, BC
    Posts
    19,169
    Quote Originally Posted by CanDB View Post
    I echo your thoughts about safety. NFL is all about revenue.

    I think this vote might have gone the other way if not for the gloom that has come due to the coronavirus, in which lesser paid players banded together to guarantee more salary, given they are not paid like the top players. I think they saw a chance to gain some short term money, and took it. I doubt they are excited about 17 games, for example.
    Or maybe...they saw the deal, and liked it... and now there is stability for years to come..
    http://s7.postimg.org/hjr8fcmaz/EM2.jpg

    Adopted Bronco: Andy Janovich

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    35,996
    Quote Originally Posted by EddieMac View Post
    Or maybe...they saw the deal, and liked it... and now there is stability for years to come..
    Or maybe....it was about the now (world situation) and the future.

    Regardless, it was an extremely close vote, and some wanted to change theirs as the deadline came closer. I do feel like the current state of the world had some influence on that. People sometimes lock in when times are worrisome.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Nelson, BC
    Posts
    19,169
    Quote Originally Posted by CanDB View Post
    Or maybe....it was about the now (world situation) and the future.

    Regardless, it was an extremely close vote, and some wanted to change theirs as the deadline came closer. I do feel like the current state of the world had some influence on that. People sometimes lock in when times are worrisome.
    At the end of the day.. it was voted in...and every individual voter had their reasons.. I find it convenient for people to now blame corona for everything they disagree with.

    When this flu passes...we will have football with no labour stoppages for a long time.the owners and majority of players wanted it and it happened.,

    Like the leaders in the NFLPA said.. it was close, but it was a yes, now they band together and move forward with their new deal..
    http://s7.postimg.org/hjr8fcmaz/EM2.jpg

    Adopted Bronco: Andy Janovich

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    35,996
    Quote Originally Posted by EddieMac View Post
    At the end of the day.. it was voted in...and every individual voter had their reasons.. I find it convenient for people to now blame corona for everything they disagree with.

    When this flu passes...we will have football with no labour stoppages for a long time.the owners and majority of players wanted it and it happened.,

    Like the leaders in the NFLPA said.. it was close, but it was a yes, now they band together and move forward with their new deal..
    Who is that you refer to?

    People have a solid right to disagree on this topic, even if they are only partially disagreeing.

    And I am partially disagreeing with you based on the current state of the world. I think it is a very real factor. I think people understand the impact it is having on almost everything of late. And I dare say, it will have an impact on many things we do for the next few months....minimum.

    So yeah, the fact that it was so close, and people were trying to change their vote of late, tells me that there was new information that made them want to change. And the new info in this case might have been the insecurity of not having an agreement, with a pandemic, which currently is much more lethal than the flu, muddying their future vision. Therefore a good deal, which this just might be, is a nice thing to agree to...now, when in uncharted economic waters.
    Last edited by CanDB; 03-15-2020 at 01:32 PM.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Nelson, BC
    Posts
    19,169
    Quote Originally Posted by CanDB View Post
    Who is that you refer to?

    People have a solid right to disagree on this topic, even if they are only partially disagreeing.

    And I am partially disagreeing with you based on the current state of the world. I think it is a very real factor. I think people understand the impact it is having on almost everything of late. And I dare say, it will have an impact on many things we do for the next few months....minimum.

    So yeah, the fact that it was so close, and people were trying to change their vote of late, tells me that there was new information that made them want to change. And the new info in this case might have been the insecurity of not having an agreement, with a pandemic, which currently is much more lethal than the flu, muddying their future vision. Therefore a good deal, which this just might be, is a nice thing to agree to...now, when in uncharted economic waters.
    The NFLPA not allowing players to change their votes could be a big deal either way:

    Since the CBA is passed, some players will argue that the NFLPA didn’t allow them to be heard. Add that to Okung’s lawsuit and Reid’s lawyers’ opinion, and confidence in the NFLPA could be low enough for players to vote to decertify their union so they can reform it.

    If the CBA failed players could still have argued that they weren’t properly heard by their union, but CBA negotiations would be kicked down the road until 2021, when the current CBA runs out. That scenario would open a Pandora’s box of possibilities, including a strike or a lockout.

    So players wanting to change their vote... is a double edged sword.
    http://s7.postimg.org/hjr8fcmaz/EM2.jpg

    Adopted Bronco: Andy Janovich

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    3,181
    Im glad it was agreed upon just for the simple fact the game shouldn't have any more hold-ups for the next decade. I don't know how I really feel about the extra game. Part of me doesn't want anything to change, but a selfish part is thrilled we have more games and more playoff teams.

    I do think this has a major effect on what teams feel are "safe" picks. A player like Laviska Shenault who is already looked at as an injury concern, may be too risky for such a long season (including expected playoffs). I do worry that there could be a negative effect that wasn't considered, and maybe some of these injured guys don't get such a great chance anymore.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    35,996
    Quote Originally Posted by EddieMac View Post
    The NFLPA not allowing players to change their votes could be a big deal either way:

    Since the CBA is passed, some players will argue that the NFLPA didn’t allow them to be heard. Add that to Okung’s lawsuit and Reid’s lawyers’ opinion, and confidence in the NFLPA could be low enough for players to vote to decertify their union so they can reform it.

    If the CBA failed players could still have argued that they weren’t properly heard by their union, but CBA negotiations would be kicked down the road until 2021, when the current CBA runs out. That scenario would open a Pandora’s box of possibilities, including a strike or a lockout.

    So players wanting to change their vote... is a double edged sword.
    I was not advocating for players to be allowed to vote again. I was merely stating a very simple opinion of mine, that uncertain times are often the reason we minimize risk, including deals such as this. For example, if someone came to me tomorrow and said they'd buy something from me at a pretty good price, but a little lower than if I held out for a while, I might sign the deal. Why? Because the known, if it is decent, is sometimes better than the unknown....especially with financials. That, in my opinion, is why there is always panic selling in the markets, when such unknowns arise. Although the NFL deal is not to be compared too closely, because it is a pretty nice opportunity, even though a better deal might possibly be had if they had the patience and hope that others in this market may not.

    Those who wanted to vote again, if I had to guess, were many of those who assimilated all the recent news, and felt that voting to accept the deal was safer and wiser due to the uncertainties of this world, at this time.
    Last edited by CanDB; 03-15-2020 at 03:38 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •