What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

CBA negotiations (17-18 game schedule / 14 playoff teams) (1 Viewer)

I can see 2 preseason games happening.  They're a joke - just sell tickets to joint practices if you need ticket sales that much. People would rather see starters in a joint practice anyway. Expanded regular season - nope.

 
IMO zero chance the regular season gets expanded. especially when you've got guys like Luck and Gronk retiring early because it's not worth it anymore. I think we will start seeing more of these guys retiring in the future. 

The NFL has already peaked long ago

 
Another interesting point (via axios)

As the NFL and NFLPA continue early CBA talks, the 18-game regular season proposal has stolen all the headlines. But there is another issue that is being largely ignored — and it could be just as impactful.

Driving the news: According to multiple reports, the elimination of the NFL's archaic "funding rule" is a top priority for the NFLPA.

In fact, Broncos kicker Brandon McManus, the team's NFLPA player representative, called it "almost a non-negotiable for us," per The Athletic (subscription).

How it works: The NFL's funding rule stipulates that every fully guaranteed dollar owed to a player, but not yet paid to him, must be placed in a league-run escrow account.

In other words, even if a player is owed guaranteed money over the course of two or three years, ownership still must place all of that money into a separate bank account.

The problem: Back when the NFL wasn't the cash cow that it is today and players had legitimate concerns about owners not being able to fulfill future financial obligations, this rule made sense and worked in the players' favor.

But in today's era, the funding rule has morphed into something completely different: a convenient excuse for ownership during contract negotiations.

Basically, teams will tell playersthat they can't afford to guarantee their deals because funding them would create cashflow issues. "Negotiations are a leverage game. And it's a cudgel they can go to," agent Jelani Roy told The Athletic.

The big picture: Thanks in part to the funding rule, fully-guaranteed contracts — which are the norm in the NBA, NHL and MLB — are a rarity in the NFL.

Last offseason, Kirk Cousins became the first QB to sign a multi-year, fully-guaranteed deal (three years, $84 million with the Vikings), and that only happened because he was the rare in-his-prime QB to hit free agency, which gave him all the leverage in the world.

The bottom line: The elimination of the NFL's funding rule might not make deals like the one Cousins signed the norm, but it would remove a giant roadblock in the players' ongoing fight for more guaranteed pay.
 
Owners are ridiculously claiming they need to make up the lost revenue from going from 4 preseason games to 3. Their level of greed is poisonous.

 
The owners are not giving up 2 preseason games without getting something in return.  It will either be additional regular season games or more teams make the playoffs or both.  Otherwise the schedule will remain as it is.

 
I can't possibly fathom the proposal of more games when it's certainly brutal enough. The owners are making fistful over fistful. The preseason is done, time to move on from it. 

 
They could add weeks and not games - like 16 games over 18 weeks - 2 byes.  That's got to be a revenue creator

 
I can't possibly fathom the proposal of more games when it's certainly brutal enough. The owners are making fistful over fistful. The preseason is done, time to move on from it. 
I agree.   I really don't want regular season games in August and definitely not in January.  I realize the preseason games are a joke but just leave it the way it is.

 
i don't think that the networks are going to pay more money for the same number of games.
An extra week of featured Sunday late-afternoon games, Sunday Night, Monday Night, and Thursday Night games has to be worth something substantial. Plus an extra week in December to broadcast Saturday NFL games.

 
They could add weeks and not games - like 16 games over 18 weeks - 2 byes.  That's got to be a revenue creator
Was done in 1993. Countintuitively:

However, teams felt that having two weeks off during the regular season was too disruptive for their weekly routines, and thus it reverted to 17 weeks immediately after the season ended.
But that was 26 years ago. I bet players would love that extra week off nowadays.

 
An extra week of featured Sunday late-afternoon games, Sunday Night, Monday Night, and Thursday Night games has to be worth something substantial. Plus an extra week in December to broadcast Saturday NFL games.
i'm not sure if there are enough games to make it worth their while.  They are already stretched thin on the prime-time games + national Sunday games.  NBC and Fox Thursday aren't going to pay for Bengals-Dolphins and Raiders-Bills.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top