CBA deal progressing

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
.

Are they gonna make rfa tenders guaranteed? If not the stars have screwed the little guys once again.

.
 
kurtfaulk said:
.

Are they gonna make rfa tenders guaranteed? If not the stars have screwed the little guys once again.

.
Click to expand...
I doubt if we know the full details until we’ll after it’s approved aside from these major talking points.
 
I just thought of something extremely haunting.

How many times are we gonna hear "done deal" the next few weeks?
 


  • The NFL's proposed collective bargaining agreement would increase the in-season roster size from 53 to 55.
    It would also increase the size of practice squads by adding two spots for "unlimited accrued seasons," aka any player. Other changes would include curbing the commissioner's power in disciplinary cases and softening marijuana punishments. There are some nice olive branches in the proposal, but a number of trojan horses, as well. It is far from guaranteed that this will be smooth sailing.
    SOURCE: Profootballtalk on NBCSports.com
    Feb 20, 2020, 7:45 PM ET


  • https://www.rotoworld.com/football/nfl/player-news/headlines/9557561
 
  • 4Like
Reactions: Ramhusker, Dodgersrf, Ram65 and 1 other person
.

When the owners agree quickly to the deal you know the players are getting screwed.

JJ Watt has already said it's a hard no to the deal.

.
 
  • Ouch
Reactions: hotanez
So if I'm reading reports right, we'll also have an extra 1.25m to spend on at most two players with 4 or more years experience. I think that bodes well for us to keep some of our vets even if it's just a modest sum. (Don't think I'll write that last part again any time soon.)

Also, not sure if someone else mentioned this but we're getting 4 more players for the roster. 2 on the active roster and 2 on the practice squad. That helps us a lot when it comes to the Oline as we've historically just kept 8 on the roster with McVay. Definitely think that one spot will go to oline on the active roster.

And there's an extra lineman rule that will allow for an inactive lineman to be activated if another lineman is knocked out of the game.

Lot to like in the CBA, some of it I'm not the biggest fan of.
 
  • High Five
Reactions: LesBaker
profootballtalk.nbcsports.com

Proposal would pay minimum-salary players at least $90,000 more in 2020

One aspect of the proposed new Collective Bargaining Agreement that is sure to be embraced by the league's lowest-paid players is a significant pay bump this year.
profootballtalk.nbcsports.com profootballtalk.nbcsports.com

Proposal would pay minimum-salary players at least $90,000 more in 2020

One aspect of the proposed new Collective Bargaining Agreement that is sure to be embraced by the league’s lowest-paid players is a significant pay bump this year.

The union distributed a fact sheet about the new CBA to all players on Thursday, and one of the concessions the union said it received from the owners was an increase of “at least” $90,000 for all current players who make the league minimum in 2020.

For example, a player who was a rookie in 2019 and is currently slated to make the second-year player minimum salary of $585,000 would instead make at least $675,000 in 2020 if the players approve the new deal.

That’s a significant increase, and it’s money that comes immediately if the players agree to the owners’ proposal. There’s some sentiment among the players to reject the owners’ proposal and try to get a better deal in 2021, but if you’re a minimum-salary player, there’s a big risk to going down that road: You’re turning down a $90,000 raise now, and for all you know you’re going to get cut a year from now and never benefit from whatever better deal the union might be able to get next year.

Although a few high-profile players, like J.J. Watt, have spoken out against the deal, it’s important to remember that highly paid stars like Watt are a very small minority of the union membership. Many NFL players have short careers and can’t afford to turn down money now for the possibility of more money down the road. And those players all get a vote on whether or not to accept the owners’ offer.
 
  • 3Like
  • High Five
Reactions: Ramrocket, Dodgersrf, hotanez and 1 other person
And this would be interesting to see play out... :oops:

profootballtalk.nbcsports.com

Report: NFL "probably" proceeds with playoff expansion if CBA doesn't pass

NFL owners approved the terms of the current Collective Bargaining Agreement proposal on Thursday and that proposal includes expansion of the playoffs to 14 teams.
profootballtalk.nbcsports.com profootballtalk.nbcsports.com
Report: NFL “probably” proceeds with playoff expansion if CBA doesn’t pass

NFL owners approved the terms of the current Collective Bargaining Agreement proposal on Thursday and that proposal includes expansion of the playoffs to 14 teams.

While some aspects of a new CBA would not go into effect immediately, the playoff expansion would be set to go into place for the 2020 season if the players approve the deal.

Mark Maske of the Washington Post reports that the league may proceed with the playoff plan even if the CBA doesn’t pass muster with players. Maske reports that NFL owners believe they don’t need approval from players in order to put the new playoff structure in place.

It’s not clear if the NFLPA feels the same way about that view and one might wonder why the league hasn’t unilaterally moved for an expanded playoff slate if it wasn’t something that fell under the purview of the CBA. Those questions would likely become moot if players approve the current proposal and that process will get going on a conference call of player representatives on Friday.
 
Players are voting no on this, they do not want 17 games and seem to be united on this front, the owners are going to have to figure out a CBA with 16 games because the players seem very united on this front.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Akrasian
den-the-coach said:
Players are voting no on this, they do not want 17 games and seem to be united on this front, the owners are going to have to figure out a CBA with 16 games because the players seem very united on this front.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's a fairly token increase in salaries, especially once you factor in larger rosters - but the chance of career ending or altering injuries goes up substantially with an extra game.
 
  • High Five
  • Like
Reactions: nighttrain and den-the-coach
den-the-coach said:
Players are voting no on this, they do not want 17 games and seem to be united on this front, the owners are going to have to figure out a CBA with 16 games because the players seem very united on this front.
Click to expand...
Players want to be paid for the 17th game. And by paid, its game check ++
Owners from what I understand have only allotted a 250k max add on.
Of course the players will be against anything that doesn't adequately increase their pay, they hold all the leverage on this. The future contracts will be screwed as the 17th game would effectively be baked in.
I'm typically pro-owner on these negotiations, but am 100% with the players on this. I wouldn't accept anything less than 1.5X game check, with no cap. And for future contracts, they would required to be negotiated at 16 game rates and the 17th game kicker on top.
 
  • Like
Reactions: den-the-coach
dieterbrock said:
I wouldn't accept anything less than 1.5X game check, with no cap. And for future contracts, they would required to be negotiated at 16 game rates and the 17th game kicker on top.
Click to expand...

I agree I'm usually pro owner too, but the players are united in this and I don't understand why you have to increase the schedule by one game. Again, IMO, I have a feeling there could be a strike, but unless all players unite, I don't see how they can keep other players from playing, like the XFL players for example.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back