17 game season and 14 team playoff expected under new NFL CBA, sources say

[Last Week]

If and when a new collective bargaining agreement is finalized -- and there is now mounting optimism it could be done sometime in the next week -- it is expected to include a transformational change to the NFL's playoff structure as it is currently constituted for next season, league sources told ESPN.

Under the current CBA proposal that NFL owners are pushing for, the playoff field would be expanded to seven teams from each conference, while the regular season would be increased to 17 games per team and the preseason shortened to three games per team, sources said.

As part of the proposed playoff format, only one team from each conference would receive a first-round bye as opposed to the two that currently do, league sources said. That would mean a revised postseason schedule that includes six games on wild-card weekend, with three on Saturday and three on Sunday.

The changes to the NFL's playoff format would take effect for the 2020 season, assuming the new CBA is ratified beforehand. Had the proposed format been in place this past season, the Los Angeles Rams and Pittsburgh Steelers would have been the next teams included in the expanded playoff field.

"That's been agreed to for a long time," one source familiar with the CBA talks said about the NFL's new playoff structure. "There wasn't a lot of disagreement to that issue."

Additionally, the players on the teams that earn a first-round bye will receive postseason pay for that weekend. That was not the case under the current CBA, which has always rankled some players.

Now the sides are trying to work through the final issues, including getting the players to sign off on a 17-game regular season. That has yet to be agreed to, and would not take effect until 2021 at the earliest.

"The new CBA's not done, there's no term sheet yet, there still are issues being negotiated, but I'd be very surprised if there's not a new CBA for the new league year," the source said.

 

[Last Week]

I imagine that the playoffs would look something along the lines of;

2nd highest divisional winner v 3rd highest ranked non divisional winner.
3rd highest divisional winner v 2nd highest ranked non divisional winner.
4th highest divisional winner v highest ranked non divisional winner.

Then, in week 2;

1 v lowest ranked winner
2nd lowest ranked winner v 3rd lowest ranked winner.

Then those two winners play in the Conference Championship game.

I like it if it's that way. The length of the play off's (not including the Super Bowl) remains at 3 weeks. Divisional winners still get their home ground advantage in week 1 and possibly 2.

 

[Valheru]

Yeah that's exe fly how it will play out IMO.

The more interesting part of the article IMO is the 17th regular season game. That just doesn't make sense with scheduling as that means they will have to play another intra-conference match. How will they choose the opponent?

18 games makes far more sense because then you could scrap the system where each team plays 2 intra-conference games against teams who finished in the same position and just make them play a full division.

So in other words that would mean 6 games against your division, 4 against a division from the other conference and I against two whole divisions in your conference.

 

[Last Week]

Yeah that's exe fly how it will play out IMO.

The more interesting part of the article IMO is the 17th regular season game. That just doesn't make sense with scheduling as that means they will have to play another intra-conference match. How will they choose the opponent?

18 games makes far more sense because then you could scrap the system where each team plays 2 intra-conference games against teams who finished in the same position and just make them play a full division.

So in other words that would mean 6 games against your division, 4 against a division from the other conference and I against two whole divisions in your conference.

*edit - brain fart*

More interestingly for me is, who hosts the game? I can see the college stadiums getting a work out. Mexico and Canada will get their fair share of games too.

 

[nick87]

THis deal for the players looks like a disater based on details leak so far

they get an increase in revenue from 47% to 48% or 48.5% if they move to a 17 game schedule, but almost all of that per team is going to wind up in the QB's pocket and maybe 1-2 other players

And the "concessions" the owners have made for this appears to be some light camp and training schedules, scaling back the Commissioner power for disciplinary action and some revised drug policy

None of those matters are economical. As said the revenue will end up in 2-3 players per team and no one else sniffs it, the changes to minimum spend arent good enough and the increase risk to not even get a 50/50 split is WILD.
THe drug policy and commissioner power issue wer givens! You dont need to surrender anything for that.

If the players do this deal, well good for us fans, no work stoppage but this is a f**king SHIT show.

 

[Valheru]

THis deal for the players looks like a disater based on details leak so far

they get an increase in revenue from 47% to 48% or 48.5% if they move to a 17 game schedule, but almost all of that per team is going to wind up in the QB's pocket and maybe 1-2 other players

And the "concessions" the owners have made for this appears to be some light camp and training schedules, scaling back the Commissioner power for disciplinary action and some revised drug policy

None of those matters are economical. As said the revenue will end up in 2-3 players per team and no one else sniffs it, the changes to minimum spend arent good enough and the increase risk to not even get a 50/50 split is WILD.
THe drug policy and commissioner power issue wer givens! You dont need to surrender anything for that.

If the players do this deal, well good for us fans, no work stoppage but this is a f**king SHIT show.

Personally I find it hard to feel sorry for NFL players. Perhaps I don't have an appreciation for the bottom rung players and I am no expert in the economics of the sport but on the surface they have the best deal going around. Small schedule, barely any off-season training to speak of and massive wages.

For me the extra game or preferably 2 should be no issue, especially given the decrease in pre-season game/s

 

[Last Week]

Personally I find it hard to feel sorry for NFL players. Perhaps I don't have an appreciation for the bottom rung players and I am no expert in the economics of the sport but on the surface they have the best deal going around. Small schedule, barely any off-season training to speak of and massive wages.

For me the extra game or preferably 2 should be no issue, especially given the decrease in pre-season game/s

NHL. Arguably tougher sport. Play more games and get paid significantly less.

 

[nick87]

Personally I find it hard to feel sorry for NFL players. Perhaps I don't have an appreciation for the bottom rung players and I am no expert in the economics of the sport but on the surface they have the best deal going around. Small schedule, barely any off-season training to speak of and massive wages.

For me the extra game or preferably 2 should be no issue, especially given the decrease in pre-season game/s

The NFL is taking WELL over 50% of revenue, where as the NBA players get 50% and MLB fluctuates in the mid 50's to high 50's
The new CBA which will probably go through in the next few weeks will see the NFL holding 51.5% or more of total revenue until 2030.

The NFL have the franchise tag and transition tag that essentially exists just to neuter the markets and keep salaries down by never allowing top level players to hit an open market and reset it.

There is no one and done in College football, players have to go through 3 years before hitting the draft, so you're not making a dime until 22-23. Where as really good basketball players are out at 19-20. MLB get draft and into the minors as 18 year olds.

So now an NFL player hits the league at 22, and if he's not a QB, then he's got about 10 years to make money until 32... if you're a high pedigree guy and first round pick, it's 4 years plus the 5th year option... then the franchise tag, and then they might franchise you again... teams have total control of the player for 7 years of their at best 10 years.

So what do players do? They sign team friendly deals that pay them less than they deserve because there is no avenue for them to hit FA if they're that good. And the deals arent even guaranteed!

Nigel Bradham signed a 5 year 40m dollar deal in 2018. 2 years ago, the eagles released him yesterday... of that 40m deal he signed, he actually only got 10 of it and now the eagles can walk away without owing him a cent.

And the small schedule they play scrabbles half of their brains into CTE submission. CTE is not a problem is baseball and NBA, its your normal wear and tear of a pro athlete. It's not reducing you to a dribbling mess and heightening your risks of mental illness

The NFL deal, is by far the worst for the players across the 3 majors. And it's not even close
(Im not much of a hockey guy so cant speak to that)

 

[zombie jesus]

Steelers' players were the only team not to agree to the last deal, should be more this time around.

 

[gordsy]

The NFL is taking WELL over 50% of revenue, where as the NBA players get 50% and MLB fluctuates in the mid 50's to high 50's
The new CBA which will probably go through in the next few weeks will see the NFL holding 51.5% or more of total revenue until 2030.

The NFL have the franchise tag and transition tag that essentially exists just to neuter the markets and keep salaries down by never allowing top level players to hit an open market and reset it.

There is no one and done in College football, players have to go through 3 years before hitting the draft, so you're not making a dime until 22-23. Where as really good basketball players are out at 19-20. MLB get draft and into the minors as 18 year olds.

So now an NFL player hits the league at 22, and if he's not a QB, then he's got about 10 years to make money until 32... if you're a high pedigree guy and first round pick, it's 4 years plus the 5th year option... then the franchise tag, and then they might franchise you again... teams have total control of the player for 7 years of their at best 10 years.

So what do players do? They sign team friendly deals that pay them less than they deserve because there is no avenue for them to hit FA if they're that good. And the deals arent even guaranteed!

Nigel Bradham signed a 5 year 40m dollar deal in 2018. 2 years ago, the eagles released him yesterday... of that 40m deal he signed, he actually only got 10 of it and now the eagles can walk away without owing him a cent.

And the small schedule they play scrabbles half of their brains into CTE submission. CTE is not a problem is baseball and NBA, its your normal wear and tear of a pro athlete. It's not reducing you to a dribbling mess and heightening your risks of mental illness

The NFL deal, is by far the worst for the players across the 3 majors. And it's not even close
(Im not much of a hockey guy so cant speak to that)

People saying the players get paid huge amounts for small seasons etc yes that's true but why shouldn't they get paid a lot, they generate billions and billions in revenue for the Nfl and the owners. Seems only fair they get a large slice of that revenue.

 

[kurt faulk]

The NFL is taking WELL over 50% of revenue, where as the NBA players get 50% and MLB fluctuates in the mid 50's to high 50's
The new CBA which will probably go through in the next few weeks will see the NFL holding 51.5% or more of total revenue until 2030.

The NFL deal, is by far the worst for the players across the 3 majors. And it's not even close.

mlb has 162 games per regular season.

nba has 82 games per season.

nfl has 16 games per season. and the players are crying that they will have to play one more.

mlb players share per year - $4.8 billion

nba players share per year - $2.4 billion

nfl players share per year - $6.24 billion

25 players per mlb team. 15 players per nba team. 53 players per nfl team.

750 players in mlb per year. 450 players in nba per year. 1,696 players in nfl per year.

each game - 3 hours mlb, 2.4 hours nba, 3 hours nfl.

per year - 486 hours mlb, 197 hours nba, 48 hours nfl.

total hours for all payers - 364.5k mlb, 88.6k nba, 81.4k nfl

pay per hour played - $13.2k mlb, $27.1k nba, $76.7k nfl.

at a per hour rate the nfl players are in their own stratosphere.

.

 

[nick87]

MLB and NBA arent sports that turn your brain into f**king mush.
They also have gtd contracts. They also dont have things like the franchise tag which not only prevents players from reaching the market and resetting it and get their fair market value, it acts as a depressant for the market in general, which takes money out of everyone's pockets.


If you honestly think the NFL players are getting a good deal, i've got some prime swampland to sell you

 

[kurt faulk]

MLB and NBA arent sports that turn your brain into f**king mush.
They also have gtd contracts. They also dont have things like the franchise tag which not only prevents players from reaching the market and resetting it and get their fair market value, it acts as a depressant for the market in general, which takes money out of everyone's pockets.


If you honestly think the NFL players are getting a good deal, i've got some prime swampland to sell you

Nobody is putting a gun to their heads to play the sport. They willingly play because the amount of money they get paid is insane.

After the new CBA comes in and new tv rights get signed the amount of money they get paid per hour of play is gonna explode.

Not sure why you think they don't have it good. They live in a dream world.

.

 

[Captain Apollo]

Not sure why you think they don't have it good. They live in a dream world.

.

Tell that to guys like Dwight Clark, Frank Gifford, Chris Henry, Junior Seau or Bubba Smith.

 

[Captain Apollo]

Well the NFL and the NFLPA have finalised the CBA. Players to start voting on whether the NFLPA should ratify it or not shortly - https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...ew-cba-final-decision-to-be-made-by-march-12/

 

[nick87]

Well the NFL and the NFLPA have finalised the CBA. Players to start voting on whether the NFLPA should ratify it or not shortly - https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...ew-cba-final-decision-to-be-made-by-march-12/

Lots of high profile stars taking to twitter to say they're voting no and urging others to vote no too.
But I suspect it'll pass...

The structure of this deal provides a good size pay rise to rookies and minimum wage guys, provided a lot of additional support for PS guys, there is performance escalators in it for rookies and there a bunch of concessions made for things like discipline (removed Goodell as judge, jury, executioner) and drug polices

the simply reality is 70% of the league are guys who are going to see immediate returns on that, and this vote only needs a simple 50% majority. It's a bad deal for a number of reasons but i also recognise its much easier for Richard Sherman, Russell Wilson and Todd Gurley etc al, who have already got their money, who can afford a work stoppage, who are big time stars to say "vote no, we can do better!"

The problem is they're only 20-30% of the league. The rest of the league is full of guys like Nick Sundberg, who was vocal on twitter about why he's going to vote yes... you cant ask guys like him and rookies who are looking at a solid bump in their salary and their entitlements etc to risk a lock out for a future they might not even have

What those guys need is football to keep going, because they havent got life altering money, so they cant afford a stoppage, and more than that, they need football to keep going so they can keep getting game time and practise reps and coaching, so they can develop into the player they believe they can be, and have their contract years toll so they can get off that rookie deal and get some of that Sherm/TG3/Wilson/etc generational wealth money

Also it's hard to imagine people like Tom Brady, or Drew Brees, or Phil Rivers or any of those aging vets who are desperate to get that ring, or add to their rings to cement their legacy, to vote no and risk a work stoppage or a missed season

The owners have crafted an extremely difficult deal for the players body as a whole to knock back, even if they arent getting a fair deal, as many believe to be the case.