- Joined
- Apr 7, 2013
- Messages
- 120,146
By Daniel Kaplan Mar 15, 2020
NFL players narrowly approved a new 11-year Collective Bargaining Agreement by 59 votes, 1,019-959 (one more than 50 percent is necessary). The slender margin underscored that the CBA the NFL proposed after 10 months of negotiations with the NFLPA sparked controversy among players, unlike anything the union has seen since arguably the 1987 strike when some union regulars crossed the picket line.
For those who may have missed it, the following is a list of 10 important changes under the hours-old CBA that I highlighted prior to the vote. There are plenty more of course in the 439-page document, like an expanded playoffs, these are just the ones I flagged.
1. 17 games
The addition of the 17th game to the normal 16-game season had long been seen as a nonstarter. But the NFL made it non-negotiable, meaning the players could ask for something in return or walk away. The NFLPA chose to negotiate for a host of benefits. Many of the players against the 17th game are veterans who recognize the physical toll even 60 extra minutes will take, and that is the primary reason they were against the CBA. But for the 65 percent of players at the minimum wage level of the NFL and whose careers often last three or fewer years, an extra game and the paycheck may not seem like such a bad idea. The 17th game at the earliest would begin in 2021 and is tied to negotiating fees from the networks. Something tells me the networks won’t say no.
2. Minimum salaries
“Our goal going into it was to help core players, and to help minimum salary players,” new NFLPA president JC Tretter told ESPN last week. And player representative Nick Sundberg told The Athletic recently that the NFLPA first asked the NFL to double minimum salaries to $1 million, but got a 20 percent increase in Year 1 (and a more than doubling by 2030). To critics of the deal, this reeks of the NFL pitting players against one another by using higher minimums to drive a wedge between union members. Perhaps, but the truth is if there is a salary cap, then raising minimum salaries by definition depresses how much there is to pay higher-paid players. And a key criticism of the old deal is it created a haves and haves-not league. Nevertheless, it’s interesting that while 65 percent of the league are minimum salary players and benefit arguably the most for the new CBA, the deal passed with barely more than 51 percent. That means one of two things: the 25 percent of the NFLPA’s voting-eligible members that did not vote were disproportionately minimum salary; or many minimum salary players voted against their near term economic interest after listening to the opposition.
3. Revenue sharing (the money)
The players get a bump from 47 percent to 48 percent of revenues in this deal, and the number goes to 48.5 percent when a 17th game is added and media revenues rise to a certain amount (and as high as 48.8 percent depending on those media deals). Many players wanted to see a 50-50 split, or better, but the owners were not going for it. A 1 percent increase may not seem like much, but the NFL is expected to generate more than $200 billion over the lifetime of the deal. So a 1 percent increase is billions of dollars. Of course, spread over 11 years and 32 teams, the effective salary cap benefit is not as dramatic. One sidenote: there are fewer revenue offsets in this new deal (for things like debt for new stadiums), so the owners can’t shrink the revenue pie that they share from as much as in past deals. When revenue is referred to, it is really a term called All Revenue, which is every dollar that comes in minus the offsets.
4. Deal term
The NFL in 2011 signed the longest CBA in the history of pro sports at a decade, and without an opt-out option. Clearly the owners like that certainty and NFLPA leadership appears to as well (executive director DeMaurice Smith told ProFootballTalk last week an opt-out works both ways, it doesn’t let the owners out of a deal that may suddenly prove more advantageous to players).
5. Pensions
By some accounts, the deal infuses $2 billion more into pensions for both current and past players. Ex-players, especially those who played before 1993, have long complained about their mediocre pensions. And this deal goes a long way to fix that, even creating a new benefit. The 700 players who played at least three years, but not four, before 1993 will get $22,000 annually by 2025. Previously they were not eligible.
6. Disability
In 2007, after Congressional hearings on why so many former NFL players were turned down in their disability claims before NFL-NFLPA panels, the NFL made a key switch: using Social Security disability metrics to determine eligibility. This CBA eliminates that by 2025 and allows the NFL to deduct Social Security disability payments from NFL payouts. Former-player advocate Sheilla Dingus said her phone has rung constantly since this became apparent. “My Twitter’s blowing up,” she said. “The problem is the people have built their lives around believing this is their income.” But there is not a lot of money at stake in the big picture, perhaps $300,000 less for the NFL to pay annually in disability payouts, Dingus estimated. “They’re taking away from the disabled to give to the elderly,” she said of the pension increases.
7. Player discipline
Many assumed the player discipline decisions would shift away from the commissioner. It’s been a royal and litigious headache, from Deflategate, Bountygate, Ray Rice and others. Under the last CBA, the commissioner or his delegate heard discipline cases, and also the appeals (thus he is judge, jury, and executioner). Under the new system, a neutral arbitrator is appointed, but any appeal is again heard by the commissioner. This suggests this issue is important to the league, which argues it needs the authority to protect the brand of the NFL. Given only a handful of players are ensnared in the process, the NFLPA (like with the franchise tag) made a calculation that there were more impactful issues to fight for that affected a wider group of players.
8. Player data
The 2011 CBA has five mentions of the word “sensor.” The 2020 version? 45. Since 2011, the league and teams have deployed a wide variety of sensors that measure things like performance, biometrics and even sleep. Who controls that data? By and large, the players do, according to the new CBA, but the league receives permission to share the data in certain circumstances (for example, how fast a player runs is shared with a broadcaster). But other data, such as a sleeping disorder, is not to be shared with other teams, which could use it when deciding whether to sign that player. It is also not supposed to be used by the current team in contract talks. The NFL and NFLPA will also create a sensors committee to review the handling of sensor data.
9. Endorsements
The NFLPA long has had a separate commercial agreement with the NFL in which the league pays the union not to sign sponsorships with companies that conflict with league partners. So the NFLPA would not sign a Coke deal because Pepsi is with the NFL. Players individually don’t have that restriction. But the new CBA moves a little way in that direction. “Player shall also, in cooperation with Club, use all reasonable efforts to pursue media and marketing agreements with Club sponsors and media partners, before commencing negotiations with any competitor of any Club sponsor or media partner.” So before a player approaches company x, he must give that company’s competitor a chance if it is a team sponsor. What reasonable effort constitutes is of course unknown. But the league sees value if they can assure partners that they will have a chance to head off players signing with competing brands.
10. Practices
In return for a 17th game, offseason and in-season practices are reduced, and one of the four preseason games eliminated. While this may seem like a good thing for players, for some trying to make a roster, the loss of practices and a preseason game could be a drawback. However, there are two more practice squad players per team under the new CBA.
NFL players narrowly approved a new 11-year Collective Bargaining Agreement by 59 votes, 1,019-959 (one more than 50 percent is necessary). The slender margin underscored that the CBA the NFL proposed after 10 months of negotiations with the NFLPA sparked controversy among players, unlike anything the union has seen since arguably the 1987 strike when some union regulars crossed the picket line.
For those who may have missed it, the following is a list of 10 important changes under the hours-old CBA that I highlighted prior to the vote. There are plenty more of course in the 439-page document, like an expanded playoffs, these are just the ones I flagged.
1. 17 games
The addition of the 17th game to the normal 16-game season had long been seen as a nonstarter. But the NFL made it non-negotiable, meaning the players could ask for something in return or walk away. The NFLPA chose to negotiate for a host of benefits. Many of the players against the 17th game are veterans who recognize the physical toll even 60 extra minutes will take, and that is the primary reason they were against the CBA. But for the 65 percent of players at the minimum wage level of the NFL and whose careers often last three or fewer years, an extra game and the paycheck may not seem like such a bad idea. The 17th game at the earliest would begin in 2021 and is tied to negotiating fees from the networks. Something tells me the networks won’t say no.
2. Minimum salaries
“Our goal going into it was to help core players, and to help minimum salary players,” new NFLPA president JC Tretter told ESPN last week. And player representative Nick Sundberg told The Athletic recently that the NFLPA first asked the NFL to double minimum salaries to $1 million, but got a 20 percent increase in Year 1 (and a more than doubling by 2030). To critics of the deal, this reeks of the NFL pitting players against one another by using higher minimums to drive a wedge between union members. Perhaps, but the truth is if there is a salary cap, then raising minimum salaries by definition depresses how much there is to pay higher-paid players. And a key criticism of the old deal is it created a haves and haves-not league. Nevertheless, it’s interesting that while 65 percent of the league are minimum salary players and benefit arguably the most for the new CBA, the deal passed with barely more than 51 percent. That means one of two things: the 25 percent of the NFLPA’s voting-eligible members that did not vote were disproportionately minimum salary; or many minimum salary players voted against their near term economic interest after listening to the opposition.
3. Revenue sharing (the money)
The players get a bump from 47 percent to 48 percent of revenues in this deal, and the number goes to 48.5 percent when a 17th game is added and media revenues rise to a certain amount (and as high as 48.8 percent depending on those media deals). Many players wanted to see a 50-50 split, or better, but the owners were not going for it. A 1 percent increase may not seem like much, but the NFL is expected to generate more than $200 billion over the lifetime of the deal. So a 1 percent increase is billions of dollars. Of course, spread over 11 years and 32 teams, the effective salary cap benefit is not as dramatic. One sidenote: there are fewer revenue offsets in this new deal (for things like debt for new stadiums), so the owners can’t shrink the revenue pie that they share from as much as in past deals. When revenue is referred to, it is really a term called All Revenue, which is every dollar that comes in minus the offsets.
4. Deal term
The NFL in 2011 signed the longest CBA in the history of pro sports at a decade, and without an opt-out option. Clearly the owners like that certainty and NFLPA leadership appears to as well (executive director DeMaurice Smith told ProFootballTalk last week an opt-out works both ways, it doesn’t let the owners out of a deal that may suddenly prove more advantageous to players).
5. Pensions
By some accounts, the deal infuses $2 billion more into pensions for both current and past players. Ex-players, especially those who played before 1993, have long complained about their mediocre pensions. And this deal goes a long way to fix that, even creating a new benefit. The 700 players who played at least three years, but not four, before 1993 will get $22,000 annually by 2025. Previously they were not eligible.
6. Disability
In 2007, after Congressional hearings on why so many former NFL players were turned down in their disability claims before NFL-NFLPA panels, the NFL made a key switch: using Social Security disability metrics to determine eligibility. This CBA eliminates that by 2025 and allows the NFL to deduct Social Security disability payments from NFL payouts. Former-player advocate Sheilla Dingus said her phone has rung constantly since this became apparent. “My Twitter’s blowing up,” she said. “The problem is the people have built their lives around believing this is their income.” But there is not a lot of money at stake in the big picture, perhaps $300,000 less for the NFL to pay annually in disability payouts, Dingus estimated. “They’re taking away from the disabled to give to the elderly,” she said of the pension increases.
7. Player discipline
Many assumed the player discipline decisions would shift away from the commissioner. It’s been a royal and litigious headache, from Deflategate, Bountygate, Ray Rice and others. Under the last CBA, the commissioner or his delegate heard discipline cases, and also the appeals (thus he is judge, jury, and executioner). Under the new system, a neutral arbitrator is appointed, but any appeal is again heard by the commissioner. This suggests this issue is important to the league, which argues it needs the authority to protect the brand of the NFL. Given only a handful of players are ensnared in the process, the NFLPA (like with the franchise tag) made a calculation that there were more impactful issues to fight for that affected a wider group of players.
8. Player data
The 2011 CBA has five mentions of the word “sensor.” The 2020 version? 45. Since 2011, the league and teams have deployed a wide variety of sensors that measure things like performance, biometrics and even sleep. Who controls that data? By and large, the players do, according to the new CBA, but the league receives permission to share the data in certain circumstances (for example, how fast a player runs is shared with a broadcaster). But other data, such as a sleeping disorder, is not to be shared with other teams, which could use it when deciding whether to sign that player. It is also not supposed to be used by the current team in contract talks. The NFL and NFLPA will also create a sensors committee to review the handling of sensor data.
9. Endorsements
The NFLPA long has had a separate commercial agreement with the NFL in which the league pays the union not to sign sponsorships with companies that conflict with league partners. So the NFLPA would not sign a Coke deal because Pepsi is with the NFL. Players individually don’t have that restriction. But the new CBA moves a little way in that direction. “Player shall also, in cooperation with Club, use all reasonable efforts to pursue media and marketing agreements with Club sponsors and media partners, before commencing negotiations with any competitor of any Club sponsor or media partner.” So before a player approaches company x, he must give that company’s competitor a chance if it is a team sponsor. What reasonable effort constitutes is of course unknown. But the league sees value if they can assure partners that they will have a chance to head off players signing with competing brands.
10. Practices
In return for a 17th game, offseason and in-season practices are reduced, and one of the four preseason games eliminated. While this may seem like a good thing for players, for some trying to make a roster, the loss of practices and a preseason game could be a drawback. However, there are two more practice squad players per team under the new CBA.