CBA Ratified

Share this page

Facts are there’s significant upgrades for entry level contracts and most players are 1-3 years and gone. They have the same voting power as the stars.

So what they agree to impacts the stars long term, when they may not be around to even see that 17th game.
 
There's a great deal more to the new CBA than this. Very close vote on this thing.

I wonder where the vote split was. My supposition is that the higher salaried players were ready for a fight over some stuff like Goodell having supreme power, "Deflategate" but the lower tiered players wanted the extra cash over anything else.
 
johnlocke said:
There's a great deal more to the new CBA than this. Very close vote on this thing.

I wonder where the vote split was. My supposition is that the higher salaried players were ready for a fight over some stuff like Goodell having supreme power, "Deflategate" but the lower tiered players wanted the extra cash over anything else.
Click to expand...

That would be my guess, also.

They all voted and the players got what they wanted. They just didn't want what a lot of Pats fans, including me, wanted: taking Goodell down a notch and vindication for deflategate.
 
Greedy bastards. Pigs at the trough... just pigs at the trough.
 
Bif split between the players. Better and older players were dead set against, younger and the more unheralded players said yes. The owners were very Wiley, offering the new, less well-paid players more money and reducing the playing years to be eligible for the pension won that group over.
 
Roberto71 said:
Bif split between the players. Better and older players were dead set against, younger and the more unheralded players said yes. The owners were very Wiley, offering the new, less well-paid players more money and reducing the playing years to be eligible for the pension won that group over.
Click to expand...

Can't say I blame those unheralded guys, it's a short career, and even if they do start making a name for themselves, they're potentially one bad injury away from calling it a day and losing out on a significant amount of money.
 
Ryan91 said:
Can't say I blame those unheralded guys, it's a short career, and even if they do start making a name for themselves, they're potentially one bad injury away from calling it a day and losing out on a significant amount of money.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's all very well the Richard Shermans and JJ Watts of the league lecturing on this while sitting on huge cash piles and not really needing a pension when they retire.

But you can also see their point about the extra games being detrimental as well.
 
The average majority of NFL players are better off and a majority is all it took to be ratified. It's not as if anyone was taken to the cleaners.


Good Lord, is this what Gronk has become? A pitch man?


Rob Gronkowski@RobGronkowski

Congrats to the@NFL for passing the new CBA. I’m glad players get another week of recovery & can use natural products such as @cbdmedic_pharma as part of their treatment.
 
chevss454 said:
The average majority of NFL players are better off and a majority is all it took to be ratified. It's not as if anyone was taken to the cleaners.


Good Lord, is this what Gronk has become? A pitch man?


Rob Gronkowski@RobGronkowski

Congrats to the@NFL for passing the new CBA. I’m glad players get another week of recovery & can use natural products such as @cbdmedic_pharma as part of their treatment.
Click to expand...

It shouldn’t work that way.

This isn’t a free democracy situation. This is a situation that dictates the work environment for all with equal votes for many that won’t even be working in said environment when the time comes.

The simple solution imo would be to weigh the votes. For every year of service you get a vote. A player like Winovich, first year, gets a vote strength if 1. Brady would have a 20.

You don’t let a guy who’s selling cars in 7 months have the same say as someone who’s built and toiled in that league for over 10 years.
 
Dwight Schrute said:
It shouldn’t work that way.

This isn’t a free democracy situation. This is a situation that dictates the work environment for all with equal votes for many that won’t even be working in said environment when the time comes.

The simple solution imo would be to weigh the votes. For every year of service you get a vote. A player like Winovich, first year, gets a vote strength if 1. Brady would have a 20.

You don’t let a guy who’s selling cars in 7 months have the same say as someone who’s built and toiled in that league for over 10 years.
Click to expand...

Very interesting thought. :peace:
 
Dwight Schrute said:
It shouldn’t work that way.

This isn’t a free democracy situation. This is a situation that dictates the work environment for all with equal votes for many that won’t even be working in said environment when the time comes.

The simple solution imo would be to weigh the votes. For every year of service you get a vote. A player like Winovich, first year, gets a vote strength if 1. Brady would have a 20.

You don’t let a guy who’s selling cars in 7 months have the same say as someone who’s built and toiled in that league for over 10 years.
Click to expand...
Interesting, but wouldn't that also mean that the players who will have to live with this CBA in the future has less of a say that the old players who will soon be gone and not have to deal with it.
 
spacecrime said:
Interesting, but wouldn't that also mean that the players who will have to live with this CBA in the future has less of a say that the old players who will soon be gone and not have to deal with it.
Click to expand...

Sure.

But the vets earned their say. They made it. The young haven’t earned it yet. Shouldn’t have equal say.
 
Dwight Schrute said:
Sure.

But the vets earned their say. They made it. The young haven’t earned it yet. Shouldn’t have equal say.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's a tough one, to figure out what is more fair. The vets have the experience and know what they need. The new guys are the ones who will live with the results the longest.

They have such differing needs, but I'm inclined to change my mind and agree with you, that the old guys can vote more intelligently with more knowledge than the younger guys, especially rookies that know their careers might be very short and therefore want to mazimize short term earnings.

Tough one, though. IIRC the union reps were supposed to vote and they did vote in favor but went for an all-member vote.

Is that correct?
 
spacecrime said:
Yeah, that's a tough one, to figure out what is more fair. The vets have the experience and know what they need. The new guys are the ones who will live with the results the longest.

They have such differing needs, but I'm inclined to change my mind and agree with you, that the old guys can vote more intelligently with more knowledge than the younger guys, especially rookies that know their careers might be very short and therefore want to mazimize short term earnings.

Tough one, though. IIRC the union reps were supposed to vote and they did vote in favor but went for an all-member vote.

Is that correct?
Click to expand...

Not sure.

They’ve got nobody to blame but themselves and it’s still a shit ton of money to get yourself off on the right foot if you follow the prudent lead of a Gronk for example.

I heard it passed by about 30 something votes.

Then, a couple days later, I heard 60 something didn’t even vote.

F em.
 
2 biggest wins for players THC no longer banned . A bigger share of the profits . They’re now have to play 17 games .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top