Comments on: Smith Wants Talks With League Before Vote On Expanded Season

By: moonbeam

moonbeam — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 08:40:16 +0000

“mr smith has a basic philosophy when it comes to these matters”
that’s like saying,it’s an old family tradition for the last four years.
smith has never been in the football game and now he has a tried and true theory of managment?give me a break.
this guy has empty suit written all over him.
the fact that the union dismissed cornwell says everything,the union deserves what it gets.

By: SkinsFan

SkinsFan — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 22:21:45 +0000

Strategically speaking I understand why Smith wants to get in and start discussions this as well as other issues related to the CBA. Afterall, he wants to get a new CBA negotiated before the current one expires. However, I believe the owners are going to use this against him (and the NFLPA). They will continue to strategically line up all their ducks in a row and present the NFLPA with their list of demands for a new CBA at the eleventh hour, and they either take it or leave it (they will leave them as little time as possible to negotiate anything). I originally thought that a lockout was inevitable, but I am starting to there is a slim chance it can be avoided. Either way I still believe the owners will come out way ahead on these negotiations. The players don’t want to be locked out and I am really starting to think they don’t really want to see that uncapped season either. (i know it sounds bizarre but there are a lot of negatives to players that will be associated with that uncapped season)

By: SkinsFan

SkinsFan — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 22:11:25 +0000

illspaz,
the owners would never just cut 2 preaseaon games because they are huge money makers for the owners! everybody agrees that the pre-season needs to be shortened, but the owners arent going to give up an exta revenue generating home game. they will however be willing to exchange it for another home game that counts towards the standings.
DFWtmillaw,
the owners can do anything they want once the current CBA expires. the CBA is a loabor contract agreed to by the owners and players. when the contract expires there is nothing binding either side to any of the provisions in the expired contract. but obviously it would be an issue when / if they ever negotiated a new CBA

By: illspaz

illspaz — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 20:25:06 +0000

So when Adrian Peterson rushes for 2,200 yards in a few years, in 18 games, everyone will have to put an asterisk next to it and call Erik Dickerson’s 2,105 the “Pre-Goodell Era” record.
What’s wrong with just cutting 2 preseason games? Is adding games to the regular season really “for the fans” or is it to make the NFL more money and give Goodell a legacy?

By: empty13

empty13 — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 20:17:45 +0000

Demaurice looks like he was an owners’ psyop
I agree with mc
Make them all play a thursday game

By: warpaint88

warpaint88 — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 19:30:56 +0000

I really hope they keep it at 16 games.. I feel like it’s pretty perfect where it’s at right now. Players already start wearing down toward the end of the season, so extending it 2 games would kinda suck.

By: empty13

empty13 — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 18:50:04 +0000

he will have plenty of chances to screw up at the actual talks.

By: stboyd

stboyd — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 18:40:11 +0000

Seems to me that Goodell is not looking at the labor issue. He is making an attempt to gain public sentiment for the owners side of the up and coming labor negotiations/dispute.
Every season ticket holder would love to see more regular season and less pre-season games. If the owners champion this cause, and the union nixes it, the public perception could be that the greedy players are cheating the fans.(or at least that’s what the owners hope it will be). I think it is a smart play by Goodell.

By: VBG

VBG — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 18:08:41 +0000

“The NFL can’t unilaterally impose a fundamental change in the work conditions like an expanded regular season without bargaining. So even if the owners vote to add games to the season, the vote won’t be binding on the players.”
—————–
Are you sure about that? Why can’t the Owners say something like:
—————–
“We currently have a 24 game season (4 Pre-Season, 16 Regular Season and 4 Post Season).
Currently, only 20 of those games count toward a teams record but going forward, 22 of those games will count and only 2 will be exempt from the final record.”
—————–
Do the players get paid the same amount of money for pre-season as they do regular season games? If so then what gives them the ability to refuse to play in those games?
If they don’t get the same game check then that’s different.

By: McWest 536

McWest 536 — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 18:06:58 +0000

After playing a tough physical first half of a season, the league wants the players to turn around and play on 4 days rest for Thursday Night games in the 2nd half of the season.
Play 16 Thursday Night games (32 teams equals 16 games). Give each team their regular bye week and another bye before their Thursday Night game. The bye would take away the advantage the home team has by not having to travel on 4 days rest.
This expands the regular season from 17 weeks to 18 weeks, and no extra playing time for the players. The NFL could also sell the Thursday Night package to TNT, ABC, or another station and increase their revenue to boot.

By: McWest 536

McWest 536 — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:55:39 +0000

After playing a half of a tough physical NFL season the league wants these guys to turn around on 4 days rest and play a Thursday Night game.
Play 16 Thursday Night games. Give each team their regular bye and another bye before their Thursday Night Game. The participating teams on Thursday Night would then be off the following Sunday (in essence the Thursday Night game would have been the game they would’ve played on Sunday). A bye before the Thursday Night game takes away the advantage for the home team of not having to travel on 4 days rest.
This would expand the regular season by another game, 18 weeks instead of 17. No extra wear and tear for the players. And the NFL could sell the Thursday Night package to TNT, ABC, or another station and increase their revenuer to boot.

By: inmymind

inmymind — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:32:23 +0000

Smith is going to be a total tool isn’t he? He seems the type to try to put his face in the media, puff out his chest and do what is in the best interest of him, not the players every opportunity he gets.

By: NYJetsFan

NYJetsFan — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:23:48 +0000

I’d surmise that Smith understands that dialoguing early on the subject (before owners make up their mind without input from the union/players) can be very beneficial to the process and time line. Otherwise, the sides get together with a “NFL position” and an “Union position” and battle it out. If the Union communicates any questions / issues upfront, the owners will have an opportunity to discuss and address them in crafting their proposal.
Just because Smith’s approach isn’t the way it has always been done, doesn’t mean it is wrong or that he doesn’t know what he is doing.

By: 4thFloor

4thFloor — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:21:07 +0000

Why didn’t you just throw your name into the NFLPA President fray buddy, since you seem to be the smartest lawyer/NFL guru around……

By: DFWtmillaw

DFWtmillaw — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:20:23 +0000

Labor law is not my area of legal expertise…so I would be curious whether there could be an 18 game regular season, without the player’s consent, for any season after the current CBA has expired and a new CBA is not in place.