Skip to content

League’s desire to change practice rules killed IR, trade deadline proposals

NFL Labor Agreement Signed Getty Images

At a time when the NFL and NFLPA continue to be unable to agree on anything, the two sides disagree on the scope of their latest disagreement.

The league quietly had been pushing the position that changes to the trade deadline and the injured reserve rules weren’t approved by the NFLPA because the NFLPA wanted something in return for tweaks that arguably are beneficial to the players at large.  The NFLPA says that the league bundled the trade deadline and injured reserve proposals with revisions to new rules regarding padded practices.

It’s possible that both are accurate — that the NFLPA wanted concessions primarily because the NFL wanted to take a Mulligan on one of the key non-monetary changes owners gladly made in order to get the players to agree to the formula for cutting up the cash.  And if that’s the truth, the league needed to either make a concession or drop the issue of changes to the rules regarding padded practices.

It’s become popular in the context of the bounty cases to point out that the NFLPA must live with the fact that it agreed to allow Commissioner Roger Goodell to retain full power over most types of player discipline.  That door swings both ways; the NFL must live with the fact that it agreed to sweeping changes in the rules regarding padded practices.

And if the league now wants to change the rules regarding padded practices, maybe the league should offer to surrender some of the Commissioner’s power over player discipline.

Under the rejected proposal, the trade deadline would have been moved from Week Six to Week Eight, and each team would have been able to put one player on temporary injured reserve for injuries suffered after passing the preseason physical.

Here’s a thought — why not just offer the union to make those changes with no strings attached?

Permalink 7 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Rumor Mill
7 Responses to “League’s desire to change practice rules killed IR, trade deadline proposals”
  1. fmwarner says: Aug 23, 2012 7:10 PM

    Here’s a thought — why not just offer the union to make those changes with no strings attached?
    ==================================

    Because the NFL isn’t interested in a partnership with the players, or in their well-being beyond the ability to deliver trucks of cash to Park Avenue.

  2. reedrobertson says: Aug 23, 2012 7:13 PM

    I usually side with the owner’s.

  3. stew48 says: Aug 23, 2012 7:51 PM

    Just curious. Have you ever had a guessing game about how much Goodell made in 2011?

  4. sixburghrules says: Aug 23, 2012 8:00 PM

    What ever happened to signing an agreement and living up to it? Seems like the players side is always complaining about the new contract. They were supposedly aware of the clauses before they voted! If not shame on D. Smith their little midget with a big mouth! Be a man and honor your obligations!

  5. westcoastraider says: Aug 23, 2012 8:36 PM

    I seriously try to stay out of the NFL Politics, but more and more I’m starting to not like goodell, he reminds me of
    G w bush

  6. kampfire90 says: Aug 23, 2012 8:59 PM

    The NFL is screwed no matter what when it comes to the way these articles are written. So, instead of the union agreeing to something that arguably helps many of it’s members, they want to play chicken with the NFL & possibly lose that opportunity.

    I do agree that the league should drop that item if it totally eliminates the ability to get to an agreement, but Florio, you know that’s not how negotiations work. Both sides take as extreme stances on their sides as they can, as to not look weak, then “if they are smart” they will do some compromising after puffing out their chests.

  7. vikingamericann says: Aug 23, 2012 9:23 PM

    sixburghrules | Aug 23, 2012, 8:00 PM EDT
    What ever happened to signing an agreement and living up to it? Seems like the players side is always complaining about the new contract. They were supposedly aware of the clauses before they voted! If not shame on D. Smith their little midget with a big mouth! Be a man and honor your obligations!

    You must be from the Alabama section of Pennsylvania. The NFL wants to change the agreement. Learn to read. Better yet learn to question what you read.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!