Belichick’s plea may fall on deaf ownership ears

Getty Images

Sure, coaches want more time with players. That’s been a common refrain from the moment that commanders-in-chief of 32 NFL franchises realized the 2011 Collective Bargaining Agreement sacrificed precious offseason workout time, training-camp two-a-days, and in-season padded practices.

When Jon Gruden returned to coaching after a nine-year break, he complained loudly and repeatedly about the rules limiting coaching access to players. Bill Belichick reportedly has made a similar case, at a time when owners are preparing to commence talks on a new labor deal.

But will it matter? With players determined to get more in the next round of CBA talks, they won’t be looking to give up the gains made in 2011. And they definitely won’t be giving up those gains without getting something significant in return.

With owners surely not inclined to make the concession(s) necessary to get players to agree to work longer and harder hours, Belichick’s plea could fall on deaf ears. If nothing else, the NFLPA has gotten an advance glimpse of what the owners may want. The players now need to figure out what they’d want, in return for giving the coaches what they want. (If the owners decide that they want it, too.)

The challenge for the players will be to figure out exactly what they want — and to be surgical not scattershot in how those demands get communicated. This will be the first CBA negotiation during the era of full-blown social media, and the NFLPA will need to be strategic and measured when the time comes to send messages, to take positions, and to craft a desired outcome.

Fractures and divides on one side of the table can be exploited by the other side. For now, the NFLPA has a window into what could be a sharp difference of opinion between coaches and owners. Time will tell whether the NFLPA can avoid providing similar windows to the league.

18 responses to “Belichick’s plea may fall on deaf ownership ears

  1. As I said in the other thread, the league gives up weed to the players, the players give the 5 weeks back to the coaches, everybody wins.

  2. The players also have something to lose if they don’t get in the extra time in the offseason. Jon Gruden also stated, after he made his comeback last year that he had to “cut players without ever meeting or seeing them workout in person.” A number of others have also pointed out that blocking and tackling techniques since the last CBA have gotten sloppy, since the players don’t have as much offseason time.

  3. The players should trade this off with the franchise tag.

    Either eliminate the franchise tag completely or make it a one time (year) thing and then the player becomes an unrestricted free agent the following season.

  4. Anybody really thinking that Cannibis becoming legal isn’t priority #1 better pluck their heads from the sand.

  5. 30 owners plus the fans in green bay as owners are very jealous off bb so anything bb says they immediately reject

    these same 31 teams would hire him as gm and coach immediately if available, however

  6. Kiss the 1st round rookie 5th year option goodbye…the Cowboys situation is the best example of how detrimental the 5th year option is to first round rookies…

    Dak Prescott drafted in the 4th round will be eligible for free agency next year…Zeke Elliott was drafted the same year as Dak…but in the 1st round…he has to wait 1 more year before he’s eligible for free agency…despite being the better player and playing a more unforgivable position regarding wear and tear…

    Jared Goff and Carlson Wince were also drafted in the 1st round, but unlike Dak…they’ll also have to wait 1 more year before they can score that big contract…despite being better QBs than Dak…

    A system that rewards lesser players merely because they weren’t talented enough to be drafted in the 1st round is wrong and needs to change!!!…

  7. tylawspick6 says:
    March 31, 2019 at 12:37 pm
    30 owners plus the fans in green bay as owners are very jealous off bb so anything bb says they immediately reject

    these same 31 teams would hire him as gm and coach immediately if available, however
    +++
    Bill isn’t the only coach that has mentioned this over the years. He’s the best head coach. I get it but, everything he says, or does, doesn’t make him the first to do so.

  8. I guess after winning the AFC East for 20 years, going to 9 super bowls and winning 6 he feels he can do more. God bless him.

  9. We have heard a lot about what the players want (legalized weed, franchise player gone, more guaranteed money). However, we have heard very little about what they will give up in return. This BIGGEST ace in the hole for the players is the 18-game schedule (plus two preseason games) that the owners want. But they must save that for something they want to fall on the sword for. This maybe one of the bargaining chips for the players to make the owners/coaches happy and get one of the things they want in return.

  10. With the money they make they should work 12 months a year like normal people do. They don’t have to put on pads and beat themselves up every day in the offseason. Put them in the classroom.

  11. I just don’t see the owners thinking the 5 weeks is important or valuable enough to give the NFLPA much in return. Yeah, they’d probably like to keep their coaches happy, but from a business perspective, I don’t think it matters much.

  12. Some interesting proposals among the comments.

    Consider why the NFLPA bargained to eliminate the 5 weeks, and what players wanted it. Was it the rookies and 2nd-year players so much or was it the veterans? Who benefited the most? My point is I don’t see the NFLPA trading this for something that only affects a few rookie-contract players, like the 5th year option, or something like the franchise tag because again, it only affects a handful of players. The same segment that wanted and benefitted from the 5 weeks is larger and probably more influential than the few who would benefit from most of the suggested proposals. In other words, the trade isn’t worth it. And besides, like someone else already pointed out, the owners probably don’t value it enough to give much in return anyway.

  13. “I just don’t see the owners thinking the 5 weeks is important or valuable enough to give the NFLPA much in return. Yeah, they’d probably like to keep their coaches happy, but from a business perspective, I don’t think it matters much.”

    ——-

    I think this is the best way to put it. A lot of people have brought up good points, but this is what it comes down in the simplest wording. I would like for Belichick, Payton, Harbaugh, and the coaches to get more their requests for more time with players, but it doesn’t seem as important to be anything more than an unused bargaining chip the players have over the owners.

    I’ll guarantee you that the offensive line coaches in particular would kill for more practice time.

  14. How ever this works out, I hope the owners realize they have a quality product and the BEST way to improve on the product is by improving the ‘input’. It would be to the FINANCIAL benefit to give more b/c the WILL get more in return. It in NOT how much you get up front but what you get in the LONG RUN.

  15. If they want the franchise tag gone they have to go to 18 games that’s one thing for sure

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.