NFLPA player reps will vote Friday on DeMaurice Smith’s future

Getty Images

With the NFLPA’s constitutionally-created Selection Committee failing to rubber stamp a new contract for executive director DeMaurice Smith, the next step comes on Friday.

Via Mark Maske of the Washington Post, the board of player representatives is scheduled to vote Friday on whether to approve a new contract with Smith, or whether to declare the position open and conduct a full search.

If two-thirds of the board of player representatives vote to keep Smith without a search, the Executive Committee would then be required to negotiate a new contract with Smith. Given that the Selection Committee, which consists of the Executive Committee plus the three longest-tenured player representatives, voted 7-7 to keep Smith without a search, some members of the Executive Committee may be inclined to play hardball with Smith when negotiating a new deal. Any who have decided they don’t want him to continue may want to make Smith an offer they know he’ll refuse.

If Smith fails to get a positive vote from at least two-thirds of the player representatives, the Selection Committee then will be required to identify two to four candidates for the job. Smith, to have a chance to continue in the job, would have to be selected as one of those candidates. The next Executive Director would then be elected in March.

In 2018, attorney Cyrus Mehri tried to run for the job, but the Selection Committee unanimously voted to keep Smith, preventing an election. It’s unclear whether Mehri currently has interest in the job.

Here’s another name that has bubbled up as a potential candidate: Anthony Gonzalez. The former first-round pick of the Colts and member of Congress recently announced he won’t run for re-election in 2022. He’d have to resign from his position in the House of Representatives to take the NFLPA job, if he decides to pursue the position and prevails.

Smith’s 12-year tenure has become tenuous because of the 2020 CBA negotiations. In lieu of taking another lockout that would have inevitably resulted in a 17-game regular season, Smith advocated an agreement to a 17-game season, along with the financial benefits flowing therefrom. The vote ended up being closer than it should have been, with plenty of veteran players complaining loudly about it.

Few players currently in the NFL endured the offseason lockout in 2011, and none have lived through an in-season work stoppage. Football players want to play football and get paid for it. The imbalance in financial resources and longevity between the owners and the players makes it very difficult for the players to win a labor dispute that results in games being lost.

By doing a deal in 2020, Smith opted to avoid acrimony and the potential for lost games in 2021. By doing a deal before the pandemic began, Smith also avoided what surely would have been far less favorable terms after the owners lost billions during the 2020 season.

Regardless, and as Smith has said time and again, the players have to decide what they want to do. But like a team that is thinking about changing coaches, the first question the players need to ask themselves is whether the next executive director will be better, worse, or the same as the current one. Maybe, given everything that happened last year, they need to go through a full-blown search process to come to that conclusion.

On Friday, we’ll find out whether that will be happening.

9 responses to “NFLPA player reps will vote Friday on DeMaurice Smith’s future

  1. I find it funny that some commenters constantly criticize De Smith. These critics know absolutely nothing about how labor relations work, and know even less about the details of the negotiations with the NFL. Additionally, Smith’s critics are the same people who constantly take the owners side versus the players, a quite hypocritical stance to take.

  2. Smith has a thankless job and he also has very little leverage to work against the owners. There’s no way for us to know what he could or couldn’t have done better, but I would say there’s a zero percent possibility that another person in that job would’ve gotten significantly different results.

    “…The imbalance in financial resources and longevity between the owners and the players makes it very difficult for the players to win a labor dispute that results in games being lost…”

    Exactly. And that goes the same for most significant player issues – the owners hold most of the cards.

  3. This guy is a typical corrupt political lawyer. He will never ever do right for the rank and file, just as politicians never do right for its citizens. Him as well as that Browns meat-head both need to just go.

  4. Considering this guy just agreed to lengthening the season at the same as reducing the salary cap it’s hard to imagine his successor being any worse for player interests.

  5. Like Smith or hate him, there’s 2 things he recognizes that the rabble rouser candidates don’t:

    1. The stars may be important, but satisfying the rank and file gets the labor deals done.
    2. The threat of a strike is pretty much toothless. The owners could afford a year of replacement players. Many players can’t afford to miss game checks.

  6. The ludicrous deals that the NBA and MLB throw around make the NFL deals look bad. But as a fan of quality and competitiveness I hope the NFL doesn’t budge too much. We already saw how bad the old rookie mega deals used to turn out.

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.