18-Game Schedule Allegedly Off the Table

[theFRANCHISE]

[font="arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif"][size="2"]Based on what I've ascertained, two of the three main points of contention over the new CBA have now been resolved.

According to various reports, particularly [url="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/nfl/03/09/nfl.labor.18.game.schedule/index.html?eref=sihp"]SI.com[/url], the 18-game schedule is now OFF the table during CBA negotiations. This is in addition to the two sides reaching an agreement on a new rookie wage scale, as discussed in [url="http://boards.baltimoreravens.com/topic/34700-rookie-scale-reached/"]this thread[/url].[/size][/font]

The only dispute now is over revenue-sharing, which could result in another week-long extension from the already-extended deadline approaching this Friday.

Looks as if my prediction of this thing being resolved within three weeks could end up being right.

[berad]

If the reports are true, I've gotten what I wanted...

A rookie pay-scale

And retaining the 16-game regular season

Now sign the damn thing so we can get Haloti locked up.

[T3hRaven]

If this is true, this is turning out better than I expected it would. The players should concede some of the money the owners want and get this thing locked up. Keeping the season at 16 games is definitely what's best.

[Romo Ravens]

When Ray Lewis makes a comment, you listen lol.

[-Truth-]

Could not be happier to hear this.

[JO_75]

[quote name='berad' timestamp='1299727085' post='651242']
If the reports are true, I've gotten what I wanted...

A rookie pay-scale

And retaining the 16-game regular season

Now sign the damn thing so we can get Haloti locked up.
[/quote]

I agree with everything you said. What I never understood was that they couldn't just extend the current agreement and just add the Rookie Scale and that's it. In the end, all they are going to end up doing is wasting a bunch of time when all they had to was Extend the Current Agreement and add a Wage Scale, and that's it.

[berad]

[quote name='JO_75' timestamp='1299729609' post='651260']
I agree with everything you said. What I never understood was that they couldn't just extend the current agreement and just add the Rookie Scale and that's it. In the end, all they are going to end up doing is wasting a bunch of time when all they had to was Extend the Current Agreement and add a Wage Scale, and that's it.
[/quote]

Well I think they opted out of the current CBA because of the issue they're debating, now, the revenue-sharing. Owners want a bigger chunk because they say they're losing money, players want to keep or increase their own slice. I'm glad that they seem to have the other issues settled, though.

[Bltravens]

Those were the 2 easy things though, the revenue sharing was always the massive roadblock that had to be treaded around lightly.

[Passepartout]

Think about the increase in injury that the league would had faced on the players. Plus two bye weeks. As the teams would have to rest their starters once a week as well.

[MagicianCamille]

I never really bought into the possibility of a non-season...just seems like too many people would lose way too much money.

[theFRANCHISE]

[quote name='Bltravens' timestamp='1299731909' post='651275']
Those were the 2 easy things though, the revenue sharing was always the massive roadblock that had to be treaded around lightly.
[/quote]
I'd only partially agree with that statement, though; while those two things were easy compared to the revenue-sharing, the reason why the rookie wage scale hadn't been instituted sooner is because agents were heavily against it. Because the agents control the negotiations of their star players, they had a lot more political influence over this decision than they really should've had. With so many star players about to hit the free agent market, the owners had to take a united stand and call the agents' bluff. Thankfully, a lot of the veteran players also understood the rookie wage scale and were not opposed to it, regardless of the sway of their agents.

As for the 18-game season being an easy decision, it was difficult in that the owners were stubbornly behind it even though there was allegedly no formal proposal.

Now that those two issues are out of the way, however, you're right in that the hard part comes in resolving this revenue dispute. This is where everyone's bottom line is directly affected, and both sides will naturally want a solution that benefits them more than the other side.

[FerrariFan87]

This is good news. The 18 game schedule was a misguided idea from the get-go. They do need to reform the Pre-Season and stop charging fans and season ticket holders full price to attend these "games." A rookie wage scale is long overdue...

[Alexir]

I'm cool with the 16 game schedule but if the NFLPA are still going to ask for more money from owners, then they should play 18 games.

Also, Once Ed and Ray retire, I would be cool with going to 18 games [img]http://boards.baltimoreravens.com/public/style_emoticons/default/baltimore-ravens.gif[/img]

[bpytnjr58]

The way things are going there may not even be a 16 game schedule....can you say United Football League?

[BloodRaven]

If I was an owner of another team I'd be trying to work out a sneaky loophole to try screw us out of Ngata.

[ryan23945]

i heard mawae on the radio today, he says 18 games will NEVER happen