NFL owners in the new CBA deal are "popping the champagne corks after getting players to sign off on a deal that guarantees their golden goose remains golden for at least another 10 years," according to Tim Dahlberg of the AP. This was a deal that "didn't need to be made, at least right now." Dahlberg: "And to make it for 10 years?" The NFL owners "win once again" (AP, 3/15). In K.C., Sam Mellinger writes the players "gave up the one thing the owners wanted most (a 17th game) in exchange for a lot of stuff the owners don't really care about (further practice limitations, softened marijuana policy, etc.) while not making enough progress on total revenue (their share goes from 47 percent to a max of 48.5 percent, though the owners still get to chop money off the top for various expenditures)." However, the players "did make progress in some areas." They "got more jobs and a higher minimum wage," and they "gained some health benefits and struck a win for former players." Mellinger: "That's all significant" (K.C. STAR, 3/16).
LEADERSHIP PROBLEM? In Ft. Worth, Mac Engel writes NFL players again were "put in their place" by the owners. The players "got popped, again, and had to say yes out of fear of the cash spigot turning off." Why they agreed to a 10-year contract that has no opt-out is an "indictment" on NFLPA Exec Dir DeMaurice Smith (Ft. Worth STAR TELEGRAM, 3/16). In N.Y., Pat Leonard writes if one can "imagine these negotiations as a dinner for two, the owners ate both entrees and let the players go to town on the sides" (N.Y. DAILY NEWS, 3/16). NBCSPORTS.com's Peter King wrote his biggest takeaway "will be how the 959 men who voted no -- that's a huge number -- look at their union now." And "how they look at their union boss." For a union that "took a very deep breath [last] night after passage of the CBA, there still could be storm clouds coming from unhappy players" (NBCSPORTS.com, 3/15).
THE BIGGEST ISSUE? CBSSPORTS.com's Jonathan Jones wrote the "most glaring issue is the revenue split." The players "go from an old CBA that represented 47% of the revenue split over the lifetime of the CBA to one in 2020 that will be 47% and increase to 48.5% once the 17th game is added." The players are "inching toward a 50/50 split, but it's fair to wonder if the addition of another game is worth just one-and-a-half percentage points as other major North American sports leagues hover around the true split" (CBSSPORTS.com, 3/15). ESPN's Adam Schefter said, “It does seem hypocritical of the NFL, which has preached health and safety of players, adding on a 17th regular season game and adding on to the playoff field.” Schefter: “It is hypocritical, and that’s why I think a lot of players were turned off" (“SportsCenter,” ESPN, 3/15).
TOPICAL EFFECTS: Chicago-based sports consulting firm Sportscorp co-Founder, President & Managing Dir Marc Ganis said that the events of the past few weeks with the coronavirus outbreak and subsequent market fluctuations "might have helped nudge the vote over the goal line." Ganis said, "The world is far less certain. Where some players thought the owners were benefiting most from the length of the contract, what has become evident this past month is that it's the players who benefit from the length of the contract" (L.A. TIMES, 3/16).
