Seattletimes: Yee has solutions for CBA negotiations

[Audible_Red40]

Mods, please feel free to move this to another thread if you deem it to be more suited there. I know it could go in a CBA thread, but the discussion is solely based on a specific topic and how "fans" preceive it.

Also though it could stay in the Stadium, even though it's not purely Redskins related, but no different the the other threads popping up.

None the less, Mr. Yee (T.Brady's agent) says he has a solution to the 18 game proposal, and that "This compromise will create even more interest from fans,"

So fellow Redskins fans, does his "solution" work for you? Like / dislike? Pros/ cons?

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sports/2014191351_apfbnyeesettlingthecba.html

I wont get into the rookie scale. But the 18 game solution:

-Increase the roster from 53 players to 58, and make all eligible to play on game day; currently, only 45 can play.

-Institute a rule that prohibits any player from appearing in more than 16 games.

"This compromise will create even more interest from fans," Yee said in an e-mail to The Associated Press. "What two games will the head coach sit the starting QB? That's a discussion that will set sports talk radio airwaves afire.

"This compromise will also be popular with coaches and general managers who want a greater opportunity to develop younger players," he said. "The NFL doesn't have a minor league, and this compromise will force meaningful participation by younger players on the roster.

"Players also would endorse this because each would effectively get two bye weeks during the year. Bye weeks afford important healing time and personal time away from the game."

Yee sees a lengthened regular season as a virtual free revenue stream for the league.

[onedrop]

forcing healthy players to sit is simply contrived and uneccessary. theres enough parity as it is.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

That's a very interesting concept. I guess, under this new proposal though, the players would lose some of their leverage for gaining more revenue since they are potentially playing in fewer games than before (since the pre-season will shrink and the regular season stays the same from an individual player perspective).

[wrecker]

Increase the roster from 53 players to 58, and make all eligible to play on game day.

Institute a rule that prohibits any player from appearing in more than 16 games.

This contradicts itself. How can all 58 be eligible to play and no player be able to play more than 16 games work?

[graffjd]

Increase the roster from 53 players to 58, and make all eligible to play on game day.

Institute a rule that prohibits any player from appearing in more than 16 games.

This contradicts itself. How can all 58 be eligible to play and no player be able to play more than 16 games work?

Not contradictory, Yee is saying to get rid of the 3rd string inactive qb and the gameday reduction from 53 down to 45 active, everyone is active but must not play in 2 games which would be the coaches decision. Effectively you must AVERAGE 51.555 players per game. On any one game fewer or more could be given the day off.

[daveakl]

"-Institute a rule that prohibits any player from appearing in more than 16 games.

"This compromise will create even more interest from fans," Yee said in an e-mail to The Associated Press. "What two games will the head coach sit the starting QB? That's a discussion that will set sports talk radio airwaves afire."

Sounds like fantasy football has made it to real life.

[wrecker]

Not contradictory, Yee is saying to get rid of the 3rd string inactive qb and the gameday reduction from 53 down to 45 active, everyone is active but must not play in 2 games which would be the coaches decision. Effectively you must AVERAGE 51.555 players per game. On any one game fewer or more could be given the day off.

So if you get the day off then you would not be eligible to play, right?

Senario: Cooley has the day off the last game of the year ( has already played his 16) with playoff contention on the line and Davis goes down with an injury on the first play from scrimage.

Also what happens in the playoffs? Are all 58 still eligible?

[TheGoodBits]

No offense to Mr. Yee, but I'm sure there are a number of far less complicated, potentially stupid solutions to this.

[rudc1]

It would create a lot of sports radio talk gossip that is for sure, but I just don't like it. I would prefer to see the most talented healthy people on the field every week...but if it meant I got 2 more weeks of real football (and I didn't have to pay for a preseason ticket that I didn't use each year in my season ticket package) then maybe...

With that being said, I do see one more positive that could come from it, and that is that teams who have serious injury problems do not necessarily take themselves out of the hunt, since injured players could accrue their forced sitting games and make their injury a less of a factor on the overall season.

I wonder how they would handle suspensions if they did this. Would big ben missing 4 games at the start of the season like he did this past season mean he gets to play the rest of the season, or would he still have to sit 2 more? I don't think a suspended player should be able to count those games, and that would be a big issue, with Big Ben, Vjax, Holmes, and a lot of other high profile players that were forced to sit this year.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I wonder how they would handle suspensions if they did this. Would big ben missing 4 games at the start of the season like he did this past season mean he gets to play the rest of the season, or would he still have to sit 2 more? I don't think a suspended player should be able to count those games, and that would be a big issue, with Big Ben, Vjax, Holmes, and a lot of other high profile players that were forced to sit this year.

I would think that any missed games would count. Keep in mind, the spirit of his proposal is to preserve the players' bodies, so I don't think there should be any restrictions to which type of missed games "count" toward the two.

[GibbsFactor]

Not saying it's a horrible idea, but a pipe dream none the less.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

So I am going to buy a ticket to a Patriots game and find out that Brady is a healthy scratch?

I would burn the stadium down.

It's a ****ing terrible idea.

[Audible_Red40]

So if you get the day off then you would not be eligible to play, right?

Senario: Cooley has the day off the last game of the year ( has already played his 16) with playoff contention on the line and Davis goes down with an injury on the first play from scrimage.

Also what happens in the playoffs? Are all 58 still eligible?

Exactly, this is what I am thinking. Based on your scenario, they "inactive" player can not get in the game. Yes, we would have a backup to Davis active, but the fact remains is you cant insert Cooley because he has reached the 16 game "limit".

Also, it's not like hockey for example, giving the starting goalie the night off. If the backup is just having an off night, they could essentially insert the starter for the remainder of the game and try the backup another night.

Also, not it becomes a strtegy game based on matchup daveakl said. It is perhaps fantasy football.

I travel down from Ottawa Canada once a year. Last year was the Monday night game versus eagles. Do I really want to attend only to find out that Fletcher, Hall, Torrain and Moss are inactive. That is not giving me the best of the best for my money. Now is that fair?

[Conn]

Its a ridiculous idea. The fans (especially the casual fans) watch to see the superstars play. Not so they can tune in and here "well, final injury/eligibility reports are in, and it looks like the Colts offense will be lead onto the field by....Curtis Painter?"

Yeah, that's going to work really well for the league. Purposely benching its superstars for 2 games a season. How can they guarantee that a team will play its "big name players" for a nationally televised Sunday Night Football game? They can't. And the average fan doesn't want to watch Brian Hoyer get sacked by Jason Phillips, while trying to complete a horrible looking pass to Matt Slater. Yeah.....who?

This would only create more meaningless games in a longer season...because you're only benching your superstar QB when you admit that you're okay with losing that game, if you really have to pick one or two to bench your star player.

Stupid. It'll be like fantasy football, where you have to have viable starters backing up even the QB position for these extra "bye weeks" for every player.

[Audible_Red40]

Also, another thing that makes this idea horrible is:

Increasing the roster to 58, only by 5 players.

Well news flash. Kickers are players too. So now each team would have to make a roster spot for a backup kicker and punter? Thus 5 players would not be enough. Cuz you expect there to be special terms for kickers can you?

Yee is dumb.

[GibbsFactor]

So I am going to buy a ticket to a Patriots game and find out that Brady is a healthy scratch?

I would burn the stadium down.

It's a ****ing terrible idea.

She's on Farve's payroll/conspiracy team. The entire premise is to keep Farve's streak in top.

FARRRRRRVE!!! Damn you!

[pjfootballer]

I hate this idea, but as bad as we suck we would get to see alot of backup QBs.

Anyway, with an 18 game schedule, they'd have to expand the rosters and make all players active on gameday. One change I'd like to see is the IR rule. Why not go to a 4 game disabled list. You could put a guy on the DL, promote a practice squad guy up, then activate the player when he's ready and put the backup back on the PS.

[SkinsMaster88]

I don't see any way that the 'mandatory' limit of 16 games for any player in an 18 game season is going to work. Regardless of developing young talent and more speculation, many fans pay to see the elite players in the league. It's not quite the NBA with superstars leading the way, but one of the main reasons for some of the recent divisional schedule changes was to avoid teams resting their starters in the final weeks. The NFL wants to stay competitive every week to maintain interest. You don't do that by limiting healthy star players to which games they can and can't play.

Now, if they do go to an 18-game format (which I personally don't want), then yeah, the roster and game-day actives should expand and IR/PUP rules should become much more flexible.

But no forced limits on playing time. Great players will always want to play, coaches will always want the best on the field, and the fans come to see the best. They want development, that's what the preseason games and the failed NFL Europe was about.

[Darth Tater]

I remember the year they had two bye weeks for a team. This meant that it was highly likely that a fan would suffer a week with no games of interest and many had two. Would a Patriot fan really be that much more interested in the games where Tom Brady sits? Heck, even the fans of their opponents would likely be a little less happy.

[oraphus]

healthy scratch? ..... what a moronic idea!

I am all for increasing overall roster size and active game roster size.. but the idea of limiting how many games a healthy player can play is idiotic to say the least.

The thing is.. i don't understand why majority of the players are so up at arms against an 18 game season.

2 pre season games vs 4 = basically one extra game a year.

The teams will be forced to focus on depth and good rotation more, which means more veterans will keep jobs and more rookies/ unproven players might get a shot to play and show what they got earlier then in a 16 game season and everyone gets paid more.

Think about it... its already common for most NFL teams to have 2 healthy starting caliber RBs on the roster... not that number will go up to 3, same with WRs, TEs, linemen.

This will change the game a little where coaches need to adjust to rotating the right players in/ out of game.

Perhaps increasing the pre-snap time might give teams more time to adjust on field personnel.

[Darth Tater]

Now, if they do go to an 18-game format...IR/PUP rules should become much more flexible.

Thing is, IR rules were pretty much modified at the players' request. Old IR rules allowed you to activate players put on IR in season to the active squad and use those players in practice. Use to make it fun because old vets got cut so young guys could be active in the opening game and then put on the IR while the cut guys got re-signed (also allowed owners to give those vets worse contracts). The first big change came from labor action that limited that to a certain number until that number got to 0. At some point, I think there might have been an exception for post-season. Change was intended to allow greater player movement and helped prevent those on IR from becoming a virtual taxi squad.

[TheGreatBuzz]

This sounds like one of those ideas that sounds great on paper as long as you don't put to much thought into it. Once you do, you realize it's stupid.