Powerful Week for the NFLPA, Marijuana on NFL’s Horizon?

When it comes to the NFL, the clash of the Titans begins again.

Basically, the NFL (the owners, Commissioner Roger Goodell, and the league’s offices) and the NFLPA work to construct a ‘collective bargaining agreement.

This document, which is hundreds of pages long and takes years to negotiate, governs the employment standards and conditions agreed upon by the players and the teams. The CBA, as it is informally called, covers details such as: restraints on practice time, minimum pay for rookies, and revenue sharing.

The time has come for the initial negotiations. This round of talks looks to feature much more interesting issues than the past, including team relocation. Other topics include the drug policy, the Commissioner’s ability to serve as a neutral arbitrator, and the fate of the preseason.

In terms of positioning for the next NFL collective bargaining agreement, the NFLPA had a really powerful past week or so.

More from With the First Pick

Because owner Mark Davis and the Oakland Raiders are hellbent on relocating the team to Las Vegas, the league’s owners are being forced into collective bargaining talks prematurely.

All of the revenue that the National Football League makes enters into one pot. That money is then redistributed at about a 3:2 ratio between the owners and players. This means that for every five dollars that the NFL makes, $3 are designated for the owners and $2 are designated for player purposes.

Each Collective Bargaining Agreement sets forth a pay schedule for the two sides. The ratio is adjusted based on concessions given to both sides.

For example, one such concession has to do with “stadium credits.” Stadium credits are reductions in the numerator (the owner’s profits) of the ratio in exchange for increased capacity to profit off of stadium relocation. These credits allow the owners to make money off of new revenues made off of the stadium.

The Raiders situation forces the NFL owners to the bargaining table– as the owners do not have enough stadium credits to allow for the Raiders relocation. And, because the Raiders already have a stadium paid for and approved by the state of Nevada. The owners essentially have no choice but to offer concessions to the players for the newest CBA.

As of late, the NFLPA seems to be playing hard to get. Even though the NFLPA will not admit to being formally engaged in negotiations. However, their willingness to position through the media suggests otherwise. This is a wise approach. NFLPA President Eric Winston told the Washington Post:

"“It would be hard to imagine any new deal if there is not a change [to Commissioner Roger Goodell’s authority in disciplinary matters.]"

Commissioner Goodell’s power has been a contentious issue throughout his tenure. Here is where the two sides stand on the issue:

On the players side: Recently, the Commissioner’s capacity to levy discipline has been inconsistent. Players have taken notice about Goodell’s proclivity to punish certain acts related to his interests and turn a blind eye on actual nefarious, disgusting behavior.

On the league’s side. The Commissioner’s position on player discipline was fortified by the Court’s decision in NFLPA v. NFL (Deflategate). The Deflategate case essentially calcified the Commissioner’s belief that he has the authority to impose discipline arbitrarily.

Aside from the Commissioner’s disciplinary power, could the NFLPA be lured to the table by other attractive additions to the new CBA?

One win-win scenario could coalesce around the league’s substance abuse policy. Both the league’s owners and players could profit from a change in the NFL’s punitive, antiquated Marijuana policy.

The league could modify the drug test panel to increase the acceptable amount of THC. Which is the psychoactive ingredient in Marijuana or Cannabis-infused products, in a player’s body. This would allow players to consume Marijuana at a controlled rate while allowing the NFL to continue touting the existence of it’s drug policy.

An article in ESPN opined that, aside from player discipline and Marijuana, that it would be ‘hard to see’ what major concessions the NFL could give.

However, there are quite a few changes the NFL could offer.

First, the NFL could overhaul it’s player health program. Concussions are not taken seriously enough. While the addition of concussion ‘spotters’ is nice, the spotters do not have any power with which to do their jobs.

The NFL did not add any penalties for violations of the spotter program. In this season alone, a notable example of the failed program includes Cam Newton’s concussion on opening night against the Denver Broncos.

With their current bargaining leverage, the NFLPA could shape a really comprehensive neurological safety plan. This sort of reform could help to secure football’s future.

Next, what about proposing changes to player discipline based on specific issues that the union wants to change? Perhaps Commissioner Goodell would be willing to concede his role to a neutral arbitrator of the NFLPA’s choice when choosing discipline on specific issues.

That way, the players would be able to hold themselves accountable with an independent administrator and the NFL could keep itself free from entanglement.

What about a guaranteed money clause?

One of the biggest issues for NFL players is that most of the money in their contracts is not guaranteed. Other leagues, like the NBA, pay out players upon release. The NFL, undoubtedly the most physically demanding and damaging league, does not.

The NFL players could demand to amend the new CBA with a guaranteed money clause. This clause could state that players must have a guarantee of a high percentage.

Other potential concessions by the NFL include: a reduction of preseason games, a reduction of Thursday Night Football games, and an increase in the denominator of the owners-to-players ratio.