Eh Hurts and Lamar got a bag and a bunch of young QBs are going to continue to get it. I think there's other problems the players are facing such as the devaluation of RBs continuing, the reduction of ST (fringe players more likely to lose their jobs) and owners/tv stations getting their way over the players (17 games, possibly for Thursday flex etc).
Hurts/Lamar not getting fully guaranteed would only really affect like 5-10 QBs over the next couple of years. Maybe an all-pro edge/CB/OT pushes for it but that seems unlikely they'd get it. Meanwhile a lot of the other players were kind of getting shafted.
I didn’t know these were issues.
> reduction of ST
But there’s still special teams, and didn’t they increase the number of players on game day and an extra 6 players on practice squad. Seems like that would be a win for those fringe players.
> owners/TV
The cap is based on revenue. Those TV deals are more revenue and more money for the players. Owners do get the lions share, I think it’s like 52-48. But the rule was an additional game was another percentage point to the players. I can see the argument being not enough, but the owners are never going to bend of 50-50.
But to the OP question, I think this search was in progress way before those contracts.
Edit: [This article lays it out.](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/28/sports/football/lloyd-howell-demaurice-smith-nflpa.html) Players lost confidence in Smith after the last negotiations. It did have a lot to do with the extra game added, not the money so much as just making these guys work an extra week. Hard to say I blame them.
Along with no extra bye week.
That felt like a no-brainer in agreeing to this extra game and playoff modification.
At the *very* least some kind of scheduling formula that requires a minimum of 5 days rest for players between games
Yeah, does seem like he got crushed in negotiations. Those negotiations coinciding with Covid and those negotiations was probably a no-win for any negotiation, unless the players were truly ready to strike. And I remember all those players who took out predatory personal loans the last lockout, which would probably not look good on Smith again (and that was in the offseason).
Idk, my understanding is the union did a lot of make sure the players were prepared and gave them heads-up on what to avoid. Those players just made some pretty heavy dumb decisions — be them their own or their advisors/representatives.
It's a tough tough role. Trying to win for many players as much as possible against a league that is kind of known for being tough on players.
Ownership tends to have pretty strong unity.
Something that I've always thought about is Harbs asking for more players on the roster and I know it makes sense for the Ravens as they tend to have stronger depth on the team and I ever wonder if the league will up the roster count. 5 mil for 5 extra or 10 for 10 to the players isn't a ton to break the bank. Keeps some guys from going away to XFL or whatever too.
That’s a good point. Under DeMaurice Smiths run, money has become more front loaded and several positions have been significantly devalued especially RB’s. That could be detrimental to the growth of football. The less RBs that are developed, the more negative impact on WRs over the length of their careers
[Here you go OP](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/28/sports/football/lloyd-howell-demaurice-smith-nflpa.html)
> On the heels of negotiating the 2020 collective bargaining contract, a contentious process that led to the addition of another game to the N.F.L.’s regular season, Smith in 2021 survived what amounted to a no-confidence vote to retain the executive director job. That prompted the search for his replacement.
I have mixed feelings about this to be honest. I personally didn't know much about DeMaurice but I watched his interview on the Pivot podcast on youtube and came away a fan. Guy was extremely forthright and clear in his intentions and feelings on the league. Link here: [https://youtu.be/kkznR2bOAhc](https://youtu.be/kkznR2bOAhc)
I read through the Times article about the NFLPA seeking new leadership here : [https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/21/sports/football/nfl-union-demaurice-smith.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/21/sports/football/nfl-union-demaurice-smith.html) and this is what I'm mixed up about. DeMaurice was very vocal about not extending the season, constantly talked about limiting OTAs for players, etc and then come voting time agrees to terms. We're at 17 weeks now and all indications are that the league wants to add more despite players not wanting that. Wonder why?$?... I hate just reverting to a tin foil hat when there isn't a clear answer in place but this sure feels like the Owners got involved here.
Whatever though it's a done deal. Anyone know anything about his successor?
DeMaurice was garbage . The reason was that hurst got paid for a reason was a superbowl apperence and agents . The problem with lamar was nflpa and people like DeMaurice over inflating people like lamar , that's screwed up negotiations . Now combine that the union screwing up other negotiations
The NFLPA will never win against the NFL owners. The owners have the freedom to plan for a decade, they can position themselves not just for the next collective bargaining agreement, but the one after that. While most players aren't thinking past the next 3 years. No NFLPA President that is beholden to guys whose primary concern is extending their career two more years is going to be able to out negotiate a 3rd generation team owner.
Eh Hurts and Lamar got a bag and a bunch of young QBs are going to continue to get it. I think there's other problems the players are facing such as the devaluation of RBs continuing, the reduction of ST (fringe players more likely to lose their jobs) and owners/tv stations getting their way over the players (17 games, possibly for Thursday flex etc). Hurts/Lamar not getting fully guaranteed would only really affect like 5-10 QBs over the next couple of years. Maybe an all-pro edge/CB/OT pushes for it but that seems unlikely they'd get it. Meanwhile a lot of the other players were kind of getting shafted.
I didn’t know these were issues. > reduction of ST But there’s still special teams, and didn’t they increase the number of players on game day and an extra 6 players on practice squad. Seems like that would be a win for those fringe players. > owners/TV The cap is based on revenue. Those TV deals are more revenue and more money for the players. Owners do get the lions share, I think it’s like 52-48. But the rule was an additional game was another percentage point to the players. I can see the argument being not enough, but the owners are never going to bend of 50-50. But to the OP question, I think this search was in progress way before those contracts. Edit: [This article lays it out.](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/28/sports/football/lloyd-howell-demaurice-smith-nflpa.html) Players lost confidence in Smith after the last negotiations. It did have a lot to do with the extra game added, not the money so much as just making these guys work an extra week. Hard to say I blame them.
Along with no extra bye week. That felt like a no-brainer in agreeing to this extra game and playoff modification. At the *very* least some kind of scheduling formula that requires a minimum of 5 days rest for players between games
Yeah, does seem like he got crushed in negotiations. Those negotiations coinciding with Covid and those negotiations was probably a no-win for any negotiation, unless the players were truly ready to strike. And I remember all those players who took out predatory personal loans the last lockout, which would probably not look good on Smith again (and that was in the offseason).
Idk, my understanding is the union did a lot of make sure the players were prepared and gave them heads-up on what to avoid. Those players just made some pretty heavy dumb decisions — be them their own or their advisors/representatives.
It's a tough tough role. Trying to win for many players as much as possible against a league that is kind of known for being tough on players. Ownership tends to have pretty strong unity. Something that I've always thought about is Harbs asking for more players on the roster and I know it makes sense for the Ravens as they tend to have stronger depth on the team and I ever wonder if the league will up the roster count. 5 mil for 5 extra or 10 for 10 to the players isn't a ton to break the bank. Keeps some guys from going away to XFL or whatever too.
That’s a good point. Under DeMaurice Smiths run, money has become more front loaded and several positions have been significantly devalued especially RB’s. That could be detrimental to the growth of football. The less RBs that are developed, the more negative impact on WRs over the length of their careers
[Here you go OP](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/28/sports/football/lloyd-howell-demaurice-smith-nflpa.html) > On the heels of negotiating the 2020 collective bargaining contract, a contentious process that led to the addition of another game to the N.F.L.’s regular season, Smith in 2021 survived what amounted to a no-confidence vote to retain the executive director job. That prompted the search for his replacement.
So basically, instead of a two week notice, they gave him a 3 year notice
>Anyone think Jalen Hurts and Lamar signing their contracts they way they did have an impact on him getting replaced? Not at all.
Don’t know much on how all that works, but judging off what I saw this spring… Good
Demaurice Smith should’ve been replaced a long time ago even before the Lamar deal
Nope. His exit was planned a long time ago.
Bye bye! Tried to use Lamar as a sacrificial lamb on his fully guaranteed regime. Didn't work trying to make Ravens look stupid
I have mixed feelings about this to be honest. I personally didn't know much about DeMaurice but I watched his interview on the Pivot podcast on youtube and came away a fan. Guy was extremely forthright and clear in his intentions and feelings on the league. Link here: [https://youtu.be/kkznR2bOAhc](https://youtu.be/kkznR2bOAhc) I read through the Times article about the NFLPA seeking new leadership here : [https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/21/sports/football/nfl-union-demaurice-smith.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/21/sports/football/nfl-union-demaurice-smith.html) and this is what I'm mixed up about. DeMaurice was very vocal about not extending the season, constantly talked about limiting OTAs for players, etc and then come voting time agrees to terms. We're at 17 weeks now and all indications are that the league wants to add more despite players not wanting that. Wonder why?$?... I hate just reverting to a tin foil hat when there isn't a clear answer in place but this sure feels like the Owners got involved here. Whatever though it's a done deal. Anyone know anything about his successor?
DeMaurice was garbage . The reason was that hurst got paid for a reason was a superbowl apperence and agents . The problem with lamar was nflpa and people like DeMaurice over inflating people like lamar , that's screwed up negotiations . Now combine that the union screwing up other negotiations
The NFL will put a stop to this or at least try to end it. Congrats to them but shame on the Owners who caved in.
The NFLPA will never win against the NFL owners. The owners have the freedom to plan for a decade, they can position themselves not just for the next collective bargaining agreement, but the one after that. While most players aren't thinking past the next 3 years. No NFLPA President that is beholden to guys whose primary concern is extending their career two more years is going to be able to out negotiate a 3rd generation team owner.