NFL players approved a new Collective Bargaining Agreement by a slim 1,019-959 margin Sunday. The 60-vote difference shows just how split players were on the proposed CBA – or so we think.
Approximately 500 players didn’t vote. And Damon Amendolara couldn’t believe it
“For the NFLPA, this is directly how you make money,” Amendolara said in disbelief on The DA Show. “If you don’t vote in your contract negotiations, when will you ever vote? That is such a black eye for the NFLPA. No. 1, the vote margin was 60 votes. No. 2, 500 players didn’t vote. Think about all of the sway votes. I can’t imagine being an NFL player and not voting on this. It wasn’t even like you had to drive to your middle school and pull a lever. You just logged on. That is the most humiliating stat. I will always defend the players in many regards because they put their body on the line, and I’ve had the privilege to have friendships with some former players and I really admire what they do and how they do it. But I can’t believe this. This is embarrassing.”
The players increased their revenue share, but they also signed off on a 17th regular-season game, among other changes. You would think every player would want a say in this.
Apparently not.
“It’s your life,” Amendolara said. “This is how you get paid. Do you like it or not? And you had to have the sense that it was a split. You had to have the sense that your vote mattered. [An average of] 15 guys per locker room said, ‘I’m not going to be bothered.’ That is insanity to me.”
The new CBA will increase minimum salaries and reduce the number of preseason games from four to three, among other changes. It also includes $2 billion for pensions for current and former players.
“Ultimately, do I think it’s bad for players?” Amendolara asked. “No, I don’t think the CBA is bad for players; I think it could have been better for players. I think the players [could have] said, ‘We can get more out of the 17th game. That’s the big thing the owners desperately want. We can squeeze more out of them because we know they’re dying for the 17th game.’ The owners, this is fine for the owners. They wouldn’t have put it in front of the players if they didn’t like it. It’s good for the owners. It’s fine for fans. I think it’s kind of a push for fans. I don’t want the 17th game, but I don’t think you’re going to have riots in the street because there’s a 17th game. Most people will just accept it. But for the players, is it bad? No, it just could have been better.”