Many issues remain for NFL and players to resolve as camps open

On the same day that rookies for the Chiefs and Texans reported to their respective team headquarters for the initial COVID- 19 tests of training camp, NFL Players Association executives and league owners continued to haggle about how to deliver a season amid the coronavirus pandemic.

The Texans and Chiefs are scheduled to meet in the regular- season opener Sept. 10.

So in order to begin the return to action process, their rookies were required to show up both Monday and Tuesday to be tested for COVID- 19 outside the teams’ facilities. Players receiving consecutive negative tests will move on to the next phase, including two days of medical exams and equipment fittings.

Quarterbacks and injured players around the league are expected to report for duty Thursday, while all 32 teams expect to have their full teams in by July 28.

But a number of pressing matters still must be addressed for the NFL to return in earnest, the league and union continuing to work feverishly in search of solutions.

The owners held a video conference call at 2 p. m. ET Monday in an attempt to resolve outstanding issues.

From there, league officials and

NFLPA leaders planned to resume their discussions, according to two people familiar with the situation. They spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the process.

Here’s where matters stand as players begin filtering back to work:

Testing and safety

Monday afternoon, the league and the union agreed on daily COVID- 19 testing for players, coaches and designated staff members who interact with them throughout the first two weeks of training camp.

Testing could then scale down to alternating days if positive rates dip to fewer than 5%.

All 32 teams have submitted their infectious disease emergency response ( IDER) plans to NFL Chief Medical Officer Dr. Allen Sills, and 25 had been approved and forwarded to the NFLPA.

Opt- out protocols

Although they want to play, players have concerns about their own safety as well as that of their family members. As we’ve seen in other sports, some players could decide not to play this season.

As of Monday afternoon, the owners and union had yet to agree on a deadline for those opt- out decisions, though the league had floated an Aug. 1 deadline.

However, the players see a need for more time, especially since training camps will not even be in full swing by that date. They would prefer to have until just before the first preseason game – assuming there is one – to decide.

The league and the union also disagree on compensation for players who opt out. Owners initially proposed a $ 150,000 stipend for players who elect not to play because of health risk concerns. The union would prefer a sliding scale to more adequately benefit players who most need financial assistance. Signs point to the owners obliging.

Acclimation process, preseason

The NFLPA and the league’s joint task force agreed that to help minimize the risk of injury, players should undergo an acclimation period that allows for 21 days of strength and conditioning once camps start, 10 days of non- padded practices and 14 days of game preparations. To make this window possible, owners had wanted players to report two weeks early. But the union resisted given the terms already laid out in the collective bargaining agreement.

The need for an acclimation process has triggered questions about the practicality of a preseason. From the players’ perspective, there’s no way to acclimate their bodies and play games in August. The owners initially countered with the reduction from four games to two. Players remained opposed to that idea.

As Sunday’s social media player blitz indicated, many veterans still deem it very important that the owners prioritize player health safety above the revenue they would earn from preseason games. And on Monday, the owners wound up conceding, meeting the players’ request by offering no preseason games, according to a person familiar with the discussions. The person requested anonymity because the offer was not yet public. This will provide a more adequate acclimation period and ramp- up window for the players.

The potential losers in this scenario are the players at the bottom of the roster who could have benefited from game action and the chance to showcase their skills to other teams.

“We believe that the right focus for our players and our business is not only coming up with a way to start the season, but to contemplate a way to finish the season,” NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith said during a conference call with reporters Friday. “And engaging in two games where players would be flying all over the country and then meeting together to engage in work, we feel that doing that prior to the season doesn’t properly influence or increase the likelihood of starting and finishing the season on time.”

Economic impacts

Although the sides have made progress on health and safety aspects, they remain divided on determining how to absorb the financial blows COVID- 19 will deliver.

Because it appears unlikely stadiums will be filled this season – some likely will even be empty – teams could lose enough revenue that the salary cap might fall from approximately $ 198 million per club this year to less than $ 130 million apiece in 2021.

Earlier this month, owners had proposed holding 35% of player salaries in escrow to help compensate for revenue losses. But the players opposed such a proposal, arguing they actually were already subjecting themselves to great risk by simply taking the field amid the pandemic.

Players realize that a loss in revenue means a hit to the subsequent cap. However, they propose spreading those shortfalls over the 10- year life of the CBA to make the financial impact less painful for all parties. The owners have now abandoned the escrow idea.

However, they’re considering cutbacks elsewhere, including various benefit reductions. The players oppose that solution, so discussions remain ongoing.