Bears owners deserve some credit for being the sole team voting against the 17 game season

[Leomaz]

fify

Yes you are.

 

[DrGonzo]

Pure speculation on my part, but I'm kinda thinking one less preseason game might impact things more than one more regular season game. Less time for evaluation of depth/bubble players means even less motivation to play starters in preseason, which means more rust in week one and less opportunities to evaluate the offensive scheme.

Then again this Bears coaching staff doesn't really use the preseason to evaluate it's offensive scheme anyway so maybe it makes no difference.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

Better to get injured in a 17th game that means something than a 4th preseason game that doesn’t. I would feel the same about an 18th game and the 3rd preseason game as well.

What an odd line of thinking.

 

[nc0gnet0]

Many of them didn't. The vote was 1,019 to 959 and it was largely the fringe starters and backups that voted for it not the stars. It is a bit of a rigged game in that regard as owners thru some stuff in their to appeal to the lesser players while the people most affected by this ie the starters are the ones that voted against. It is also rigged in that owners typically need 75% agreement to accept a proposal while the players only need a simple majority. If the latter was required on the player side then the CBA would not have passed. Of course, a lot of this is self-inflicted but point is treating the players as some monolith when nearly half of them disagreed with the CBA is inaccurate.

Again, the players themselves decided to have the union, and also can decide if all is required is a majority vote or a larger consensus. It's not like the owners mandate the rules of the union. And despite what your saying, it is the stars that will eat up the largest portion of the cap increase that result from the 17 game schedule, not the fringe players.

 

[remydat]

Again, the players themselves decided to have the union, and also can decide if all is required is a majority vote or a larger consensus. It's not like the owners mandate the rules of the union. And despite what your saying, it is the stars that will eat up the largest portion of the cap increase that result from the 17 game schedule, not the fringe players.

Yes hence why I said it is self inflicted. Thanks for agreeing.

The point is saying the players agree as if the vote was not pretty much split is odd. 48-49% were against it. Those are the same people complaining about the 17th game.

You are sort of pretending they votes yes and now are complaining when in fact they voted no and thus are being consistent in still complaining.

 

[Chicoman]

What an odd line of thinking.

Why is it odd? For years
we have heard players, coaches, fans, media all lament a player getting hurt in a meaningless preseason game. I would of course like them not to get hurt at all, but a player that gets hurt in a preseason game most likely gets an injury settlement, and no further moneys until they are resigned, a player that gets hurt in the regular season is due their contract. The wording may have been odd, but the idea is not.

 

[Chicago Staleys]

I’m guessing we will see more playoff bound teams sitting starters in the 17th game.