The deadline for NFL players to vote on the CBA is Saturday. Here’s what you need to know.

The NFL has a dizzying five-day stretch ahead.

Teams face the franchise- and transition-tag deadline Monday. Free-agency negotiating also opens Monday. And the new league year begins Wednesday.


But first, the players’ vote on a new collective bargaining agreement will come to a close Saturday night. That will end a lengthy stretch of negotiations and debate about how to achieve labor peace.


Here’s what to know about the CBA vote as offseason activity kicks into high gear.

What’s at stake in the CBA vote?

An agreement that would run through 2030 was sent to roughly 2,000 players to vote March 5, and it will pass if a simple majority of the players who vote yes.

The two topics most fans will be interested in is the addition of a 17th game some time between 2021-2023 and the expansion of the playoff field from 12 to 14 teams.

Of course, the agreement goes much deeper than that. Much debate has centered on whether the players would receive enough in return for acquiescing to the addition of an extra regular-season game amid concerns about its effect on player health.

The new CBA would increase rosters by two and practice squads by two initially and four by 2022. The contract would reduce preseason games from four to three, reduce padded training camp practices from 28 to 16 and cap training camp practices at 2½ hours, among other improvements to working conditions.

Revenue splits are another hot topic, with players set to receive a bump from 47% to at least 48% in 2021.

That number could go up different fractions of a percentage point, depending on the size of the NFL’s new media contracts, as NFL.com detailed. Minimum salaries for players with less than one year of experience would jump about 20% to $610,000 this year and would top $1 million by 2030, ESPN reported. Other minimum salaries would see similar increases.

An increased overall pot of money also would come from playoff expansion.

Given the increasing legalization of marijuana, the league’s drug policy would significantly relax under the new deal. It would eliminate suspensions for positive marijuana tests, reduce testing to the first two weeks of training camp and increase the threshold for a positive test.

The current CBA doesn’t expire until after the 2020 season, so a lockout wouldn’t come until 2021.

But there are varying degrees of incentive to get the deal done now. Team owners undoubtedly would like to see an agreement so they can negotiate new TV contracts with a deal through 2030 in place. Players would receive immediate bumps in salary.

Whether the concessions the players receive in return for a 17th game are enough to warrant agreement to an 11-year deal is in question.


What are players saying about the vote?

Players have publicly voiced support for and opposition to the deal.

Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers tweeted his reasons for casting a “no” vote shortly after discussions between players and owners wrapped up, suggesting players needed to receive more in return for the 17th game.

Seahawks quarterback Russell Wilson, Texans defensive end J.J. Watt and Vikings wide receiver Stefon Diggs are among the other big names to publicly suggest they would vote “no.”

“Democracy is messy,” NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith told news outlets, including the Athletic, at the NFL combine. “Why would I ever be in a world where I would look at them voicing that in a negative way? I get that Aaron is passionate and he expressed his opinion. Other players have come out and are passionately expressing their opinion. It’s fine. I would much prefer that than for anybody to think they didn’t have a voice.”

Dolphins quarterback Ryan Fitzpatrick put a video on Twitter saying he would vote yes.

He listed the fact that the players would increase their revenue share — and overall revenue also would increase — as one reason for his support. He also said he believes the players get many of the things they wanted addressed, including increased minimum salary, an adjusted marijuana policy and better working conditions.

Former Bears linebacker Sam Acho, a member of the NFLPA executive committee, said he is in favor of the new CBA because it benefits the majority of players who make minimum or lower salaries. He acknowledged the deal wasn’t as good for star players, since franchise tags would still be in place.

“But let’s not be fooled,” Acho said. “This deal is a really good deal for a majority of NFL players, who like most Americans who work, get paid more if you play more. This deal eliminates superstar economics and it brings everyone up with a tidal wave.”

Ravens quarterback Robert Griffin III was among those who engaged with Acho’s video, saying “the divide and conquer tactics are exactly what the other side wants.”

New NFLPA president J.C. Tretter, a Browns offensive lineman, put out a lengthy letter on the details of the deal, including the overall economics, players salaries, rosters and work rules. It’s worth a read for those interested beyond the bullet points.

What are former NFL executives saying about it?

Two think pieces on the CBA from former NFL executives with differing opinions circulated over the last two weeks.

Joe Banner, the former Eagles and Browns executive, detailed for USA Today site Touchdown Wire several terms he considers “wins” for the players. Among them were increased minimum salaries, increased payout for more retired players and changes in player benefits. (Though the New York Times lays out how disability benefits for some former players could shrink.)

Banner argued that, while it’s not a great deal, the players should not risk getting a worse deal when this one will make an impact on several issues important to many players.

On the flip side, former Packers vice president Andrew Brandt wrote for Sports Illustrated that players should make a 50/50 revenue split non-negotiable if they’re going to agree to a 17-game season that most don’t want. And he also believes they should negotiate for an opt-out after four years to negotiate a better deal.

Brandt called fears of the unknown should the players reject this CBA “misplaced,” noting owners need this deal.

How does the vote factor into offseason roster building?

The NFL pushed back the franchise and transition tag deadlines to Monday because whether teams can use one or both this season depends on the CBA vote.


Usually teams can use just one of the tags per year, but in the final year of the current CBA, both can be used. If the new CBA passes in the players’ vote, it will go back to one tag per team this year.

Among the most notable effects on a team such as the Bears is that the salary cap would increase with a new agreement, giving them a little more room to spend this offseason.

Associated Press contributed.

Recommended on Chicago Tribune