Ramon Foster denounces contradiction as NFL highlights DK Metcalf offsite training while warning players they will not be paid in the event of injury
You may have noticed in recent weeks that there is a new standoff between the NFL and the NFLPA. The union is pushing to encourage players to skip voluntary offseason practices, with the goal of eliminating them as face-to-face practices altogether.
After Denver Broncos attacked Ja’Wuan James suffered a season-ending injury, the NFL deliberately sent out a memo essentially reminding everyone that the team had no obligation to pay James for this season because his injury had been sustained outside. of their premises.
This becomes a very thorny issue which will probably need to require mediation in time. Even outside of OTAs, NFL players are expected to train throughout the NFL calendar. So if that is the expectation, then the argument will follow that the league should give them compensation assurances in the event of injury.
Former Pittsburgh Steelers lineman Ramon Foster got into a stir yesterday by highlighting what he saw as NFL hypocrisy. The league’s Twitter account was promoting Seattle Seahawks wide receiver DK Metcalf competing in a 100-yard shot and showing off his speed – but would they make up for it if he got injured doing this?
“Wait @NFL you are all celebrating DK for an ‘offsite’ competition / training, but you sent a memo about @ JawuanJames70’s injury for being offsite and claiming he is not protected to payâ¦ must be on both sides, âhe wrote. â@NFLPA things what makes you have hmm. So can they train offsite or not? “.
Robbery @NFL you are all celebrating DK for the ‘offsite’ competition / training, but you sent a note to @ JawuanJames70 injury for being offsite and saying he was not protected to payâ¦ must be on both sides. @NFLPA the things that make you hmm ð¤ð¤. So can they train offsite or not? https://t.co/pXOljFZtRB
– Ramon Foster (@RamonFoster) May 9, 2021
There’s got to be a happy medium here somewhere. It has become routine over the past decade for NFL players to train during the offseason with coaches and coaches, and it has become an unspoken expectation ever since.
In its informal status of obligation, then is it reasonable for players to expect assurances that they have some protection against injury while doing a job that is essentially part of their job? But how exactly would a policy take shape?
After all, it can get pretty tricky very quickly. On the one hand, teams have little or no control over what players do with outside coaches and cannot be assured that they are training in a safe manner, as they can with team coaches on the outside. square.
Conversely, this “voluntary” training is in a way a circumvention of the collective agreement limiting the practice and the time of training, on which the NFL teams have frankly come to depend. And it has also become a virtual job requirement, because those who do not take this off-season training risk falling behind and losing their jobs – which is the same argument with âvoluntaryâ OTAs. The more you dig, the more precarious this issue becomes.