Sorry, but not "Wrong".
1) Two years ago, I found this link
- "BEYOND 2011 THIS IS A PROJECTED SCHEDULE BASED ON PRIOR YEARS!!! The NFL has announced the schedule rotation only through 2011 (click here for 2011 opponents). The schedule below assumes they will follow the same rotation pattern through 2017; they may not follow the same pattern!"
Back in '08 or '09 when the Johnny Roadtrip guys put all that data on their web site, they included the caveat you refernece for seasons AFTER the 2011 season. The NFL had announced an extension of the schedule rotation that was in use from 2002 to 2009 for 2 more years ('10 and '11). The Johnny roadtrip guys caveated their forward looking schedules noting that the years 2012 through 2017, which they published projected schedules for, were subject to change, as the NFL had not made any formal commitment to the rotation past the 2011 season.
The part that is wrong is that any of this info is dictated by the CBA. It is not. The owner's of the teams and the league office devised the current schedule rotation policy shortly after divisional re-alignment took place after the 2000 season. (this was the realignment that moved the Seahawks to the NFC, brought the Texans into the league, etc). This new rotation was set in place largely to erase a lot of goofy things that existed in the previous method of scheduling games, such as the 19 year period where the Steelers and the Raiders never had a regular season game!).
In August of 2001, the league put this rotation policy into effect, declaring it the law of the land for the 2002 through 2009 seasons. Before the 2009 season, the NFL extended the same rotation to cover 2010 and 2011. All of this was done without any discussion with the NFLPA, as the schedule rotation and who plays whom in any given year just isn't a topic of much interest to the NFLPA.
Further investigation revealed that the CBA dictated how many games a team plays against divisional rivals and who they play in non-divisional games. Non-divisional games are rotated on a pre-determined basis
What "further investigation" are you referring to? I have a copy of the entire 300+ page CBA from 2006 that was in effect until last month. It has no reference to the schedule rotation or to the determination of opponents. I'll be glad to send it to you if you care to spend the time going through it yourself.
Kareighuis wrote:that system is now up in the air with no CBA.
No, actually it's not. There are a lot of things up in the air, like when the season will start, if there will be a pre-season, if there will be a season at all
, but assuming there is a 16 game season in 2011, the schedule rotation in use since 2001 will continue to be used. The NFL has confirmed that, and the team by team opponents are already determined and published on the NFL's web site. The CBA doesn't address the issue of what "system" is used to determine opponents, nor has the NFLPA ever expressed a desire to have that system be a contractual issue
Even prior to the CBA expiring this spring, the NFL had already indicated (as quoted by Goodell himself) that the earliest that the league would be asking the NFLPA to consider going to an 18 game schedule would be the 2012 season
. After the sides entered arbitration in Washington DC last month, the league made an offer on March 9th to the NFLPA that included a committment to keep the current 16 game schedule in place through both 2011 and 2012, and left the question of asking to expand to 18 games open, but the request would come no earlier than the 2013 season.
2) The League and the owners have been pushing for 2 extra games for nearly a year now. There's also been talk of more international games, like in Europe, Canada and Mexico. To adjust for this, there's been talk they'll need to cut back on OTAs and preseason games and even add a second bye week. The main obstacle has been the players have balked big-time. If the court cases don't play out in their favor, or they agree to certain changes in exchange for something they want dearly, there could be 18 games, regardless of what the schedule the League puts out says.
As mentioned above, the league has already conceded that they won't be asking for 18 prior to 2013. Even if they wanted to go to 18 for the 2011 season, and the NFLPA conceded to it, they couldn't get the logisitcs to work out between now and the start of the season in September
See this link for details:http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81eb9907/article/league-releases-details-of-proposal-that-union-didnt-accept
3) Which gets to the final point. With all the back and forth between the two sides, there's been some concern that there'll even be a full 2011 season. By putting out a schedule, that could suggest the League is focusing on getting one. Additionally, how many games the schedule has could be just another bargaining ploy. If they put 18 and the players refuse to agree to it,
With regards to the 2011 schedule, that won't happen. A 16 game schedule will be published within the next two weeks, and the league is also working on countless contingency schedules that would involve shorter seasons should the need arise to play a 14 game schedule, 10 game schedule or whatever due to a delayed start of the season. The parties have not been debating an 18 game schedule for 2011, only for future years.
With regards to the seasons 2013 and beyond
, the 18 game regular season is indeed a negotiating point between the parties.
In short, the schedule release will have little or no input from the players.
That much is true. The players have never had input to the schedule rotation policy, the schedule itself, or to when it is released, nor will they have input to any of those items this year. Nor will the NFLPA. Although expansion in future years from 16 to 18 games is of great concern to both parties, those 3 items are not of concern to the NFLPA.