Western Pennsylvania's trusted news source
First Call: NFL CBA missing the boat; what if Steelers made playoffs under proposed format? | TribLIVE.com
Steelers/NFL

First Call: NFL CBA missing the boat; what if Steelers made playoffs under proposed format?

Tim Benz
2362925_web1_GTR-Steelers52-091718
Tribune-Review
Kansas City Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes throws a pass under pressure by Pittsburgh Steelers linebacker T.J. Watt during the third quarter Sunday, Sept. 16, 2018, at Heinz Field.

For Monday’s “First Call,” we take a look at the many threads of conversation surrounding the NFL collective bargaining talks, a 17-game schedule, and the potential expansion of the playoff field to seven teams per conference.


J.J. Watt and Richard Sherman say the players shouldn’t like what has become public about the new NFL collective bargaining agreement.

And I don’t blame them.

Aside from relaxed marijuana rules, a little less practice contact, and a slightly bigger piece of what will be a much bigger pie, what are the players getting?

Not much.

Especially considering the league may get an extra week of games per team, an extra two weeks of broadcasts, maybe only one week less of preseason, and two extra teams making the playoffs.

Plus, for now, it appears they’ll be keeping the franchise and transition tags as tools — even if they’ll be used on a more limited basis — and not guaranteeing contracts.

If you’re a player, what’s to like about that?

I’m not sure how I feel about the players negotiating a union contract over Twitter like what Watt and Sherman did.

But then again, if the NFL is going to leak out details to shine up its proposal, why can’t the players counter back, too?

In general, it seems like the NFL is asking more of the players than what it is giving back.


• Based on what I’ve been reading, both sides are missing a golden opportunity to rectify the biggest problem between labor and management in recent years.

That’s players trying to get out of — or refusing to play under — valid contracts or the franchise and transition tags.

This would be a perfect chance for the players to fight harder for guaranteed contracts and for the NFL to close the loopholes players have to avoid playing under franchise tags, entry-level deals, and contracts that players sign and then regret.

The league should guarantee contracts for three or four years and refuse to allow renegotiation midstream like the NHL does. A lot of problems would be solved as a result.

Instead, we are arguing about expanded playoffs, 17-game schedules and marijuana restrictions.

All things I think are much more easily solved.


• When it comes to the proposed 17-game NFL season, let’s play the “butterfly effect” game for the Chiefs since they were the ones who won the Super Bowl.

Yes, Kansas City would’ve had to play an extra game as the No. 2 seed, with Baltimore getting the lone bye as the AFC regular-season champs.

But that game would’ve been against the Devlin “Duck” Hodges-led Steelers, a team that would have limped into the playoffs having lost three games in a row.

The Chiefs would’ve won. Easily. And from there, theoretically, the rest of the bracket would’ve held anyway.

By virtue of Tennessee upsetting New England in a 3-6 game and then presumptively beating Baltimore in a 1-6 game, the Chiefs still would’ve gotten Houston after a win over Buffalo and then the Titans in the AFC championship game anyway.

Would things have been juggled on the NFC side? Who knows. But nothing really would’ve changed on the AFC side.

The only prospect for a major wrinkle in the outcome would’ve been four more quarters of Patrick Mahomes dropping back and scrambling against a fearsome pass rush from the Steelers.

I bet Mahomes and company still would’ve cruised. Exposing him to excessive hits and injury from the Steelers defense would have been the only variable.


• Meanwhile a lot of Steelers fans are looking at the proposed playoff format tweaks and saying, “Gee, where have you been?”

If the AFC field had been seven-deep instead of six-deep in 2018 and 2019, the Steelers would have qualified.

Ha! Great. To what end?

So that they would’ve had to go to Foxborough in the wild-card round after the 2018 season? Or to Arrowhead for “Duck” versus Mahomes?

My god, how do you think that would’ve turned out?!

Ugly!

To be honest, I haven’t spent much time dwelling on “what if” the Steelers had gotten in.

I’ve spent more time thinking how little it would mean if the Steelers go 9-8 under the new 17-game schedule and get housed in the first round next year, but we sit around patting Mike Tomlin on the back for still never having a sub-.500 season.

In the NFC, the Los Angeles Rams would’ve played Green Bay in the 2-7 game, with the San Francisco 49ers owning the bye.

Would the Packers have won that game? Yeah. Most likely. But as disappointing as L.A. was this season, it wouldn’t have been the lock of a result that we would’ve seen on the AFC side with the Steelers visiting Arrowhead.

In either conference, there’s no clear annual dividing line between where playoff-worthy teams end or where the gap between the bottom of bracket and the top becomes absurd.

But the more the NFL expands its playoff, the more it brings that debate into focus.

Tim Benz is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Tim at tbenz@triblive.com or via X. All tweets could be reposted. All emails are subject to publication unless specified otherwise.

Remove the ads from your TribLIVE reading experience but still support the journalists who create the content with TribLIVE Ad-Free.

Get Ad-Free >

Categories: Sports | Steelers/NFL | Breakfast With Benz
Sports and Partner News