Getty Aaron Rodgers #12 of the Green Bay Packers speaks with head coach Matt LaFleur during the second half of the NFC Championship game against the San Francisco 49ers at Levi's Stadium on January 19, 2020 in Santa Clara, California.
Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers isn’t about to let the NFL add another game to the regular season without offering him and his fellow players more offseason relief.
According to both ESPN’s Dan Graziano and Adam Schefter, Rodgers was one of the loudest voices in opposition to the proposed collective bargaining agreement that NFL owners have been pushing since last week. Rodgers, who is the Packers’ player rep for the NFL Players Association, fought for more offsets to compensate for the additional wear and tear of a 17-game regular season, seeking more “dramatic” changes to the offseason work required of players.
Whereas Richard Sherman was one of the loudest voices against the proposed CBA last week, Aaron Rodgers was one of the biggest objectors last night, per sources. Rodgers wanted even more dramatic changes to the off-season program that included more free time for the players.
Player reps for all 32 teams convened Tuesday in Indianapolis to discuss the proposed deal, spending nearly four hours with members of the NFL’s negotiating committee before discussing it among themselves for several more hours. Eventually, the reps voted — 17-14 with one abstention — to send the proposal on to the full membership of the NFL Players Association for a final decision.
It will take a simple majority of roughly 2,000 members to pass the proposed CBA to go into effect for the 2020 season; though, the expansion to 17 games wouldn’t take place until 2021 at the earliest.
Rodgers later Wednesday confirmed he voted no against the proposal and expanded upon his reasoning with a social media post, citing conversations he has had with “the men in my locker room that I’m tasked to represent.”
“This deal will affect every player that ever plays this game and we have made this decision with only an abbreviated version of the deal and that isn’t good enough,” Rodgers wrote in his post. “Although I do see that there are many things in the proposal that improve the lives and care for past, present and future NFL players, there are issues with others.”
Follow the Heavy on Packers Facebook page for the latest breaking news, rumors and content!
Rodgers Details Reasons Why He Voted No
In his social media post on Wednesday night, Rodgers called out the leap to a 17th game as a component of the deal that “was never something to be negotiated” and said the owners made it clear their decision to add another game was about paying for the “added benefits” rather than being a reflection of positive feedback they received when assessing the toll an extra game would take on the players.
My thoughts. #
He also said the proposal addressed some — but not all — of the issues that had been raised about the workplace, workload and offseason.
“With an extra game added to the schedule, added risk, and longer stretches before and after the bye week, we felt it (sic) was important to address adding more offseason recovery time,” Rodgers wrote. “The ideas discussed would not add cost for teams, in fact if anything, would lessen some of them.”
Some of Rodgers’ teammates made a show of social support for their rep’s post, retweeting his message and including their own in some cases to urge players to make the right decision. Packers left tackle David Bakhtiari implored players to consult with their agents about how to approach the vote and “get informed by the people who YOU chose to give a percentage of YOUR contract to.”
Other star players from around the league — including Seattle’s Russell Wilson — also took to social media in the aftermath of Tuesday’s late-night discussions and expressed their opinions both for and against the proposed CBA.
“WE should not rush the next 10 YEARS for Today’s satisfaction,” Wilson tweeted. “I VOTE NO.”
READ NEXT: Colorado Star WR Loves Idea of Joining Packers, Davante Adams