Tag:Josh Katzowitz
Posted on: July 20, 2011 12:43 pm
Edited on: July 20, 2011 12:49 pm
 

Bart Scott doesn't like the idea of no two-a-days

ScottPosted by Josh Katzowitz

Assuming that the elimination of two-a-day practices in training camp is included in the next CBA, it’s fair to believe that most players would think that’s an extraordinarily nice new perk.

Two-a-days, after all, are brutal (or so we’ve been told by people who actually play football for a living), and obviously, it takes a tremendous toll on the body in the short term (and probably on the long-term health as well).

As you should know by now, Jets LB Bart Scott is not most people. He doesn’t agree with the idea of no two-a-days. Not at all.

"I think it’s wimping out; making football more soft," Scott told the Newark Star Ledger. "No reason to try and make camp easy.

"I get concerned you're making football players weaker because you don’t push them past that threshold. ... I get concerned with the same thing with the quarterback stuff, that they turn it into flag football; they turn it into little pansy stuff.”

You have to wonder if there’s a fine line between “little pansy stuff” and “making sure you’re not hurting yourself in the long run.” Especially if the NFL and the NFLPA are concerned about concussions and will ratchet down the on-field contact in the offseason in order to make the game safer.

I don’t think that’s “little pansy stuff.” I think that’s smart.

But Scott is worried about the coaches trying to cram two sessions worth of material into one practice. Ultimately, he says, that will make everybody a little bit worse at his job.

“Two-a-days, it’s what football is all about," Scott told the paper. "It’s about endurance, pain, will, putting yourself through something when your body is telling you it doesn’t want to go. Your mind controlling your body. That’s what camp is all about. With one-a-days, guys might not be in as good of shape as they would have been. Camp tears you down, and then a smart coach starts pulling back in enough time that allows players' bodies to build back up."

I understand Scott’s point, but the game (and the way practices are conducted) are always changing. How would Scott feel about not getting any water in practice, as coaches used to do in the old days? Does he feel like keeping himself hydrated is “little pansy stuff?”

No matter how he feels about it, it’s hard to argue that the elimination of two-a-day practices is probably best for everybody’s health. I imagine 99 percent of his colleagues would agree.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.
Posted on: July 20, 2011 12:01 am
Edited on: July 20, 2011 12:09 am
 

What should happen Wednesday and Thursday

Goodell, SmithPosted by Josh Katzowitz

After lawyers for the NFL and the NFLPA spent 13 hours together Tuesday in New York City finishing most of the final draft of the new potential CBA, as recounted by NFL.com’s Albert Breer, the next obvious question is: Will the players accept it?

Team representatives from all 32 teams and the NFLPA’s executive committee* are expected to meet Wednesday in Washington to discuss and possibly sign on to the new CBA, but Sports Illustrated’s Jim Trotter is hearing that ratification isn’t necessarily an easy step and that the players have “no plans to rubber stamp it.”

Writes Trotter: “Some reps are expecting a spirited debate … Some players feel they finally have leverage and they want to use it.”

*The executive committee, though, won’t make a decision Tuesday night on if it will recommend the CBA to the players.

If the players do approve it by Wednesday, sending it to the plaintiffs of the Brady v NFL case (the plaintiffs also would have to approve it), the owners could vote to pass it at their meeting Thursday in Atlanta.

Assuming that passes, the lockout then would be over, and teams could begin preparing for what promises to be a quick free-agency period.

But for now, we still have a ways to go before that happens. And if the players WERE to vote against the new CBA, it’s hard to comprehend how disappointing that decision would be.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.

Category: NFL
Posted on: July 19, 2011 10:43 pm
Edited on: July 22, 2011 6:31 pm
 

Report: 75 former players suing NFL

Posted by Josh Katzowitz

In what is fairly shocking late-night news, TMZ is reporting that 75 players are suing the NFL, claiming the league intentionally hid the effects of concussions for 90 years.

The lawsuit, which seeks unspecified damages, was filed in L.A. County Superior Court Tuesday and states: “The NFL knew as early as the 1920s of the harmful effects on a player's brain of concussions; however, until June of 2010 they concealed these facts from coaches, trainers, players and the public."

TMZ writes that former Dolphins WR Mark Duper and former Giants RBs Ottis Anderson and Rodney Hampton are among the 75 players suing.

More from TMZ:

The suit claims the NFL commissioned a study in 1994, titled "NFL Committee on Mild Traumatic Brain Injury" and published a report in 2004, concluding there was "no evidence of worsening injury or chronic cumulative effects" from multiple concussions.

And, the suit alleges, it was not until June 2010, that the NFL acknowledged concussions can lead to dementia, memory loss, CTE and related symptoms. All of the players are claim[ing] they suffered injuries as a result of multiple concussions.


The NFL Alumni group has been making its views widely known recently about concussions, and they obviously haven’t had a great relationship with the NFLPA. So, instead of sitting down at negotiations between the two sides in the lockout (where they seemingly have been marginalized), some former players are instead looking to the legal system for justice.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.

Posted on: July 19, 2011 9:08 pm
Edited on: July 19, 2011 11:51 pm
 

What will the Brady v NFL plaintiffs receive?

BreesPosted by Josh Katzowitz

We’ve written the past day or two about the labor negotiations from the perspective of the plaintiffs in the Brady v NFL case and what they might want individually in return for settling the lawsuit against the league.

For example, Patriots G Logan Mankins and Chargers WR Vincent Jackson apparently are asking for $10 million apiece. Which naturally led to Vikings P Chris Kluwe calling the two of them, plus Saints QB Drew Brees and Colts QB Peyton Manning, “douchebags” on his Twitter account Tuesday.

The reason for Kluwe’s ire against Brees and Manning? The reports that they want a lifetime exemption from the franchise tagging system.

Brees, on his Twitter account, said to be wary of media reports on this subject, writing, "All media claims about me wanting a personal reward for this deal are false. I hope you all know me better than that." The Boston Globe’s Greg Bedard tweeted that Brees, Manning and Jackson have softened their stances in regards to individual lawsuit compensation.

Meanwhile, it seems like Jackson is willing to return to the Chargers and sign the $11 million franchise tag for 2011 (if there actually is a tag system in the new CBA), according to The San Diego Union-Tribune. Still, he’d (obviously) like a long-term contract and not the one-year tag money, but this way, I don’t see how Kluwe could be mad at him.

UPDATE 11:41 P.M. ET: According to the Boston Globe, the NFLPA's executive committee will recommend that the plaintiffs receive no special considerations as part of the lockout's end.

Writes Ron Borges: "It was determined it would be too cumbersome to try and work out individual deals. Since the bulk of plaintiffs were well-placed NFL veterans, the best way to go, it was decided, was to stick simply with the larger deal negotiated between the NFLPA and the league’s owners."

As far as "well-placed NFL veterans" go, I imagine Broncos rookie LB Von Miller would beg to differ on that point.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.

Posted on: July 19, 2011 7:28 pm
Edited on: July 19, 2011 7:34 pm
 

Report: Bears, Rams won't start camp on time

Posted by Josh Katzowitz

In Tuesday’s Daily Shoutout, CBSSports.com’s Mike Freeman reported that “free agency will begin slightly later than generally known and training camps will also be delayed.”

So, today's news came as no surprise when ESPN’s Adam Schefter reported that the Bears and Rams won’t report to camp on time and that their arrival “will be pushed back a few days.”

That news suggests that the Aug. 7 Hall of Fame game between the two squads in Canton, Ohio -- while “officially” still on -- likely will become a lockout casualty and will have to be canceled (even though Bears offensive coordinator Mike Martz says he’d need only one day to prepare his squad).
 
But hey, if I had told you when the lockout first hit that the 2011 season would be saved but that one preseason exhibition game would have to be sacrificed, I’m sure you would have been just fine with that arrangement.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.

Posted on: July 19, 2011 6:30 pm
Edited on: July 19, 2011 6:57 pm
 

Vick comes out against dog fighting

M. Vick lobbied in Capital Hill to help curtail dog fighting (Getty).

Posted by Josh Katzowitz

Eagles QB Michael Vick visited Washington Tuesday, lobbying legislators to pass an act that has grown near and dear to Vick’s heart.

It’s called the Animal Fighting Spectator Prohibition Act, and, according to the Daily Caller, it “would apply federal criminal penalties -- fines and up to one year in prison -- to anyone attending or bringing a minor to an animal fighting event.”

Now, you might think that Vick is the LAST person* who should be talking about animal fighting (you do remember why he went to prison, yes?). But since he’s become a free man again, it seems that Vick has been an outspoken backer of all things good, whether it’s serving as a high school commencement speaker and giving out $5,000 college scholarships or trying to convince those in prison to change their ways.

*Vick, though, HAS become quite the endorser as of late.

But maybe that’s why Vick, who’s teaming up with the Humane Society on this issue, feels so strongly about this piece of legislation. After all, he was deeply involved in the dog fighting scene, and he’s seen (and participated in) the most despicable acts a human can commit on a canine.

He wants those who can be punished to be punished hard (kind of like he was, I suppose).

"I was a major part of [animal fighting],” Vick said, according to the website. “I know the game in and out. It won’t stop unless there is major change. It will continue to evolve and grow.”

Said Humane Society president Wayne Pacelle: “If you just criminalize the practitioners, you’re missing 98 percent of the people involved in the enterprise,”

When asked why he was involved in this piece of legislation, Vick said (via the Philadelphia Daily News): "I'm doing it for myself. I'm doing it for the Humane Society. I'm doing it for the animals, and I'm doing it for all the people out there who are involved, because there's so much more that you could be doing with your time. There's so many animals that could be raised in better households and used as pets and having happy homes instead of being used for pointless activity and being harmed. It took for me to go through what I went through to understand ... the magnitude of the entire situation. I’ve learned so much as time went on.

“Too many kids get involved in dogfighting, and it’s time to break this cycle. Animal fighting is a dead-end road for the young men, and there’s nothing but terrible outcomes for the dogs placed in a pit to fight. Since my case came to light, the laws against animal fighting have been upgraded, and here's another opportunity to strengthen the law and establish an even stronger deterrent.”

I know people who hate Vick -- will always hate Vick -- for his crimes against dogs, but at what point do you look at Vick and say, “Well, he’s trying to make things better?” Can those dog lovers ever forgive?

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.

Category: NFL
 
 
 
 
The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com