Jump to content

Selective enforcement of OTA rules needs to stop

Bruce Banner

Recommended Posts


Selective enforcement has become the rule rather than the exception in certain facets of the NFL, and it really needs to stop. The latest example of this practice came to light when the Baltimore Ravens, one of the most respected organizations in the league, lost the right to hold their final four OTA spring practices as a result of both overzealous practices and having their players spend more time at the facility than NFL teams are allowed under the current Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Just about every team in the NFL, with rare exceptions, practices at a tempo during these minicamps that exceeds what is supposed to be allowed. Offseason practices without pads are supposed to be conducted at a level that is "conducive to learning and not result in a situation in which two players are physically competing with one another."

Some may argue that because news came down Thursday that the Oakland Raiders will lose two OTA practices as a result of too much contact at their practices means the NFL and NFLPA aren't selectively enforcing anything. I disagree.

All of the blame shouldn't necessarily rest on the teams themselves. A lot of times the players are told to practice at a good tempo but to protect each other and be smart. That sounds simple enough until the players look up and see that most of the periods are being filmed. Film means evaluation, which necessarily leads to every player doing just a little more than the man across from them so that they look better when the coaches and scouts sit down to evaluate the tape.

That leads to more and more contact and sometimes fights, which brings up another point. The Jacksonville Jaguars had some fights break out in one of their recent OTAs. That doesn't just happen; something prompts that type of behavior. And that something is contact, yet the Jaguars remain unscathed, to this point, in the NFL and NFLPA's selective enforcement process.

Maybe the Jags aren't getting busted because none of their own players turned them in, as is often the case in these situations. So maybe it isn't selective enforcement at all but rather a matter of which teams have players who are willing to let it be known that their team is not operating within the parameters of the CBA. And if a team has players who are blowing the whistle on some of their practices, that could bring up an entirely different set of issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Create New...