The NFL commands, at the apparent behest of the NFLPA, that teams hold preseason training at their in-town home facilities.  Nick Shook of NFL.com: The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic continues to affect almost every facet of life and, for the NFL, another change in policy has come as a result.   The league on Tuesday informed its 32 clubs that training camps will be conducted only at team facilities this season, NFL Network’s Mike Garafolo reported.   In addition, there will be no joint team practices as stated in the memo from Commissioner Roger Goodell, obtained by NFL Network’s Tom Pelissero. The only exception for training camp location is if “a club can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of a joint NFL-NFLPA medical task force, that it would not be feasible to conduct at their club facility,” per the memo.   Neither decision is expected to extend to the 2021 offseason and is just for the upcoming training camps in 2020.   “We believe that each of these steps will enhance our ability to protect the health and safety of players and your football staffs and are consistent with a sound approach to risk management in the current environment,” Goodell said in the memo.   “The NFLPA was strongly in favor of these two decisions, which were made to limit exposure risks by avoiding the need for clubs to clean and maintain two facilities, by limiting the need for players and club staffs to travel to another location (sometimes located at a considerable distance from the home facility), and by limiting travel and contact between players on different clubs in the context of joint practices. These steps are being taken for the 2020 preseason to address the current conditions and are not expected to be in place in 2021.”   This directive removes the possibility of teams such as the Pittsburgh Steelers (St. Vincent College in Latrobe, Pennsylvania), Dallas Cowboys (Oxnard, California), Indianapolis Colts (Westfield, Indiana), and others from traveling to remote sites to hold their training camps. Typically, these teams would hold their camps at such sites before finishing preseason preparations at their facilities and conducting regular-season practices at those same facilities.   Often, operating training camp at remote sites opens possibilities for better fan access and interaction, a larger footprint for teams whose headquarters exist in confined metropolitan spaces and more fields to work on. The existence of additional field space allows teams to spread out their expanded, 90-man rosters for better work opportunities with each practice, drill and repetition. Some remote locations also provide teams with easily accessible lodging to keep the entire operation relatively contained and focused on the task at hand.   None of this is unachievable from a team facility; it just boils down to the preference of each team. The Cowboys have a fantastic, state-of-the-art facility in Frisco, Texas, that will work just fine for the team. They just won’t get to interact with their Southern California fan base.   With player and organizational safety at the forefront of most planning efforts amid the pandemic, fan interaction and access will have to be set aside for a period in which it wasn’t likely many fans were going to be able to attend anyway. While restrictions on fan attendance are yet to be known, forcing teams to centralize at their facilities allows the clubs to better prepare and ensure the safest environment for their players as they work toward gainful employment in the NFL in 2020. Only 10 teams were still heading away for camp, including the Panthers who have been going to Wofford in South Carolina since their inception.  Josh Alper of ProFootballTalk.com with more: Spartanburg is the home of Wofford College, which has been the training camp home of the Panthers since they entered the league in 1995. Joe Person of TheAthletic.com confirms that the team will be staying home a few days after General Manager Marty Hurney talked to him about that possibility.   “We’re just looking at all the scenarios right now, and there’s been no decisions made in that regard,” Hurney said. “We’ll just wait and see what the circumstances are and what are the best decisions when it comes down to the health and safety to everybody in our organization. There’s still more questions than answers at this point.”   Ten other teams held camp away from their home facilities last season. One of those teams is the Raiders, who were already said to be considering holding camp at their new facility in Henderson, Nevada rather than returning to Napa. Another is the Cowboys, who have been planning for a camp involving a trip to Oxnard, California as well as for one at their home site. Kevin Seifert of ESPN.com with a deeper dive on how and when the NFL might present itself. Exactly 100 days remain before the scheduled start of the NFL season. If the Houston Texans and Kansas City Chiefs actually kick off Sept. 10 at Arrowhead Stadium, they will produce one of the most significant moments in league history.   None of this country’s major professional leagues has managed to resume play since the start of the coronavirus pandemic. The NFL and NFL Players Association have more time and less urgency than their cross-sport counterparts, but the issues — testing, safety protocols, payroll adjustments and fan policies among them — are no less difficult to resolve.   The NFL has been pledging an on-time start to the season for months, even while working on multiple contingency plans behind the scenes, a number of which were built into the regular-season schedule. One could push the Super Bowl to the end of February.   “As a league, and in partnership with the players’ association, we will continue to prepare and to adjust where necessary,” commissioner Roger Goodell said during a recent media teleconference. “I think this offseason has looked a lot different than it has in the past. We are proud that our key activities, such as free agency, the league year, the offseason programs and of course the draft, demonstrated that we can operate in new and innovative ways, so we are prepared for the 2020 season.”   If the NFL season is truly to start Sept. 10, the league has a long agenda list for the next 100 days. Let’s take a closer look, both on and off the field.   What is the status of team facilities? The facilities began reopening on May 19 as state and local guidelines have relaxed. The first phase limited teams to bringing back no more than 50% of its non-field employees, for a total of up to 75 people in the building at any time. Coaches and players, other than those receiving medical treatment, were not part of that group.   The second phase began this week, as the league anticipated all facilities would reopen at some capacity. In a memo to teams, Goodell said last week that he anticipated allowing coaches to return by Friday. There is hope — but no plan yet — for the return of players before the NFL offseason ends June 26.   So what does that mean for teams’ offseason programs? The programs will remain virtual through at least June 12, at which point the league and the union will reevaluate national conditions.   That leaves a two-week window, from June 15 to 26, when the NFL could potentially allow players to return for on-field workouts. For scheduling purposes, teams have saved the one mandatory event — a three-day minicamp — for potential use in that time frame. But there is no guarantee that the NFL will be ready to utilize that time. And even if teams receive that authorization, it’s possible that some will opt against a scramble to bring players from all over the country into the facility for such a short period.   “We’ve got to get this right,” said Troy Vincent, the NFL’s executive vice president of football operations. “We’re coming out of phase 1, going into phase 2, and we have to assure the general public and our players that our protocol and procedures [work]. We can’t miss. We just can’t fail. So rather than saying, ‘Yes, we’re going to do this,’ we have time. We have to be right. We are really taking a responsible approach on a daily basis. It’s changing daily.”   What is the significance of June 26? Could the offseason be extended to get more virtual work in? By agreement with the players’ association, via the collective bargaining agreement, the league limits both the amount and period of time that players can participate in offseason team workouts. This year, the latest day that teams can host player workouts is June 26, allowing for a monthlong quiet period before training camps open.   We’ve learned this year not to rule out unusual or unprecedented events, but an extension beyond June 26 would seem unlikely and almost certainly would be tied to an acknowledgement that the start of training camps would be pushed back.   So will training camps be pushed back? That’s impossible to predict right now. We don’t even know how the offseason program will end! All teams have been instructed to plan an on-time start to camps in late July, but its ultimate timing — and that of everything that follows — is largely dependent on three key factors:   The NFL’s success in conceiving and implementing a health and safety protocol that minimizes the chances of infection and ensures quick action to prevent spread   Agreement from the players, via the NFLPA, on that protocol and on any potential economic concessions   Acquiescence from state and local governments in the localities that house NFL stadiums   What will the NFL’s health and safety protocols look like? Most of it remains in development, and part of it will be adjusted in reaction to trial and error from other leagues. We’ve gotten a few glimpses, including efforts to design a helmet visor that could limit the flow of virus through airborne particles.   Dr. Allen Sills, the NFL’s chief medical officer, has made clear that the league should expect some personnel to be infected and said: “Our challenge is to identify them as quickly as possible and prevent spread to any other participants.”   Sills also said that “certain important steps” in testing and testing availability must happen before the NFL has large-scale events. In other words, production and availability of test kits must increase to the point where the league can test all of its participants regularly and reliably without limiting the supply for the rest of the public.   “When we and the players’ association feel that we are at a point of satisfaction with that science, then we’ll be ready to move forward,” Sills said.   Once everyone is comfortable on the science, the NFL and NFLPA will need to address a series of other important aspects of their coronavirus policy. While physical distancing is not possible during games, will practices be reorganized to limit proximity? Will players and coaches be quarantined when not at the team facility? Will rosters or practice squads be expanded to ensure a full complement of healthy players? What about players with underlying conditions, those in high-risk groups and those who have other personal reasons to stay away from the field?   Atlanta Falcons center Alex Mack, the treasurer of the NFLPA, told reporters he is more concerned about players getting infected while away from the team facility or stadiums.   “I think it comes down to how can you control when people go home,” Mack said. “What they do, what the people at their home are doing. It’s just the whole spiderweb effect of contamination that’s hard to wrap your head around and kind of figure out. I guess the fear of the unknown, to me, concerns me.”   In addition to the health of players, the NFL also must take into account the rest of its on-field personnel, from coaches to athletic trainers to game officials. The NFL has three head coaches over the age of 65 and a total of six who are at least 60 years old. And the average age of the league’s game officials is 52, according to NFL Referees Association executive director Scott Green.   Let’s back up: What did you mean earlier by potential economic concessions? It’s messy, and no one wants to hear about it amid record unemployment numbers around the country. But the experiences of the NBA and Major League Baseball, in particular, show us that the NFL’s return to play is dependent on cooperation between owners and players on issues they don’t always agree on.   Owners already have instituted some pay reductions and furloughs among off-field staffers. What will happen if they ask players to also take pay reductions outside of their collective bargaining agreement?   The league’s salary cap addresses the question from a philosophical standpoint. Players would share in the impact of lower revenues in 2020 via a smaller salary cap in 2021. Would owners seek additional concessions? We would be fools to rule out the possibility.   Regardless, training camps won’t open on time and the season won’t kick off Sept. 10 without players’ full cooperation.   Is there really a chance for fans to attend 2020 games? Not every state has addressed whether it will allow professional sports this summer or fall — or whether fans would be allowed to gather in significant numbers. But contingency planning includes the possibility of admitting a limited number of fans per game.   During an appearance last month on CNBC, Miami Dolphins owner Stephen Ross said: “I think there definitely will be a football season this year. [The] real question is, will there be fans in the stadium? Right now — today — we’re planning to have fans in the stadium.”   The Dolphins recently unveiled plans to limit crowds to as low as 15,000 people at Hard Rock Stadium, allowing them to maintain physical distancing within the 65,000-seat facility. Would the NFL allow some teams to admit fans if others are prevented by state or local regulations? The league hasn’t yet said.   What about the rest of the NFL’s offseason schedule? Even after the end of the offseason program, teams can continue to work through existing individual contract situations, including signing their rookie classes.   July 15 remains the deadline for signing franchise players to long-term contracts. Otherwise, they must play the season under a one-year deal. In this unusual offseason, none of the 14 players tagged has signed new deals, a list that includes Dallas Cowboys quarterback Dak Prescott, Jacksonville Jaguars defensive end Yannick Ngakoue and Tennessee Titans running back Derrick Henry.   Isn’t the Pro Football Hall of Fame induction usually in the summer? Yes. At the moment it remains on the schedule. The annual Hall of Fame Game would be played Aug. 6, and the Class of 2020 would be inducted Aug. 8. But David Baker, the Hall’s president and CEO, told USA Today that he is considering multiple contingencies, including pushing the ceremony to the spring or combining it with the 2021 induction.   What plans are being made by the NFL for game officials? In most years, the NFL officiating department’s annual July clinic would be especially busy. The department has new leadership that includes former coach Perry Fewell, now the senior vice president of officiating administration, and retired referee Walt Anderson, now senior vice president of training and development.   The clinic is likely to be held via video conference, according to Green. The NFLRA also is discussing contingencies for the season, such as whether it would make sense for officials to be assigned to games based on their home city to minimize air travel.   Here’s another random issue to consider in the coronavirus era: Could whistles accelerate the spread of the virus? And if officials wear masks during games, how would they blow a whistle?   So when will we start getting clarity on all of this? The NFL has followed a simple rule throughout the coronavirus pandemic: Maintain original schedules until they are no longer viable. So there is no reason to expect the NFL to make any imminent announcements about training camp or the season. For the most part, it has implemented its virtual offseason program in two-week increments. That’s a good working understanding for how the rest of the summer could go.

NFC EAST

WASHINGTON Mike Florio of ProFootballTalk.com demands social accountability, as he defines it, from the Redskins: This won’t be a universally popular opinion, but the time for caring about making everyone happy and/or pissing off the fewest number of people has ended.   As the NFL and its teams look for a way to transform words into actions, a simple, easy, and clear path to change for professional football would come from an immediate change to the name of the Washington franchise.   The team that is named for the nation’s capital, at a time when the nation’s capital has become one of the flash points for protest, should acknowledge that the franchise’s nickname is a textbook racial slur, that it genuinely offends enough Native Americans to make the name unacceptable, and that it should change. If it wasn’t already obvious, it should be given the reaction to the franchise’s failed effort to embrace #BlackoutTuesday.   If not in this moment, when will the name ever change? When owner Daniel Snyder sells the team to someone else? When he can barter a new name for a new stadium? When the league inevitably tells Snyder or his successor to do the right thing, possibly in exchange for a draft or a Super Bowl?   In this critical time of turning mere language into meaningful action, this is the opportunity for Snyder to show strength, unity, and sensitivity by acknowledging that the word is outdated, that it is racist, and that it should be abandoned. While it applies to a different race than the race that currently is screaming for equality and justice, racism is racism. Unfair treatment is unfair treatment. Native Americans continue to be marginalized by a word that offends too many of them.   How many is too many? One Native American genuinely offended by the phrase is too many. And it’s far more than one Native American who objects to the term, despite the efforts of the franchise to mischaracterize inherently flawed polls and other devices aimed at creating an impression that it’s OK to use the name, that it’s only a problem if an overwhelming majority of Native Americans object, and that the opinions expressed by “woke” media members who are trying to give voice to the Native Americans who are offended by the word should be disregarded as “virtue signaling.”   Fans of the franchise, who have somehow found a way to convince themselves that “Redskins” means only a football team and nothing more, will continue to loudly object and deflect, clumsily arguing that a change to the team’s nickname will force other franchises to follow suit, given that “Giants” offends large people and “Saints” offends Catholics and whatever else they’ll argue in order to avoid the fundamental question of whether repeated and regular use of the term “Redskins” is acceptable, especially when America is being pushed (perhaps against its will) toward ending systemic racism against all minority classes.   Again, racism is racism — whether practiced against African-Americans or Native Americans or any group that isn’t part of the white majority. For far too long, Snyder and his predecessors have ignored the simply reality that “Redskins” isn’t a universal term of honor but, at the very best, a term on which Native Americans are conflicted. So as the NFL gropes for a way to turn its word salads of statements into something real and meaningful, nothing would be more real and more meaningful than finally admitting in a loud, clear , and unambiguous voice that the term “Redskins” is wrong, and that it will immediately be abandoned for another name.   If the organization does anything less than that, any of its word or actions aimed at ending racism should be regarded as hollow, incomplete, and insincere.

NFC SOUTH

CAROLINA LB LUKE KUECHLY is now officially retired.  Nick Shook of NFL.com: Luke Kuechly’s retirement is official.   The Carolina Panthers placed Kuechly on the reserve/retired list, effective Tuesday, NFL Network Insider Ian Rapoport reported.   Kuechly announced his retirement in mid-January, deciding to walk away from the game after eight professional seasons, citing concerns about his ability to play the game with strength, speed and in a physical nature. Kuechly suffered multiple concussions throughout his stellar career in which he earned five first-team All-Pro selections, seven trips to the Pro Bowl and the 2013 AP Defensive Player of the Year.   Carolina’s decision to place Kuechly on the reserve/retired list after June 1 allows the team to spread out his dead cap hit among 2020 and 2021, according to The Athletic’s Joe Person.

NFC WEST

SAN FRANCISCO Considering where he has been, new 49ers T TRENT WILLIAMS is very impressed with QB JIMMY GAROPPOLO. During the past decade in D.C., left tackle Trent Williams blocked for a declining Donovan McNabb, Rex Grossman, John Beck, Robert Griffin III, Kirk Cousins, Colt McCoy, Alex Smith, Mark Sanchez and Josh Johnson.   The up-and-down years in Washington give the Pro Bowl blocker a proper perspective on what makes a successful signal-caller.   Following his trade to San Francisco after sitting out all of last season, Williams told NFL Network Insider Ian Rapoport on the RapSheet + Friends podcast that he thinks Jimmy Garoppolo is among the top tier heading into 2020.   “I think Jimmy G is awesome,” Williams said. “I think he has proven that he’s a quarterback that you can win with. In this league, it’s just hard to find. Quarterback is the toughest position and I think that’s why you see the contracts where they are. Having a quarterback that you know is going to make the right read, the right throw, I think that has to allow Kyle (Shanahan), you know, give him a chance to sleep at night because just having a guy you know who won’t throw the game away for you. You put him in the best position possible. He’ll win.”   Williams has played in just two postseason games during his career, both losses, once with Cousins under center and the other in the infamous RGIII playoff game. After Jimmy G helped the 49ers reach the Super Bowl, Williams is glad to block for a QB he can believe in.   “From being in my position, not having a lot of success in the league, having a good quarterback then to having a kind of musical chairs back there, I know the importance of it,” he said. “So I’m extremely happy just to be part of an offense that really don’t need me to win. I add to it.”   The 49ers hope Williams can be one of the additions that gets them over the hump from Super Bowl participant to Super Bowl champion.

LOS ANGELES RAMS Who will win more games this season – the Rams or the Cardinals?  The Rams have the great Sean McVay, a young, highly-paid quarterback and the favorite for NFL Defensive Player of the Year.  But they also are in cap jail.  Bret Stuter of RamblinFan.com: The LA Rams have been fighting against the current all offseason.  The team entered this offseason with far too much of the salary cap in the hands of too few players.  The Rams also faced a critical NFL Draft with too few picks. And the team faced losing too many NFL veterans to free agency thanks to expiring contracts but holding too few dollars to resign enough back to the roster.   The jury is still out regarding how well the Rams navigated the numerous challenges faced this off-season.  After all, we have yet to even see the team on the practice field, let alone in a regular-season game. But lo and behold, another speed bump has surfaced for the LA Rams this season. That new development is an old familiar foe but repackaged into a new challenge.   Say hello to another salary cap issue! Yes, it’s another salary cap development.  But this time, it’s neither an editorial nor an analysis.  It’s about the way the Rams determined to fix the roster for 2020. The team committed a lot of money to QB Jared Goff, RB Todd Gurley, WR Brandin Cooks, and DT Aaron Donald. Of the group, only Donald continued to perform at the level of his compensation.  That left the team in a difficult position with three offensive leaders: let it ride and do nothing, rehabilitate the player with an increase of coaching attention, or cut the losses and move on from the player.   READ: LA Rams: 30 greatest players in franchise history The Rams hired quarterback whisperer Kevin O’Connell to assume the vacant offensive coordinator role with the LA Rams. While his duties for the LA Rams include a number of critical tasks, he is now the primary coach to help develop veteran quarterback Jared Goff to the next tier of NFL quarterbacks. The team also changed running back coaches, opting for Thomas Brown out of South Carolina.  Since Gurley had lobbied successfully to retain running backs coach Skip Peete, that signaled the Rams would be moving on from Gurley, which they did. The team then negotiated a trade to move Cooks to the Houston Texans.   Dread that dead cap The LA Rams rose from one of the teams with the lowest dead cap number to among the top-5 in a matter of weeks. How did that all happen so quickly?  Well, it came to pass when the LA Rams released highly compensated running back Todd Gurley and traded away highly compensated wide receiver, Brandin Cooks.   Both players had significant signing bonuses, which by rules of the NFL, can be spread over the life of the contract. When they were no longer employed by the LA Rams, the unrecognized monies became dead cap money, and immediately reduced the Rams available spending cash for 2020. That was enough to push the Rams all the way to the third most dead cap money for 2020 in the NFL.   So how do the LA Rams rank in terms of 2020 dead cap money? Well the experts at Spotrac.comhave the answer.   @spotrac Updated #NFL Dead Cap Leaders 1⃣ #Panthers, $48M 2⃣ #Jaguars, $37M 3⃣ #Rams, $34M 4⃣ #Patriots, $24M 5⃣ #Dolphins, $22M Since 2015, only 3 teams with Top 5 dead cap have posted a regular season record over .500.http://spotrac.com/nfl/cap/   And right now, it’s one more hurdle to overcome. That $34 million was not a surprise to the Rams but has certainly been a huge obstacle to the Rams plans to restock the roster. The majority of funds resulted from the trade of Brandin Cooks  ($21.8 million), the release of Todd Gurley ($9.8 million), the release of OLB Clay Matthews ($2 million), and the retirement of S Eric Weddle ($500 thousand).   Rams in better shape than you think While that dead cap money is never a positive, the LA Rams have been veterans at doing more with less. Keep in mind that the LA Rams have not drafted a first-round player for several years. While that may not seem positive, the guaranteed salary scale from round one to rounds two or later is significant. In short, the Rams have committed fewer dollars to rookies than other teams.  That’s not a problem, as long as the team is able to develop young talent into NFL starters. So far, the team has been able to do exactly that.   Despite a shortage of liquidity, the LA Rams continue to find ways to pay their bills. While it has slowed down the process of signing contracts with players and has created a host of questions at times over “where is that money coming from?”, progress continues.  If the Rams are able to assemble a competitive roster with that much dead cap holding them back, is there a flurry of NFL free agent signings around the corner?   2021 cap uncertain In 2021, the Rams three top-paid players all exhibit huge jumps in their cap consumption. That is partially offset by the team’s drop of dead cap space to $8.4 million.  Right now, the Rams are estimated at a $41 million available cap space in 2021 by Spotrac. In the same breath, they estimate the market value of the WR Cooper Kupp, CB Jalen Ramsey just under a $34 million dollar mark.  While the Rams can absorb one such significant signing in 2021,  it remains to be seen just how much the Rams can afford beyond that.   If the optimistic estimates hold true, and the salary cap increases to $240 million for next season, that will add an additional $31 million to the Rams coffers, elevating their free dollars to $72 million for next year. That should allow the Rams to sign both Kupp, Ramsey, and perhaps two additional key starters to the roster.  But if the opposite holds true, and the 2021 salary cap decreases, then it will be a series of tough decisions facing the team. The Rams have been stung by committing too many dollars to too few players. Don’t look for history to repeat itself anytime soon. With the Wuhan Covid aftermath, the 2021 cap won’t be going up to $240 million (see below).

AFC EAST

NEW ENGLAND Here is some promised info on CAM NEWTON and the Patriots.  Sam Robinson of ProFootballRumors.com: Weeks after Jameis Winston and Andy Dalton agreed to deals, Cam Newton remains unattached. Not much known interest has come Newton’s way since the Panthers released him, and ESPN.com’s Jeremy Fowler indicated the former MVP’s market has even cooled over the past month.   But the team with the most noticeable quarterback need may well have spoken with Newton at some point this offseason. The Patriots are believed to have talked with Newton early in free agency, Fowler notes, but nothing came out of those discussions. Newton has been a free agent since Carolina released him a week into free agency.   After losing one of the greatest quarterbacks ever, the Patriots did not make an impact move to replace him. Their Tom Brady succession plan exiting May: a competition featuring 2019 fourth-round pick Jarrett Stidham and the recently re-signed Brian Hoyer. New England added two UDFA quarterbacks but passed on several free agent arms since Brady’s Buccaneers defection.   Patriots OC Josh McDaniels interviewed for the Panthers job that ended up going to Matt Rhule, and the veteran play-caller was not believed to be high on Newton during his pitch for the Carolina role. Newton is obviously a more proven passer than Stidham or Hoyer and has achieved far more than many teams’ starting quarterbacks. But the 31-year-old QB’s wait continues. And the former No. 1 overall pick is willing to continue waiting, Fowler adds. At this point, Newton may be waiting to see if a training camp injury or before opens a starting job somewhere.   Reports have created an inconclusive picture of Newton’s desire to accept a backup role, and Fowler notes some around the league are not sure if the nine-year Panthers starter would be willing to do so. Newton has not been a backup since his short stay at Florida in the late 2000s.   The Chargers considered Newton, and ex-Panthers HC Ron Rivera discussed his former charge as well. The injuries Newton suffered in recent years — from his 2018 shoulder relapse to last year’s Lisfranc setback, which required surgery — have worked against Newton in this COVID-19-marred offseason. Although coronavirus restrictions are slowly loosening, free agents remain unable to visit teams’ facilities. Before a franchise goes forward with a Newton offer, it would almost certainly want its medical staff to examine him. This has kept Newton in limbo as he rehabs from the December foot surgery.

THIS AND THAT

GEORGE FLOYD AND THE AFTERMATH Shalise Manza Young of YahooSports.com is taking names on NFL reaction, and lack thereof, to the events of the last week. The time for words is over.   But as we’re seeing from a significant number of NFL teams, even empty words are a bridge too far.   As of this writing, 16 teams had posted at minimum a statement, either under the franchise logo or with the owner’s name attached, to their social media channels. They’re all different, but generally they condemn the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police and pledge to go beyond words to offer action.   Some, like Baltimore Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti and New Orleans Saints owner Gayle Benson, wrote about actionable steps they’re taking immediately: Bisciotti is donating $1 million, with players deciding how and where the money should be distributed; Benson, who also owns the New Orleans Pelicans, announced the formation of a Social Justice Leadership coalition with players from both teams.   Perhaps not surprisingly, given his father’s history as an NFL ownership renegade, the Las Vegas Raiders statement signed by Mark Davis said in part, “To be honest I’m surprised that the resulting violence hasn’t been much worse.”   It’s telling that half of the league’s teams have felt moved enough by the deep pain and desperation shown by so many black Americans in recent days in a league where over two-thirds of players are black.   On Saturday, the NFL released a statement that was credited to commissioner Roger Goodell. It was mostly word salad and certainly eye-rolling for those of us old enough to remember what the league did to Colin Kaepernick, whose silent protest was sparked by killings just like Floyd’s.   Setting that aside for another day, Goodell’s statement and the silence of so many teams is a reminder: While the commissioner may have something of a moral conscience, given that there are reports he is bothered by the lack of black head coaches and general managers in the league, the fact remains that Goodell can’t truly use the power of the NFL without the backing of those who pay his salary — team owners.   Given their statements, we assume some owners would be on board.   Given their silence, we assume most are not.   It’s striking to see where statements have and haven’t come from. The Pittsburgh Steelers, whose late owner Dan Rooney was a chairman of the league’s diversity committee, have not issued one. Owner Jeff Lurie and the Philadelphia Eagles, who have in the past been supportive of players’ efforts to work for equity in justice, stayed silent for a week before releasing a statement on Tuesday afternoon.   Members of the New England Patriots have been some of the most active in terms of putting the time in to affect change in Massachusetts, at times with the help of team owner Robert Kraft and president Jonathan Kraft. But the Patriots too have said nothing, even after we reached out on Monday night asking if there would be a statement coming.   The NFC East remains largely silent, with no statements from the Dallas Cowboys, Washington Redskins or New York Giants as of noon on Tuesday.   Players are noticing too. In a Twitter thread directed to the NFL, Minnesota’s Eric Kendricks asked, “What actual steps are you taking to support the fight for justice and [systemic] reform? Your statement said nothing. Your league is built on black athletes … You can’t bring in people to teach us how we should interact with police but not work towards changing the behavior of the police themselves. Silence will not make this go away.”   The fact is, the NFL is uniquely positioned to be a force for good right now. All but two team owners are wealthy white people (Shad Khan and his Jacksonville Jaguars are one of the teams still silent, while Kim Pegula and her Buffalo Bills have issued a statement), with the money, connections and influence to guide local, state and even federal leaders toward change.   The University of Minnesota said it will no longer contract with the Minneapolis Police Department for services at large events, including football games, after George Floyd’s death. What if the Wilf family, which owns the Vikings, made the same decision instead of a brief, carefully worded statement saying “everyone in our community deserves the right to feel protected and safe”?   Game-day contracts and other perks — the Vikings have invited police to training camp, where they got player access and autographs — are a benefit for police in the Minneapolis area, not a right. If the Wilfs truly want residents in the community to feel protected and safe, they can pull their money until local departments vow changes and implement actions like more community oversight and limiting the use of force.   Hendricks is right when he says silence won’t make this go away. All over this country, in cities where NFL teams play and dozens more where they don’t, people are protesting police brutality, begging for those charged with protecting and serving to do so without getting away with wantonly killing citizens, a far higher percentage of them black and brown, in situations where lethal force was unnecessary.   It’s likely nearly every black NFL player has at least one story, and probably more, of being racially profiled by police or discriminated against by a fellow American, and not just in the days before they became professional athletes. Outside of the walls of their team facilities, they are still black men, and neither money, Pro Bowl berths nor the vaunted NFL shield can protect them from a bigoted system.   Do team owners spend any time talking to these men? Do they ever look these players in their eyes and ask them about their experiences beyond their significant others and children and tackle stats? Have they ever heard and processed the fear many black people have when they see police lights in the rearview mirror, the racing heartbeat and thoughts that a basic traffic stop for, say, not adequately stopping at a stop sign can result in you having a gun pointed in your face?   Do these team owners think this is OK?   Even if they don’t look at players as fully formed human beings, are they OK with their employees, who help keep profits rolling in, at risk like this? Will it take Cowboys rookie CeeDee Lamb getting repeatedly tased over parking in a handicapped spot a la the Bucks’ Sterling Brown before Dallas owner Jerry Jones is moved to say anything, let alone be moved to push for action?   Since it’s all the rage these days to use the words of Martin Luther King Jr., let’s pull out these: “In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies but the silence of our friends.” At this point, not only are players taking note of what team owners doing and not doing, the rest of us are too.

THE CAP CRUSH Unlike baseball, the NFL has a negotiated method in place to deal with massive disruptions to its cash flow, such as those imposed if teams are not allowed to admit fans to their stadiums.  The basic way would be a drastic decline in next year’s salary cap, but Mike Garofolo of NFL.com says that could have an uneven impact across the NFLPA membership with more players with big contracts being let go.  There also could be a negotiated trim of contracts across the board. When it comes to the 2020 NFL season, the focus has been on how to do it safely and on time, even amid the coronavirus pandemic. That remains paramount. However, there are financial issues many believe must be worked out before anyone can take the field, with or without fans.   Multiple sources say the NFL and NFLPA both acknowledge that important negotiations are coming quickly to determine how to handle yearly salary caps for 2020 and beyond, considering there are likely to be steep revenue losses with limited or no fans in the stands. This sets up a scenario where both sides will have to come to agreements on every possible contingency on how COVID-19 could affect the season before anyone plays a game.   While there is no deadline, the hope is to have agreements reached before training camps open, which is scheduled for late July. Theoretically, the NFLPA and NFL could talk throughout the preseason, but beginning the regular season without a deal is not considered feasible, sources say.   Currently, the league and NFLPA are studying how the revenue could be affected and what the sure-fire losses will look like. That’s one reason why there have been barely any contract extensions and few free agents have been signed after the initial free agency period.   The goal is to make sure the salary cap goes up or at worst stays flat. But what if that’s not possible?   The NFL has had the luxury of waiting, biding its time and watching the other professional leagues, while MLB and its union in particular has engaged in acrimonious and sometimes tone-deaf talks for how to compensate players and what the season will look like. Those involved in football want to handle it now before it gets to that point.   Here are the issues:   The salary cap (currently $198.2 million for 2020) is calculated based on expected revenue, but there’s also a mechanism where it rises or falls based on unexpectedly higher or lower revenue in the previous season. That will be the case this year in relation to the 2021 cap with fewer (or no) fans in the stands. How bad will the revenue losses be?   The worst-case scenario is that every game is played in a completely empty stadium, leading to what sources have estimated as a $4 or $5 billion drop — about a third of revenue. Under that scenario, teams could bring in $40 to $80 million less than expected. The losses are likely to be less than that, because it is expected that some fans will be able to attend games in some stadiums, although stadiums won’t be packed. Still, if there are huge revenue losses, the 2021 cap will be impacted.   But no one wants to see the cap drop because that has consequences for teams and players. And neither side wants a situation where the cap drops significantly in 2021 then rebounds with the new TV deals in 2022. It makes it extremely difficult for teams to conduct business or do extensions.   Among the possibilities for how to smooth the cap out given expected losses is borrowing from future TV deals. New deals usually create a spike in the cap due to influx of cash, but in this case could be used to create a smooth incline and make up for losses incurred during the 2020 season. The league and the NFLPA could also agree to curtail or eliminate performance-based pay for a few years.   But some have proposed looking at the present, instead of the future, for relief. And this will require cooperation between the NFL and NFLPA.   The players’ union would have to agree to give back some money this year, thus taking on some pain in the short term to offset more in the long term. With roster bonuses, workout bonuses, option bonuses and signing bonuses already paid in the spring, the trim would likely come from the players’ base salaries, which are paid in weekly installments during the season. It’s unclear at this point, with negotiations not even underway, how big of a cut the league would request and what kind of structure the players would accept for the giveback.   Surely, the players would be reluctant to agree to such cuts. But teams would argue the alternative isn’t ideal, either. In anticipation of revenue losses, teams could opt to part with veterans with big, non-guaranteed base salaries in 2020. Players such as the Browns’ Olivier Vernon ($15.25 million), whose future in Cleveland has already been questioned by some, could find themselves in jeopardy of getting released.   Plus, if the players agree to a trim now, it would save some jobs in 2021. The smaller the drop in next year’s salary cap, the fewer number of veterans would be released then.   The NFL declined comment for this story. The NFLPA declined comment for this story, as well, but sources informed of the union’s thinking said the organization is aware of the potential for significant revenue loss this year and would be amenable to negotiating with the league to smooth out the salary cap as much as possible. And of course, they will surely have requests for what they would receive from the league in return for salary concessions.   And then there is the other, major issue that looms — what if the coronavirus cuts short the season after it started? While there is nothing firm and final, one could expect players to argue there is a strong legal argument to be made that once a single regular season game is played, teams would owe players their entire base salaries for the season, no matter how many games are ultimately played.   In that scenario, if the season were cut short, teams would lose an overwhelming amount of revenue, but still be on the hook for full salaries for their rosters. That is not considered by teams as tenable.   Agreements need to be reached on every possible contingency — if the season starts and stops, what if they play with no fans, if they play half the season with fans, somewhere in between. What if there is a resurgence in the fall or an outbreak so serious that it forces some games to be cancelled?   All issues must be resolved by an agreement between the NFL and NFLPA.   The two sides came together on a new CBA earlier this season. The next looming set of negotiations may prove just as important. Mike Florio responds, apparently on behalf of the union: Sometimes it pays, literally, to have an in-house media conglomerate.   The NFL used its NFL-owned media outlet to float a trial balloon on Tuesday regarding the possibility that players could give back some salary in 2020, in order to “save some jobs” both this season and next.   It’s a simple argument, one which has been mentioned here previously. With the salary cap set for 2020 and with losses possible if not likely in the form of games played without fans, teams will be more tempted to slash high-priced veteran players (or to squeeze them to take pay cuts under the threat of being released), hoarding cash in anticipation of the reduced revenue. For 2021, if/when the salary cap falls, that same dynamic would play out, with higher-priced veterans in greater danger of being whacked in order to keep a given team under the lower spending limit next year that would be driven by lower revenue this year.   Beyond the huffing and puffing that teams will risk blowing their own houses down by cutting players whose services will be even more valuable in a year with no offseason program to get younger, cheaper players ready, the NFL has no leverage to force the NFL Players Association to do anything by way of taking less money to, basically, share the pain of an unexpected reduction in revenue after the salary cap for a given year was set.   The players’ salaries are set. The salary cap is set. Even if the league decides to pass revenue losses through to veteran players by cutting them (or by pinching them individually to take less), the Collective Bargaining Agreement has clear spending requirements. For the most part, money not spent now will have to be spent later.   The only argument that the NFL has to not pay players arises from language in the Standard Player Contract implying that, if there’s no season, the obligation to pay base salaries never arises. If there’s only a partial season, the players arguably get their money — with the revenue losses from canceled games triggering a mutual obligation to negotiate next year on the impact on the salary cap. It’s an odd requirement in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, given that the league and the union set the salary cap based on negotiations every single year.   Plenty of teams won’t want a reduced cap. Plenty of teams want to win, and so they want to spend. Someone like Cowboys owner Jerry Jones would welcome the possibility that others will harm their own competitive interests by voluntarily tightening their belts and deliberately spending less, especially if that includes dumping veteran players who would help the team be as good as it can be.   While the two sides are free to negotiate, or try to negotiate, anything they want, the league isn’t holding many cards on this one. Frankly, the mere fact that the possibility of seeking givebacks has been floated by the league to league-owned media puts the union on notice to watch carefully for any evidence of collusive activity moving forward, with the league office potentially advising teams on how to go about getting givebacks without giving anything up to get them.   There’s precedent for this kind of behavior. Remember the uncapped year of 2010? Dallas and Washington eventually were whacked by the powers-that-be in the form of dramatically reduced cap space for violating the wink-nod rules that the league put in place to prevent teams from treating the uncapped year as, you know, uncapped.   This time around, the league may want teams to treat a year with a set cap as having a lower cap. And if teams suddenly and spontaneously starting slashing salaries and coincidentally reducing their 2020 salary budgets by similar percentages, it will make plenty of sense for the union to look under every rock for evidence of coordination i.e. collusion.