When and if the NFL Players Association executive committee gets a chance to meet with NFL management next week, one of a few things will happen. The NFLPA might accept the negotiated terms on a new collective bargaining agreement proposed Thursday by NFL team owners, or it might convince the league to agree to altered terms. Or the NFLPA could reject the proposal as it stands.The third scenario would send the two parties back to the negotiating table, and one of the primary causes likely would be the disconnect between the league and its players on a 17-game schedule for the regular season. Speaking to media on the Wednesday before Super Bowl 54 in Miami, the 49ers cornerback and NFLPA executive committee member explained why the 17-game schedule is a sticking point for players in CBA negotiations. Here’s what he had to say:”I don’t think it’s something that players are interested in, honestly. And if that’s the point they’re negotiating on, I think these negotiations are going to go on a lot longer than anticipated.”It’s odd to me — and it’s always odd — when you hear player safety as their biggest concern. They’re really standing up for player safety, player safety, player safety. But it seems like player safety has a price tag. Player safety up to the point of, ‘Hey, 17 games makes us this much money. So we really don’t care how safe they are, if you’re going to pay us this much money to play another game.'”That’s the part that’s really concerning for us as a union and us as players, because they think that players have a price tag on their health. And I don’t think we’re in the same ballpark in that regard. Players have been more aware of player safety and longevity and just life after football. And the league kind of pretends that they’re interested in it, pretends that they care about it, makes all these rules and fines all these players, but then still proposes for players to play an extra game.”And not just 17. They’re really just saying 17 so they can get to 18. So that’s two more opportunities for players to risk their bodies and put their bodies on the line. That’s what’s so ridiculous about it, and nobody calls them out. Nobody calls out the hypocrisy.”I’m hoping that one day people will be brave enough to call out the hypocrisy of saying, ‘Hey we really care about player safety, but hey we also want you to play an extra game, put your body on the line and risk your career.’”The NFLPA on Thursday released a fact sheet that lays out the key details of the league’s proposed CBA. It includes the possibility of “guaranteed 48 percent share of revenue in 2021, with ability to increase the percentage to 48.5 percent share through a media kicker which applies in any season the league plays 17 games.”Many players have expressed on social media a desire to make that revenue split an even 50/50 if they’re going to have to play 17 regular-season games. From Pro Football Talk’s Mike Florio: “The proposal that the league accepted represents the culmination of months of negotiation. Starting several weeks ago, the NFL Players Association presented the proposal to its 32-member board of player representatives. There was, as of three weeks ago, unexpected pushback, with plenty of player representatives still resisting the basic concept of playing 17 games.”MORE: Pros and cons of NFL playoff expansionBased on the terms of the proposed CBA, a move to a 17-game schedule for the regular season would come with two additional playoff games (one extra wild-card game per conference), according to ESPN. Playoff expansion reportedly isn’t an issue for the players, though, compared to the idea of an extra week of regular-season play.The NFL’s motivation behind its push for a 17-game schedule is obvious, especially considering nobody (not even the fans) is asking for regular-season expansion. If the league can tout 17 games as opposed to 16 games in its upcoming negotiations with potential broadcast rights holders, it can and will charge more for those rights.Yes, the players would earn a game check for that 17th regular-season contest, but the terms of the proposed CBA reportedly would limit that check to $250,000 per player, a laughable deal to the many players who make more per game. Yet, according to the sentiments expressed by Richard Sherman almost a month ago, the players’ pushback against the idea of a 17-game schedule is rooted deeper than compensation.