The purpose of this petition is to persuade The NFL, Its Commissioner and all other offices or departments therein, to make changes to the current rules surrounding and related to player injury reporting and game status designation. The current rule, last amended in 2017, has since come under scrutiny for its inadequacy in holding teams accountable for lack of transparency, and/or not acting in good faith in an attempt to gain an advantage over their opponent(s). While many things are impacted when these rules are not followed, it should be duly considered that players can be put into dangerous situations when their health and wellness are weighed against competitive advantage. The changes recommended by these petitioners aim to ensure player safety, strengthen the league’s ability to enforce the rule, and increase transparency. We hope that you consider our suggestions as you work to maintain the integrity of the game. 

Sincerely, “The 12th Man”.

An example for prospective petitioners:

     The final game of week 1 (2024-25) was met with some controversy. The New York Jets traveled to Levi’s Stadium to take on the San Francisco 49ers, or most of the 49ers. Roughly 90 minutes prior to the contest, star RB Christian McCaffery (SF) was ruled OUT of the game with a calf/achilles injury. Much to the dismay of fantasy managers lucky enough to land him in their drafts, the 2023 rushing leader would spend the night watching his teammate Jordan Mason amass 147 rushing yards and 1 TD on 28 carries. Following the most productive night of his career, Mason, in his 3rd year with the team, was asked by a reporter when he found out that he would be starting against the Jets. In a response that seemed uncertain, Mason replied “..Maybe Friday, Friday night. Something like that.” 

     This statement raised questions about the last minute announcement regarding McCaffery’s game status change- from “questionable” to “out”. By rule, if it has been decided that a player will not play, their team is obligated to release that information publicly no later than 4pm New York time, 2 days prior to the game (in this case Saturday, September 7th by 4pm ET.) So, how did Jordan Mason know he was starting in place of McCaffery on Friday, but the team wasn’t aware until Monday night?

     This question is raised to the league to investigate whether the 49ers organization acted in accordance to policy, and ultimately decides there are no clear violations. I am a strong believer in “innocent until proven guilty.” However, I question whether the league could prove the organization guilty IF they did in fact bend, or break, the rules. 

     Let me wrap up this recent example by saying I DO NOT KNOW if the 49ers violated the Personnel (Injury) Report Policy. And for what it’s worth, as a Bills Fan- I’m happy they won. My concern lies in the lack of ability that the league grants itself to enforce the policy, and demand honesty and integrity from its entities. The rules surrounding injury reports and game status are fair and easy to understand, but are they just as easy to break? 

     We have dubbed this change and suggestions herein as “The Fantasy Managers’ Rule” in solidarity with those who suffered a week 1 loss at no fault of their own. This one’s for you..

 

To those with the burden of upholding integrity and safety in the NFL:

 

     If this is being read by those above mentioned, we thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Your efforts in perfecting the game of football are appreciated year after year, and we each sign this petition knowing that your decisions will not and cannot be made lightly. We acknowledge that any deliberations or efforts made to change the game, or not to change the game, are in your trusted hands. We extend these ideas with the intention, not that you follow them exactly, but consider them as you work toward a solution.

 

Sections 1&2: Practice Report & Game Status Report

Changes: 

1.     Inactive lists for all teams playing on Sunday in the conventional 1pm or 4pm (ET) slots shall be due and publicly released no later than 90 minutes prior to the start of the earliest scheduled Sunday game. 

2.     Game Status Reports for all teams playing on Sunday in the 8pm (ET) slot or on Monday must designate any previously listed player as “out”, “doubtful”, or “probable” (NOT “QUESTIONABLE”) no later than 90 minutes prior to the start of the earliest scheduled Sunday game. 

3.     Any player who is removed from a Game Status Report and/or is not listed as inactive prior to the game will be assumed “certain to play” and subject to requirements listed in “Additions: 1-R1” below.

     Inactive lists for teams playing in either the Sunday 8pm slot or on Monday will be due and released no later than 90 minutes prior to their scheduled start time. Teams playing on Thursday and Saturday will abide by the Injury Reporting deadlines that are currently in place for those days (2017). 

     Teams NOT playing in the 8pm Sunday slot or on Monday shall not designate any player as “probable” on the Game Status Report. The requirement of teams in those slots to designate listed players as “out”, “probable” or “doubtful” will promote transparency among all entities while allowing a short period for further evaluation closer to game-time.

 

     Reasoning: these requirements remove potential advantage previously provided to teams with the conventional 4pm or 8pm slots. Each team competing on Sunday and Monday would have closer-to-equal amount of time to evaluate injury and the abilities of players dealing with them. This also eliminates decisions pertaining to player health and safety that could be swayed by outcomes of earlier games and implications thereof. 

Additions: 

1.     Players listed on the practice report that had either “Limited Participation” or “Did Not Participate” due to injury: 

*R1- shall be required, in conjunction with the team doctor(s) and/or Physical Trainer(s) and/or related specialist(s), to adequately document the extent of injury and level of affect on the player’s ability to perform at such time the team is required to release their initial weekly practice report. Documentation may be in any form or combination of media (i.e. written, still photographs, video etc.) so long as it adequately details the injury and any abilities hindered.  

2.     Any player who is added to the Practice Report after the team produces their original report for any reason including injury during a practice or a non-football related injury or illness, must also complete documentation mentioned in “1-R1” above.

3.     Any change to a player’s participation level on subsequent Practice Report(s) must be re-evaluated and follow documentation requirements listed in “1-R1” to provide explanation for the change in status.

Documentation is not required for instances such as veteran rest, or any lack of participation not related to injury/illness.

Documentation of injury/illness may be archived either by the NFL and/or the entity itself and need not be reviewed unless deemed necessary by the NFL to ensure compliance in such case that:

• The NFL has reasonable suspicion in a team’s injury reporting practices during such time that the documentation is/was produced
• A player, who was listed on the Practice Report(s) and has/had a game status designation of “Questionable” or “Doubtful”, is subsequently cleared to play (does not appear on the “inactives” list). In such case the team will be required to document the reason for the change through methods described in 1-R1
• A player is ruled “out” after previously having a designation of “questionable” or “doubtful” and there is reasonable suspicion that information was withheld or inaccurately reported by the entity to gain a competitive advantage.
• A player, who is active after previously having a game status designation of “questionable” or “doubtful”, is unable to finish a game due re-aggravation of injury or reasons pertaining to the aforementioned game status designation 
• A player has a noticeable or unusual decrease in snap count or playing time after having a game status designation of “questionable” or “doubtful” and is/was subsequently cleared to play 
• The NFL has reasonable suspicion or concern that a player may have been pressured in any way to play in a game with an injury and/or was negligently cleared to play with/following an injury and was/could have been subject to a significantly higher threat of bodily injury or physical/mental impairment than is normally expected

Once a player is ruled “out” for a game, no documentation of the injury/illness or information pertaining to such ailments need be recorded or submitted until the first Practice Report submission of the following game-week. If a player is placed on a “reserve” list, no documentation shall be required until such time they are eligible to play in the current schedule week. 

It is important to note that the documentation of injury is not/would not be explicitly used to implicate anyone of wrongdoing. It would ideally promote teams and players to do their due diligence when dealing with injury, and prevent lingering speculation of malfeasance or negligence in the Personnel (Injury) Report Policy.

Injured Players and Team Specialists should each be held accountable in their own right, and work together in making decisions with both longevity and the spirit of competition in mind and held to an equal importance.

 

Section 3: Reporting In-Game Injuries:

No changes or additions (unless previously stated)

Appendix A:

No changes or additions (unless previously stated)