The momentum toward a new CBA took a blow on Friday, but all hope is not lost, as the two sides have agreed to meet at the combine next week. As we await more word on where exactly the players union stands, here’s the latest on what was in the most recent proposal:

• One issue that players didn’t get what they wanted on is the ‘funding rule,’ per Dan Graziano of ESPN.com (Twitter link). The players wanted the rule eliminated, but instead Graziano notes the proposal only “weaken[ed] the rule somewhat.” The rule requires teams to put any amount of guaranteed money in a contract over $2MM into escrow. As Graziano points out, it’s an outdated rule from many years ago designed to prevent teams from being unable to make payroll. As the players have argued for years now, that makes owners less willing to give players large guarantees, since they have to put all the money into a bank account up front. Especially for owners that are more cash-strapped than others, it’s a significant deterrent. Graziano writes that the proposal increases the “funding rule threshold to $15 million in the first year of the deal and $17 million in 2029, the final year of the deal.”
• There’s been talk for a while about the new deal relaxing marijuana restrictions, and we have the full details on what that would look like, courtesy of Mark Maske of the Washington Post (Twitter link). The THC testing window would be reduced from a huge four-month period to just two weeks at the start of training camp. Additionally, players would no longer be suspended solely for positive marijuana tests, the number of players tested would be reduced, and the thresholds for positive tests would be increased. In other words, marijuana use will virtually never be an issue again for NFL players.
• Another smaller benefit for the players is they won’t have to pay as much money in fines, Maske tweets. The proposal will apparently reduce the fines from both teams and the league for on-field infractions. That means players won’t be fined as much for things like unnecessary roughness and unsportsmanlike conduct penalties.

Although Friday’s events dealt a blow to this CBA passing by March 18, NFL ownership has agreed to meet with the union at the Combine next week, Dan Graziano of ESPN.com reports (on Twitter). The meeting will take place Tuesday night in Indianapolis.

After the union’s executive committee voted 6-5 against the owners’ CBA proposal, the NFLPA board revealed it would not hold its vote on the measure Friday. However, the board will vote Tuesday night or Wednesday morning, Graziano adds. If two-thirds of the player representatives vote yes, the owners’ proposal goes to the entire union body. If a simple majority vote in favor of it at that point, the NFL will have a new CBA.

An interesting wrinkle to these negotiations: the NFL potentially pushing the 2020 league year back from March 18 to a later date in order to wrap up this process, Mike Garafolo of NFL.com reports (video link). Delaying the league year would postpone free agency. The legal tampering period begins March 16; free agents are able to sign deals with other teams on the 18th.

NFL teams want an answer on the CBA by next week, when teams can begin applying franchise and transition tags. If the 2011 CBA remains in place by then, teams can use both transition and franchise tags in a final-league-year special circumstance. This would impact a few marquee free agents.

A new CBA represents one of the key offseason pieces for ownership. The other part of the equation, the upcoming negotiations for new TV deals, is likely contingent on the NFL being able to sell 10 more years’ worth of labor piece. If ratified before the start of the 2020 league year, this CBA agreement would run through the 2029 season. After Friday’s development, some key hurdles remain. But with the NFL’s desire to have a new deal in place before the new league year, it seems unlikely owners would not be open to more negotiations — despite earlier reports of this week’s proposal being a take-it-or-leave it offer.