Absence of Agreement Could Be Big Deal

Discussion in 'The National Football League' started by Kaiser Toro, Mar 2, 2006.

  1. Kaiser Toro

    Kaiser Toro Native Mod

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,206
    Likes Received:
    1,156
    Location:
    Straight Outta Austin
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/01/AR2006030102216.html

    Without a deal, the Washington Redskins will have to trim a salary cap overage of about $20 million by the end of business today. The Oakland Raiders are close to $30 million over the projected cap. The Kansas City Chiefs and Denver Broncos each are about $25 million over, and the New York Jets were about $25 million over before making some salary trims last week. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Tennessee Titans and Atlanta Falcons each are at least $13 million over.

    Teams started releasing players yesterday in what could be a roster purge unlike the NFL has ever seen. Dozens of players could be released by the end of business today as teams scramble to get under the cap. In addition, clubs scurrying to get beneath the cap will be in no position to do much -- or any -- buying when the free agent market opens. That could make for a market far less robust than free agents such as tailbacks Shaun Alexander of the Seattle Seahawks and Edgerrin James of the Indianapolis Colts would have hoped.

    In the short term, the competitive advantage will go to teams who enter this offseason with abundant salary cap space. The Arizona Cardinals, Minnesota Vikings, Green Bay Packers and Cleveland Browns each are more than $20 million below the projected cap. The Seahawks, San Diego Chargers, San Francisco 49ers, Baltimore Ravens, Jacksonville Jaguars, Cincinnati Bengals, St. Louis Rams and New Orleans Saints are more than $10 million under. They will be, if they choose, the major buyers in free agency while usual big spenders such as the Redskins and Broncos probably will be forced to the sideline.
     
  2. Double Barrel

    Double Barrel Modified Simian

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2004
    Messages:
    33,266
    Likes Received:
    2,995
    Location:
    Onward, Upward, and back into the Trees
    Holy cow. This is going to be a bloodbath, and teams we thought had a good chance of going into the 2006 season with some momentum will be stopped in their tracks. This could get really ugly before the dust settles.
     
  3. infantrycak

    infantrycak Mod. Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    54,947
    Likes Received:
    2,606
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Well the NFL owners just unanimously voted to reject the players' proposal. Tags said there is time today but this isn't a one phone call kind of deal to solve. If this slips past today, there is no deadline to make them come together for a while.

    There has also been a ruling of some sort (only caught the tail end) which is evidently disallowing the practice of converting roster bonuses into signing bonuses to let teams restructure contracts (ex. Portis' reported restructuring). This is a huge deal for teams trying to get under the cap. Indy is so strapped by the inability to pull this with Manning and Harrison that they are planning to go to a federal court to get a reversal of the ruling. Mort was saying they may only be able to carry 33 guys on their roster until this issue is resolved.
     
  4. jacquescas

    jacquescas Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    1,323
    Likes Received:
    5
    think about this. We are not in bad cap shape, and should be able to get a decent number of free agents. lets say the draft comes and goes and our top pick gets alot less than people expect. Then an extension comes along, and we get a draft pick for a much lesser price.:drool:
     
  5. Double Barrel

    Double Barrel Modified Simian

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2004
    Messages:
    33,266
    Likes Received:
    2,995
    Location:
    Onward, Upward, and back into the Trees
    I've also heard that if the deadline passes today, there will be little incentive for the players' union to come back to the table to work out a deal for a cap in the 2007 season.

    In addition, Upshaw is supposed to request at next weeks players meeting that they de-certify the union, which apparently can have direct ramifications for the NFL with regards to anti-trust laws. I don't know all the ins & outs of this process, so any light that you could shed on the subject would be mighty helpful.
     
  6. FILO_girl

    FILO_girl I'm not here

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    1,676
    Likes Received:
    86
    Location:
    HOU-finally moved in the big city
    Wow, this is insane. In the sports world already, these athletes are paid crazy money and only the cap keeps it under some control. No cap is going to be hard on US, as WE will be paying the inflated player's salaries with our soon-to-be-skyrocketing season ticket prices. Now I see why they didn't specify what the monetary penalty is if you miss your 3/15 payment. :brickwall

    I am sorry but I really think this sucks the big one.
     
  7. MojoX

    MojoX Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    19
    I posted this in another thread:

    From what I gather, decertification means the owners can't lock out the players. It was done in 1987 to get the games to continue. NFL.com has a pretty good article on this:
    The rest of the article has pretty good info.
     
  8. Double Barrel

    Double Barrel Modified Simian

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2004
    Messages:
    33,266
    Likes Received:
    2,995
    Location:
    Onward, Upward, and back into the Trees
    Thanks MojoX. :thumbup That definitely sheds some light on the subject.
     


Share This Page