I don't see any reason why we should think Pioli lets Carr and Bowe walk.

Carr in 10 was on his rookie deal making 400k and in 11 signed his tender of 2million that was a 30% jump.Under the 30% rule carr cant sign a new deal till Mar 13 start of league year he has to hit the open market.


The Steelers and Woodley, a former second-round pick, are currently hamstrung with working out a long-term deal because of difficulties with the 30-percent rule under the old CBA, which expires in March. The franchise tag would keep Woodley off the open market and would buy both sides time to work out a long-term deal once a new CBA is reached.



The 30 percent rule applies to the renegotiation of any contracts.

It means that the player’s salary in 2010 can’t be more than 30 percent greater than the player’s salary in 2009. For players still operating under the minimum base salaries of a slotted rookie deal, that’s a problem. A big problem.



http://profootballtalk.nbcspor...-uncapped-year/

I cant find out anywhere if the 30% rule is in the new CBA need some help.Does anyone here know?

I have a bad feeling Carr will walk too...We'll probably franchise Bowe.

If he does go, this obviously makes CB a need. Arenas is best at nickel and who knows how Brown will turn out.

^ That would explain it then.

How is $2MM up from $400K a 30% jump? That's a 500% jump in pay.

I just mean the 30% rule smartass

Not trying to be a smartass, I will look up the 30% rule, this is the first I have heard of it.

Found this, and yea this could be an issue.

Anatomy of the NFL 30-Percent Rule

By Dominic Perilli

Often times with young, stud players such as Chris Johnson, Darrelle Revis, DeSean Jackson, and Patrick Willis, we hear a lot about what is called the 30% rule. The 30% rule basically states that a player’s new deal cannot be an increase of the annual salary of the rookie deal by more than 30 percent. When calculating the 30% amount of a contract, you must add everything but the signing bonus and other escalators (base salary + Option Bonus + Roster Bonus). Here is a quick example:
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td valign="top" width="74">Year</td> <td valign="top" width="74">Base Salary</td> <td valign="top" width="74">Option Bonus</td> <td valign="top" width="74">Roster /Workout Bonus</td> <td valign="top" width="74">Total Salary</td> <td valign="top" width="74">30% Amount</td> </tr> <tr> <td valign="top" width="74">2010</td> <td valign="top" width="74">$550,000</td> <td valign="top" width="74">0</td> <td valign="top" width="74">$100,000</td> <td valign="top" width="74">$650,000</td> <td valign="top" width="74">$195,000</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> As you can see, 30% of the total salary in 2010 is $195,000. Therefore, in the new deal the total salary each year can only increase or decrease by $195,000, and nothing more. Here is how the rule will be applied after signing a new deal:
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td valign="top" width="74">Year</td> <td valign="top" width="74">Base Salary</td> <td valign="top" width="74">Prorated Option Bonus</td> <td valign="top" width="74">Roster /Workout Bonus</td> <td valign="top" width="74">Total Salary</td> <td valign="top" width="74">Increase from Previous Year</td> </tr> <tr> <td valign="top" width="74">2011</td> <td valign="top" width="74">$650,000</td> <td valign="top" width="74">$195,000</td> <td valign="top" width="74">0</td> <td valign="top" width="74">$845,000</td> <td valign="top" width="74">+$195,000</td> </tr> <tr> <td valign="top" width="74">2012</td> <td valign="top" width="74">$845,000</td> <td valign="top" width="74">$195,000</td> <td valign="top" width="74">0</td> <td valign="top" width="74">$1.04 million</td> <td valign="top" width="74">+$195,000</td> </tr> <tr> <td valign="top" width="74">2013</td> <td valign="top" width="74">$1.1 million</td> <td valign="top" width="74">0</td> <td valign="top" width="74">$135,000</td> <td valign="top" width="74">$1.235 million</td> <td valign="top" width="74">+$195,000</td> </tr> <tr> <td valign="top" width="74">2014</td> <td valign="top" width="74">$1.295 million</td> <td valign="top" width="74">0</td> <td valign="top" width="74">$135,000</td> <td valign="top" width="74">$1.43 million</td> <td valign="top" width="74">+$195,000</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> Some of you may be asking why we sometimes see players like Patrick Willis getting these mega deals while still on his rookie contract. Well, that is what signing bonuses and escalators are for. Teams often give a player like Willis a huge signing bonus and a lot of easily achievable escalators.
Let’s face it – The rules in the NFL CBA are mostly on the side of the individual teams and not the players. This is mostly evident in the fact that a club can end a player’s contract if he doesn’t perform well enough. The player cannot just terminate his contract if he’s not happy, so that’s why we hear a lot about holdouts. When I was younger boy entering my teens, I would often stage holdouts at my house. I knew I had no say in my household and the rules heavily favored my parents. In order to combat that, I would refuse to go out when my parents wanted to. That’s kind of a random example, but hopefully makes the situation more clear.

Do you know if that rule made it into the new CBA?

http://www.610sports.com/topic/play_...udioId=5620695

Yup its the 30% rule nick wright talked about it today

There are only two teams that scare me in regards to the Brandon Carr situation.

Oakland and Washington

Brandon has every intent of re-signing here and the only way he doesn't is if another offer is head and shoulders above Flowers deal.

Dan Snyder scares me in this situation.

So we won't know anything about Carr until 3/13 at the earliest?

It seems that way.

Because Oakland has the money to spend on another CB.

I would be scared of the PATS they have no DB'S