Chiefs "Stockpiling picks for an uncapped year is a bad idea."

**jAZ** · 04-27-2009, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco

Stockpiling picks for an uncapped year is a bad idea.

I don't know the ins-and-outs of this particular issue raised by GB, but I appreciated the point it makes regardless.

It's this sort of obscure but absolutely essential (ie, make or break) detail that none of us are tasked with understanding or really privy to.

And there are dozens more just like it.

It's why I have no confidence in anyone around here who takes themselves very seriously when they play Armchair-GM after the draft or a trade or a signing or whatever... to me it doesn't matter whether they are zealously critical of the new front office or zealously supporting it.

I zealously support those who admit that we as fans don't have all of the detailed information that goes into running a franchise. It's not that they are smarter than us... it's not a bash on fans not being capable of doing a better job. It's that as outsiders, we don't have a full picture of the details that any GM (good or bad) has when they conduct their business each day.

**dirk digler** · 04-27-2009, 12:40 PM

Only if there is an uncapped year which I highly doubt there will be.

But I understand your point because we don't run NFL franchises but people still should be able to express their opinion regardless

**Reaper16** · 04-27-2009, 12:43 PM

Why are we allowed to discuss football at all, then?

Just Passin' By · 04-27-2009, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jAZ

I don't know the ins-and-outs of this particular issue raised by GB, but I appreciated the point it makes regardless.

It's this sort of obscure but absolutely essential (ie, make or break) detail that none of us are tasked with understanding or really privy to.

And there are dozens more just like it.

It's why I have no confidence in anyone around here who takes themselves very seriously when they play Armchair-GM after the draft or a trade or a signing or whatever... to me it doesn't matter whether they are zealously critical of the new front office or zealously supporting it.

I zealously support those who admit that we as fans don't have all of the detailed information that goes into running a franchise. It's not that they are smarter than us... it's not a bash on fans not being capable of doing a better job. It's that as outsiders, we don't have a full picture of the details that any GM (good or bad) has when they conduct their business each day.

The 'point' is incorrect. There will still be a draft and having picks in it will still be a good thing. For some teams, having the picks will be more beneficial than for others, as a matter of fact, because of the free agency rules that will be involved in the uncapped year.

**jAZ** · 04-27-2009, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirk digler

Only if there is an uncapped year which I highly doubt there will be.

Like I said, the issue isn't uncapped, it's the very question of the issue, how it fits into decision making, how we are constantly having random yet relevent details like this pop up here or there, and how it indicates a bigger picture that frames my thinking.

I'm likely seen as a homer/true fan... and it's for this very reason. I defer tothe professionals in most cases (and absolutely in this case where there is a new (watch for it) 5 year play being put in place). There is so much that they are factoring in that we aren't even aware of, let along thinking about critically... that it make zero sense to take any of our judgements (particularly those based on speculation as opposed to past performance) very seriously.

Play Armchair GM, just don't live it.

**jAZ** · 04-27-2009, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper16

Why are we allowed to discuss football at all, then?

I try to have it with the sense of humility that comes from understanding that we don't know what it is that we don't know.... and that every paid GM is factoring in lots of critical information that we just don't have.

Many of the GM's and coaches will still do it all wrong. But they are doing it with all of the relevant information that we amateurs have no idea we are missing.

vailpass · 04-27-2009, 12:58 PM

It seems like a lot of people think a year w/o a cap would benefit the players in 2010. Here are excerpts from a recent Sporting News article featuring Giants DL Barry Cofield for your consideration.

Barry Cofield rolled his eyes as his fellow Giants went on about how rich he'll be after next season. He will be a FA in his prime plus 2010 will be an uncapped year.
Cofield corrected them by saying "Not having a cap makes things worse. The guys who know the facts want a deal done between the league and the union" (for a new CBA).

As it stands now FA in 2010 will be governed by the Final League Year (FLYD) Deal-rules mutually agreed upon in 2006 that govern if no CBA is in place. May of those rules conspire to keep $ out of players pockets.
Example: in order to enter unrestricted FA a player must have 6 seasons accrued instead of 4. That would prevent around 270 players-including B. Marshall, Greg Jennings and Cofeild from entering UFA.

The FLYD places numerous restricitions on the number of UFAs divisional playoff teams can sign and how much they can pay them. Example: if the Bears make the NFC title game then sign Plax for $5m first year they can't sign any other UFA for more than $3.275m first year.

The FLY clears the cap but it also clears the foor. Teams will no longer be required to spend at least 87.6% of the cap on players. In the current economy owners will be motivated to be cash conscious especially after seeing Pittsburgh prove that money doesn't buy championships.
Says one NFL exec, "once you have one uncappe dyear there is no going back".

Many league insiders think there will be a CBA in place before 2010. Players who understand the math hope so too.
"Guys are scared," Cofrield says. "They're praying a deal gets done".

Sporting News May 4, 2009

vailpass · 04-27-2009, 01:05 PM

The front office/owners side via interview with Goodell. They are going to take back some lost ground and the players are going to have to give it. Bad economy is on the employer's side every time.:

Goodell: NFL doesn't expect uncapped season in 2010

By Sean Leahy, USA TODAY
NFL owners are formulating a strategy to begin negotiating a new collective bargaining agreement with the players' union, but commissioner Roger Goodell said Monday he expects a new deal will be in place before next March, when the salary cap is set to expire.
"I don't believe that will be the case," Goodell said when asked about the possibilities in an uncapped season in 2010. Owners opted out of the current CBA last year, which will trigger the end of the salary cap if no new deal is reached before next March.

Owners' priorities in the negotiations will include having the costs for building and operating stadiums recognized by the players and instituting a salary cap for rookies, Goodell said in a news conference at the NFL's annual meeting in Dana Point, Calif.

There is no timetable yet for when negotiations on a new CBA will begin. Goodell met with new NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith Friday for the first time.

The economy is hurting the league's revenue streams, and Goodell said the ramifications will have an effect on the negotiations. Money from sponsorships and licensing is down, and the league is concerned about the possibility for reduced ticket sales in 2009.

"The challenging times make it even more difficult," Goodell said. "But all that has done is accentuate the negatives of the current agreement.

"It's definitely hitting us on the revenue side, and meanwhile costs are going up."

The league is not going to consider lifting TV blackouts for games that do not sell out, said Goodell, who added that is a longstanding NFL policy he will not give up. But the league realizes fans and sponsors have less disposable income and will find ways to "create more value" for consumers.

"We're going to have to work harder, be more creative and respond to our fans' needs," Goodell said. "Not only this year but for a considerable time."

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/footb...nference_N.htm

vailpass · 04-27-2009, 01:08 PM

Seems like a lot of owners are expecting and ready for a strike...

DANA POINT, Calif. -- The NFL in recent years has wisely started using the first day of its annual league meeting to debut the schedule for its prime time kickoff weekend games, thereby cranking up the hype machine for the coming regular season.

But while the 2009 season is beginning to come into focus thanks to us learning who's playing in Week 1's biggest games -- for starters, Tennessee at Pittsburgh on Thursday, Sept. 10 -- it may be the last one of its kind for a while. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news regarding 2010 and 2011, but the first of those seasons may bear little resemblance to any in recent NFL history, and the second one may never happen at all.

After a Monday morning spent speaking to NFL club owners and front office executives here at the plush St. Regis Monarch Beach Resort, I've gotten -- really for the first time -- a growing sense that the league's impending labor showdown will all but assure a season with no salary cap in 2010, with a decent bet for a subsequent work stoppage in 2011.

The pessimistic sentiments I heard, usually on deep, deep background, were that people within the league are not only bracing for an uncapped season, they're preparing for it as if it's almost a given at this point. And once that unfolds, it could be a short, hop, skip and a jump to the NFL's first work stoppage in 23 years.

"I can't imagine we get a deal before there's a work stoppage at this point,'' one team's general manager told me. "The players are going to dig in, and that's where this thing is headed.''

Said another club's general manager: "I don't think it's a long shot any more in regards to an uncapped season. It's probably going to happen. It's just the reality now and everyone's dealing with it.''

A third general manager told me that his team's every move this year has been made amid the backdrop of no salary cap next year at this time, and then the strong possibility of a work stoppage in 2011.

"There's a level of acceptance now that this is a reality,'' said the third GM, of 2010 being uncapped due to no new collective bargaining agreement being reached. "You hear it from everyone. From our perspective as general managers, we start being a little more calculated about what we do with our moves in free agency, our moves with re-signing guys to contracts, and such. There's just a general feeling that this is a reality, so let's take care of business. If we don't have some foresight, then our backs may be against the wall.''

What once seemed like a far-off possibility, NFL sources said, is now coming clearly into view. It's not an issue for the distant future any more, and that point was driven home to me Monday when I asked NFL owners and club executives why the doomsday scenario that an uncapped year once sounded like is being viewed quite differently.

"It's not scary at all to us,'' Patriots owner Robert Kraft said of the possibility of playing without a salary cap next year. "There are a lot of pluses to it. It's definitely not a doomsday scenario, and it might have to happen to get things right. I hope it's the vehicle to get us a deal. I hope it's the ultimate hammer.''

Once upon a time, conventional wisdom held that NFL owners wanted no part of an uncapped year because they were fearful that a few rich and aggressive owners (read Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder) would go all George Steinbrenner on them and snap up a boatload of free agents. Such a move would spoil the NFL's unique competitive balance that has so-called small market teams prospering right alongside everyone else.

But in reality, there were so many new parameters built into the CBA's rules for an uncapped season that owners will have anything but free rein to make a killing for their teams in free agency. And I don't think the players really grasp those realities yet anywhere near as well as NFL owners and club executives do.

For starters, once the salary cap disappears, players can't be free agents until they've completed six NFL seasons, rather than four. That means there will be fewer quality young players in the 2010 free-agent pool, and less talent for any spend-happy teams to accumulate.

"That's huge, the six seasons before free agency,'' one of the general managers told me. "But it's also a bit of a funky spot to be in because, let's face it, there are going to be some unhappy players who thought they were about to get to free agency. You've got a guy who just finished his fourth season, but now he's not coming up [for free agency]. That's why I keep saying to some of my agent friends, 'Man, this is real. Don't think this will never happen or that it's going to go away and be fine. You've got to be right about this.' ''

In addition, teams in 2010 would own an extra transition tag, meaning a franchise could use both a franchise tag and a transition tag on two of its own free agents (or two transition tags) in the same season, as opposed to the one or another they get to designate now. Again, that stipulation should serve to limit the quality of the free agents who actually reach the open free agent market.

"The pool of players in free agency shrinks dramatically in the uncapped year,'' another general manager said. "That means the quality of available players is going to be affected, and the ones who actually reach free agency, how good are they really?" Most teams have gotten very good at re-signing their own best players any way. So that uncapped year, with all the contingencies, all the parameters that are in it, those things are real and they're going to keep the rich from getting richer.

And there's more. In the uncapped season of 2010, the league would have a rule called the top eight plan, in which the eight teams that reached the divisional round playoffs in 2009 would have their activity in free agency limited. The NFL's final four teams wouldn't be able to sign an unrestricted free agent until they had lost one of their own. The other four teams among the final eight to be eliminated in 2009 would have some salary restrictions on the free agents they signed, which would serve to keep them from being able to afford any elite free agents.

When you factor in rules that took effect this year once the owners opted out of current CBA last May, they too seem to tilt heavily in favor of the owners, rather than reaping a potential bonanza for players who are no longer working under the salary cap system. This season, a player's base salary can't increase more than 30 percent from one year to the next, which restricts a team's ability to award a contract that includes a huge 2009 raise in anticipation of no salary cap in 2010.

No wonder team owners aren't as worried about life in a cap-less NFL as many assume. When you throw in the fact that there will be no league salary minimum (or salary floor) that teams must spend on players in 2010, some clubs will undoubtedly spend less than they have before.

All of which tells me that NFL owners believe they hold most of the cards when it comes to using the possibility of an uncapped season as leverage in their upcoming negotiations with the players, and that only strengthens their resolve for the potential of showdown over a work stoppage in 2011.

"The uncapped season was built into the design of the collective bargaining agreement for just the reason we have,'' Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said. "Because of the provisions under an uncapped year, there's always been a very legitimate thought that we're better off with those provisions than we were in a capped year.

"So I feel better about our ability to operate without a cap and keep our league competitive and keep the game progressing, moving forward, than any way I could have felt when we were in a capped structure.''

The owners and the league seem prepared for the consequences of an uncapped season and a potential work stoppage in 2011 in a way I can't possibly imagine the players are at this point. Having just this month elected DeMaurice Smith as the NFL Players Association's new executive director, the union is just beginning to approach the upcoming negotiations with a sense of focus. An NFL club source on Monday told me that some owners have implemented far-reaching contingency plans into their business operations that reflect the potential for no season in 2011.

"Some owners have set up every component for the future,'' the club source said. "From building triggers into coaches' and front-office executives' contracts that stop those deals if there's a work stoppage in 2011, to other ways where they found they can limit their exposure and their expenses. They're getting themselves ready for this.''

According to a league source, some NFL owners with particularly huge slices of debt service on the new stadiums that they own and operate have even prepared for a possible work stoppage in 2011 by having "Force Majeure'' clauses inserted into their contracts -- which frees one from liability when an extraordinary event or circumstances beyond the control of the parties prevents one of them from fulfilling their obligations. In other words, if there's no NFL season in 2011, some owners may not get hit as hard as they might have from the loss of revenue.

"It's like anything in life, the wealthiest will be able to survive,'' one general manager said. "But these players are going to be facing the loss of a year of their earning potential in the prime of their careers, a year they can never get back. And they're short careers to start with. Look at the minimum salaries these days. To lose even that for an entire year, there'll be a small group that will be OK. But not most of them. It's going to be tough.''

It sounds like some tougher times are coming in the NFL. After years of labor peace, the rumblings of trouble are very real and drawing nearer all the time. That's why NFL fans would do well to enjoy this coming season, which in a small way got a bit of an unveiling on Monday. Because 2010 and 2011 might wind up looking and feeling very differently than 2009, this is a season that could be remembered as the calm before the storm.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ngs/index.html

**jAZ** · 04-27-2009, 01:09 PM

I blame myself for using the provocative title that's resulting in a hijacked thread.

vailpass · 04-27-2009, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jAZ

I blame myself for using the provocative title that's resulting in a hijacked thread.

Good to see you on the football side Jaz as always. I thought we were discussing the potential of 2010 as an uncapped year.
Mods if there is any way to move my posts to a new thread entitled "2010 as an Uncapped Year" please do so. Thanks.

Just Passin' By · 04-27-2009, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jAZ

I blame myself for using the provocative title that's resulting in a hijacked thread.

If I misunderstood the point of your post, I apologize.

DaWolf · 04-27-2009, 01:29 PM

Well if that's the case, the Patriot front office became very stupid this weekend...

**jAZ** · 04-27-2009, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

If I misunderstood the point of your post, I apologize.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vailpass

Good to see you on the football side Jaz as always. I thought we were discussing the potential of 2010 as an uncapped year.
Mods if there is any way to move my posts to a new thread entitled "2010 as an Uncapped Year" please do so. Thanks.

No worries.

**jAZ** · 04-27-2009, 02:25 PM

From here:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=206818

“We spent a lot of time with the defensive coaches this week trying to understand how they want to play the scheme and finding the right players to fit in there,” Pioli said. “That’s where we’re at.”

And added to this...

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=206816

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

In what our version of the 3-4 will be:

the left outside linebacker will line up on the outside shoulder of the tackle to head up on the TE . This is more like a classic LDE in terms of responsibilities. Outside containment/pass rush type stuff. This is where Hali fits as an OLB. Basically pretty much the same as his role in the 4-3. He can play a little lighter if he likes, as he won't be singled up on the Tackle pretty much ever because:

the LDE will line up on the outside shoulder of the RG (B gap). His job is to shoot that gap between the guard and tackle, attacking the line of scrimmage, disrupting the blocking scheme. This is where you'd use Glenn Dorsey. The role is very similar to what a penetrating DT in a 4-3 scheme would be doing. This is what Haley said they'd do with Dorsey in the PC yesterday. Magee is probably a rotational player at both DE spots. So no more 'Dorsey is a bad fit at NT' talk. That's not the plan, because:

Ron Edwards and Tank Tyler are your NT. However, they're not going to be traditional NT's in the Ted Washington mold. They too will have one gap responsibility, usually shading to the strong side on the center's outside shoulder, (A gap) but not always. They don't need to be 350 pound space eaters, as they're not playing two gap. Personally, I think Tyler is the most promising guy at this spot physically.

Your RILB would be the player that is basically lined up on the center/LG gap (albeit a few yards off the ball) in what would be nearly identical to a classic MLB role (this is what Zach Thomas meant about playing MLB).

Your LILB (Derrick Johnson's spot) is your 'flow to the ball' playmaker. He's covered by the LOLB outside and the LDE right in front of him. On a running play up the gut, for example, the center would take on ONE of the ILB's, but not likely get both, so this guy will probably rack up a ton of tackles.

Your RDE (Jackson) will be on the LG's outside shoulder, with one gap responsibility there. If the guard can't handle him alone, they're in real trouble, because outside the tackle is the ROLB (or rush-backer). Outside containment responsibilities, yes-and rush the passer. This is what Vrabel fits in. he's only a year removed from double digit sacks, and that's because he was injured. He needs only to require the Tackle's full attention to be successful, because that means the LDE has got a single man to beat. The whole point of a 6-5 295 monster DE with long arms is that you HAVE to double him. So choose your poison.

Safeties will play a more prominent role in run support than they did in cover 2 (at least our version, in which they were basically non-existant) and corners will probably play some man. I'm not worried about our secondary, actually, I feel pretty good about it and not too much is different for them.

I think I'm pretty accurate about the responsibilities and the personnel I named is based on the interviews with Pioli and/or Haley.

Did I get it right?

And I think it demonstrates how much detail goes into these decisions that no one person here can account for in their opining.

04-27-2009, 12:40 PM	#2
dirk digler Please squeeze Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Clinton, MO Casino cash: $3344644	Only if there is an uncapped year which I highly doubt there will be. But I understand your point because we don't run NFL franchises but people still should be able to express their opinion regardless
Posts: 66,241

04-27-2009, 12:58 PM	#7
vailpass Psycho Bag Of Squanch Join Date: Sep 2001 Casino cash: $9594244	It seems like a lot of people think a year w/o a cap would benefit the players in 2010. Here are excerpts from a recent Sporting News article featuring Giants DL Barry Cofield for your consideration. Barry Cofield rolled his eyes as his fellow Giants went on about how rich he'll be after next season. He will be a FA in his prime plus 2010 will be an uncapped year. Cofield corrected them by saying "Not having a cap makes things worse. The guys who know the facts want a deal done between the league and the union" (for a new CBA). As it stands now FA in 2010 will be governed by the Final League Year (FLYD) Deal-rules mutually agreed upon in 2006 that govern if no CBA is in place. May of those rules conspire to keep $ out of players pockets. Example: in order to enter unrestricted FA a player must have 6 seasons accrued instead of 4. That would prevent around 270 players-including B. Marshall, Greg Jennings and Cofeild from entering UFA. The FLYD places numerous restricitions on the number of UFAs divisional playoff teams can sign and how much they can pay them. Example: if the Bears make the NFC title game then sign Plax for $5m first year they can't sign any other UFA for more than $3.275m first year. The FLY clears the cap but it also clears the foor. Teams will no longer be required to spend at least 87.6% of the cap on players. In the current economy owners will be motivated to be cash conscious especially after seeing Pittsburgh prove that money doesn't buy championships. Says one NFL exec, "once you have one uncappe dyear there is no going back". Many league insiders think there will be a CBA in place before 2010. Players who understand the math hope so too. "Guys are scared," Cofrield says. "They're praying a deal gets done". Sporting News May 4, 2009
Posts: 69,591

04-27-2009, 01:05 PM	#8
vailpass Psycho Bag Of Squanch Join Date: Sep 2001 Casino cash: $9594244	The front office/owners side via interview with Goodell. They are going to take back some lost ground and the players are going to have to give it. Bad economy is on the employer's side every time.: Goodell: NFL doesn't expect uncapped season in 2010 By Sean Leahy, USA TODAY NFL owners are formulating a strategy to begin negotiating a new collective bargaining agreement with the players' union, but commissioner Roger Goodell said Monday he expects a new deal will be in place before next March, when the salary cap is set to expire. "I don't believe that will be the case," Goodell said when asked about the possibilities in an uncapped season in 2010. Owners opted out of the current CBA last year, which will trigger the end of the salary cap if no new deal is reached before next March. Owners' priorities in the negotiations will include having the costs for building and operating stadiums recognized by the players and instituting a salary cap for rookies, Goodell said in a news conference at the NFL's annual meeting in Dana Point, Calif. There is no timetable yet for when negotiations on a new CBA will begin. Goodell met with new NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith Friday for the first time. The economy is hurting the league's revenue streams, and Goodell said the ramifications will have an effect on the negotiations. Money from sponsorships and licensing is down, and the league is concerned about the possibility for reduced ticket sales in 2009. "The challenging times make it even more difficult," Goodell said. "But all that has done is accentuate the negatives of the current agreement. "It's definitely hitting us on the revenue side, and meanwhile costs are going up." The league is not going to consider lifting TV blackouts for games that do not sell out, said Goodell, who added that is a longstanding NFL policy he will not give up. But the league realizes fans and sponsors have less disposable income and will find ways to "create more value" for consumers. "We're going to have to work harder, be more creative and respond to our fans' needs," Goodell said. "Not only this year but for a considerable time." http://www.usatoday.com/sports/footb...nference_N.htm
Posts: 69,591

04-27-2009, 01:08 PM	#9
vailpass Psycho Bag Of Squanch Join Date: Sep 2001 Casino cash: $9594244	Seems like a lot of owners are expecting and ready for a strike... DANA POINT, Calif. -- The NFL in recent years has wisely started using the first day of its annual league meeting to debut the schedule for its prime time kickoff weekend games, thereby cranking up the hype machine for the coming regular season. But while the 2009 season is beginning to come into focus thanks to us learning who's playing in Week 1's biggest games -- for starters, Tennessee at Pittsburgh on Thursday, Sept. 10 -- it may be the last one of its kind for a while. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news regarding 2010 and 2011, but the first of those seasons may bear little resemblance to any in recent NFL history, and the second one may never happen at all. After a Monday morning spent speaking to NFL club owners and front office executives here at the plush St. Regis Monarch Beach Resort, I've gotten -- really for the first time -- a growing sense that the league's impending labor showdown will all but assure a season with no salary cap in 2010, with a decent bet for a subsequent work stoppage in 2011. The pessimistic sentiments I heard, usually on deep, deep background, were that people within the league are not only bracing for an uncapped season, they're preparing for it as if it's almost a given at this point. And once that unfolds, it could be a short, hop, skip and a jump to the NFL's first work stoppage in 23 years. "I can't imagine we get a deal before there's a work stoppage at this point,'' one team's general manager told me. "The players are going to dig in, and that's where this thing is headed.'' Said another club's general manager: "I don't think it's a long shot any more in regards to an uncapped season. It's probably going to happen. It's just the reality now and everyone's dealing with it.'' A third general manager told me that his team's every move this year has been made amid the backdrop of no salary cap next year at this time, and then the strong possibility of a work stoppage in 2011. "There's a level of acceptance now that this is a reality,'' said the third GM, of 2010 being uncapped due to no new collective bargaining agreement being reached. "You hear it from everyone. From our perspective as general managers, we start being a little more calculated about what we do with our moves in free agency, our moves with re-signing guys to contracts, and such. There's just a general feeling that this is a reality, so let's take care of business. If we don't have some foresight, then our backs may be against the wall.'' What once seemed like a far-off possibility, NFL sources said, is now coming clearly into view. It's not an issue for the distant future any more, and that point was driven home to me Monday when I asked NFL owners and club executives why the doomsday scenario that an uncapped year once sounded like is being viewed quite differently. "It's not scary at all to us,'' Patriots owner Robert Kraft said of the possibility of playing without a salary cap next year. "There are a lot of pluses to it. It's definitely not a doomsday scenario, and it might have to happen to get things right. I hope it's the vehicle to get us a deal. I hope it's the ultimate hammer.'' Once upon a time, conventional wisdom held that NFL owners wanted no part of an uncapped year because they were fearful that a few rich and aggressive owners (read Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder) would go all George Steinbrenner on them and snap up a boatload of free agents. Such a move would spoil the NFL's unique competitive balance that has so-called small market teams prospering right alongside everyone else. But in reality, there were so many new parameters built into the CBA's rules for an uncapped season that owners will have anything but free rein to make a killing for their teams in free agency. And I don't think the players really grasp those realities yet anywhere near as well as NFL owners and club executives do. For starters, once the salary cap disappears, players can't be free agents until they've completed six NFL seasons, rather than four. That means there will be fewer quality young players in the 2010 free-agent pool, and less talent for any spend-happy teams to accumulate. "That's huge, the six seasons before free agency,'' one of the general managers told me. "But it's also a bit of a funky spot to be in because, let's face it, there are going to be some unhappy players who thought they were about to get to free agency. You've got a guy who just finished his fourth season, but now he's not coming up [for free agency]. That's why I keep saying to some of my agent friends, 'Man, this is real. Don't think this will never happen or that it's going to go away and be fine. You've got to be right about this.' '' In addition, teams in 2010 would own an extra transition tag, meaning a franchise could use both a franchise tag and a transition tag on two of its own free agents (or two transition tags) in the same season, as opposed to the one or another they get to designate now. Again, that stipulation should serve to limit the quality of the free agents who actually reach the open free agent market. "The pool of players in free agency shrinks dramatically in the uncapped year,'' another general manager said. "That means the quality of available players is going to be affected, and the ones who actually reach free agency, how good are they really?" Most teams have gotten very good at re-signing their own best players any way. So that uncapped year, with all the contingencies, all the parameters that are in it, those things are real and they're going to keep the rich from getting richer. And there's more. In the uncapped season of 2010, the league would have a rule called the top eight plan, in which the eight teams that reached the divisional round playoffs in 2009 would have their activity in free agency limited. The NFL's final four teams wouldn't be able to sign an unrestricted free agent until they had lost one of their own. The other four teams among the final eight to be eliminated in 2009 would have some salary restrictions on the free agents they signed, which would serve to keep them from being able to afford any elite free agents. When you factor in rules that took effect this year once the owners opted out of current CBA last May, they too seem to tilt heavily in favor of the owners, rather than reaping a potential bonanza for players who are no longer working under the salary cap system. This season, a player's base salary can't increase more than 30 percent from one year to the next, which restricts a team's ability to award a contract that includes a huge 2009 raise in anticipation of no salary cap in 2010. No wonder team owners aren't as worried about life in a cap-less NFL as many assume. When you throw in the fact that there will be no league salary minimum (or salary floor) that teams must spend on players in 2010, some clubs will undoubtedly spend less than they have before. All of which tells me that NFL owners believe they hold most of the cards when it comes to using the possibility of an uncapped season as leverage in their upcoming negotiations with the players, and that only strengthens their resolve for the potential of showdown over a work stoppage in 2011. "The uncapped season was built into the design of the collective bargaining agreement for just the reason we have,'' Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said. "Because of the provisions under an uncapped year, there's always been a very legitimate thought that we're better off with those provisions than we were in a capped year. "So I feel better about our ability to operate without a cap and keep our league competitive and keep the game progressing, moving forward, than any way I could have felt when we were in a capped structure.'' The owners and the league seem prepared for the consequences of an uncapped season and a potential work stoppage in 2011 in a way I can't possibly imagine the players are at this point. Having just this month elected DeMaurice Smith as the NFL Players Association's new executive director, the union is just beginning to approach the upcoming negotiations with a sense of focus. An NFL club source on Monday told me that some owners have implemented far-reaching contingency plans into their business operations that reflect the potential for no season in 2011. "Some owners have set up every component for the future,'' the club source said. "From building triggers into coaches' and front-office executives' contracts that stop those deals if there's a work stoppage in 2011, to other ways where they found they can limit their exposure and their expenses. They're getting themselves ready for this.'' According to a league source, some NFL owners with particularly huge slices of debt service on the new stadiums that they own and operate have even prepared for a possible work stoppage in 2011 by having "Force Majeure'' clauses inserted into their contracts -- which frees one from liability when an extraordinary event or circumstances beyond the control of the parties prevents one of them from fulfilling their obligations. In other words, if there's no NFL season in 2011, some owners may not get hit as hard as they might have from the loss of revenue. "It's like anything in life, the wealthiest will be able to survive,'' one general manager said. "But these players are going to be facing the loss of a year of their earning potential in the prime of their careers, a year they can never get back. And they're short careers to start with. Look at the minimum salaries these days. To lose even that for an entire year, there'll be a small group that will be OK. But not most of them. It's going to be tough.'' It sounds like some tougher times are coming in the NFL. After years of labor peace, the rumblings of trouble are very real and drawing nearer all the time. That's why NFL fans would do well to enjoy this coming season, which in a small way got a bit of an unveiling on Monday. Because 2010 and 2011 might wind up looking and feeling very differently than 2009, this is a season that could be remembered as the calm before the storm. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ngs/index.html
Posts: 69,591

04-27-2009, 01:09 PM	#10
jAZ Supporter Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Tucson, AZ Casino cash: $9847493	I blame myself for using the provocative title that's resulting in a hijacked thread.
Posts: 24,799

04-27-2009, 01:29 PM	#13
DaWolf Cry havoc... Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $10007725	Well if that's the case, the Patriot front office became very stupid this weekend...
Posts: 6,798