What owners will be the best in the uncapped year?

[pittnthat 0]

Could an owner and GM take a 4 year contract from a good player and restructure it so that it would be all paid out next year?(the uncapped year).

This could put a team in salary cap heaven for future years if it is done with several players. They would have to do it with players who really fit into long term plans but I'm sure some owner and GM will find a way to work the system.

 

Could they sign J.Peppers to a 5 year deal with almost all the money being paid out next year.....then league min for the last four??? This could really set them up for future years if so.

This has Snyder and Jones written all over it.

[kmbryant09 1]

I don't think the player would go for that...that means he'll be playing the remaining 3-4 years of his contract with zero income.

 

Also, I believe there is at least a minimum that a player must make each year.

[goat 0]

I don't think the player would go for that...that means he'll be playing the remaining 3-4 years of his contract with zero income.

 

Also, I believe there is at least a minimum that a player must make each year.

 

i believe the OP said he would have the players take the league min for remaining yrs of deal.

 

i do not think the league would let this happen and truthfully with the way nfl contracts are written i dont think the owners would want that.

 

players have just as much right to ask for a new contract as anyone. not to mention the sitgma of players not giving their all after the big payday. on top of that your talking about players that will command $ in the 70 mil range for total contracts on avg. thats for one player. so to do that with like 2 or 3 players. they would be paying 210 mil in one yr for 3 guys PLUS the rest of the players salary. plus the costs of running a stadium and team in general. and having no gaurentee your players continue to play and if they get hurt no recourse for getting the money back.

 

interesting idea but i just dont see the owners wanting any part of that plan.

[pittnthat 0]

I don't think the player would go for that...that means he'll be playing the remaining 3-4 years of his contract with zero income.

 

Also, I believe there is at least a minimum that a player must make each year.

 

I agree with the min(i put that in the Peppers example) but if football contracts are not guaranteed, why wouldn't the player go for it? At the least maybe front load a contract.

[goat 0]

I agree with the min(i put that in the Peppers example) but if football contracts are not guaranteed, why wouldn't the player go for it?

 

i think any player in the nfl would jump at the chance for something like this. but like i said before i dont think the ownership would want to go thro with something like this. too many risks for not enough reward.

[kmbryant09 1]

i think any player in the nfl would jump at the chance for something like this. but like i said before i dont think the ownership would want to go thro with something like this. too many risks for not enough reward.

Sorry about the minimum salary confusion, I missed that part in the original post***.

 

As for the player going for that deal...If players can b!tch their way out of a contract because they don't feel they are making enough under their current contract, what makes you think these players will stick to their word while making the minimum salary?

 

If Peppers signs a 4 year/$65 million, paying him #63 million this year, then $667K over the final 2 years...you think he's gonna be happy? He then holds all the leverage - what if he decides to hold out for a new contract? The management has already paid him $63 million, so now he doesn't have to even play for the final 3 years. Heck, he could even retire.

[pittnthat 0]

Sorry about the minimum salary confusion, I missed that part in the original post***.

 

As for the player going for that deal...If players can b!tch their way out of a contract because they don't feel they are making enough under their current contract, what makes you think these players will stick to their word while making the minimum salary?

 

If Peppers signs a 4 year/$65 million, paying him #63 million this year, then $667K over the final 2 years...you think he's gonna be happy? He then holds all the leverage - what if he decides to hold out for a new contract? The management has already paid him $63 million, so now he doesn't have to even play for the final 3 years. Heck, he could even retire.

 

You might have found a valid point in my thinking with "he could retire". Thats why I threw it out there. Do u think this could work with someone very trustworthy like a Peyton Manning?

[FlaHawker 24]

Paul Allen = 10 Billion

 

Yeah I'm rooting for an uncapped year

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,433]

The players would absolutely go for this in that they are essentially getting guaranteed contracts. The player would not be cut unless they had a major injury and they already have the money in the bank. It would be just like a huge signing bonus, except that it would not be spread over the life of the contract because there is no salary cap.

 

Three items:

1. The teams are not sure that the next CBA will not have provisions that cover contracts that are already in existence. If Jones or Snyder does it, who is to say that the other 30 teams don't throw them under the bus and have a provision that makes that money count in the next salary cap?

2. The owners do not want to pony up big contracts in the event of a lockout. The player would have all of the leverage in that they already have their money in the bank.

3. The standard player contract includes language that allows the team to recoup signing bonuses paid if a player holds out during the contract. This was strengthened in the last CBA as part of a "T.O. rule".

[Kopy 596]

Paul Allen = 10 Billion

 

Yeah I'm rooting for an uncapped year

I would think that Allen, Snyder and Jones could have some serious spending sprees if they want.

[Sho Nuff 720]

I would think that Allen, Snyder and Jones could have some serious spending sprees if they want.

 

Everyone waiting for Jerry Jones to spend a lot better keep waiting a bit...do they not have restrictions for finishing in the final 8 teams in the league?

Something about not being able to sign a free agent til they lose one of "equal" value or something like that?

If so...this will severely limit with Jerry can do.

[tenaciousb 0]

How many owners actually pull money out of their own pockets to supplement payroll? In any sport?

[Raider 84 29]

Don't forget about Mr. Davis, he might want to blow his wealth before he croaks to win another Superbowl.

[kmbryant09 1]

Everyone waiting for Jerry Jones to spend a lot better keep waiting a bit...do they not have restrictions for finishing in the final 8 teams in the league?

Something about not being able to sign a free agent til they lose one of "equal" value or something like that?

If so...this will severely limit with Jerry can do.

Is there a clause about equal value?

 

I'm asking because I have no idea - I'm aware of the Final 8 Rule, but can you sign any free agent if you lose any free agent? Does it have to be on the same side of the ball? Same position? Similar salary structure?

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,433]

Is there a clause about equal value?

 

I'm asking because I have no idea - I'm aware of the Final 8 Rule, but can you sign any free agent if you lose any free agent? Does it have to be on the same side of the ball? Same position? Similar salary structure?

 

Same value of the first year of the contract

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8...mp;confirm=true

 

In the case of all final eight teams, the first year salary of UFAs they sign to replace those lost cannot exceed the first year salary of the player lost with limitations on the per year increases.

[Sho Nuff 720]

Now...and owner who I think should spend based on circumstances...Bud Adams.

Guy is getting older...wants to win before he dies. Uncapped year and he is loaded.

Why not go get Peppers to shore up the pass rush. Make the D better to go with that run game.

And stock up on fine money to flip to bird to everyone in his baby blue leisure suit.

[jgcrawfish 232]

anybody who thinks this is good for the NFL is wrong...it isn't. The bigger problem isn't the salary cap, is the salary floor. because of revenue sharing, small market teams without rich owners have no motivation to put a good product out on the field. For ever rich owner who will spend gobs of money to build a powerhouse team, there is a cheap owner who will put out the bare minimum he has to so he can pocket whatever he can. I can envision someone buying the top draft picks for straight up cash and lower picks. This isn't a good situation at all.

[kmbryant09 1]

anybody who thinks this is good for the NFL is wrong...it isn't. The bigger problem isn't the salary cap, is the salary floor. because of revenue sharing, small market teams without rich owners have no motivation to put a good product out on the field. For ever rich owner who will spend gobs of money to build a powerhouse team, there is a cheap owner who will put out the bare minimum he has to so he can pocket whatever he can. I can envision someone buying the top draft picks for straight up cash and lower picks. This isn't a good situation at all.

What about a competition committee looking into this? I agree that's a big problem, in most sports, especially baseball. I do believe that some competition committee has looked at the situation in the MLB, and has told teams such as Pittsburgh and Florida to spend more money in order to at least "attempt" to be competitive.

 

I guess it boils down to owners being more "business man" first, and "competitive winner" second. Like you said, these guys buy these franchises to make money, not to run an organization that brings home championships.

[jgcrawfish 232]

What about a competition committee looking into this? I agree that's a big problem, in most sports, especially baseball. I do believe that some competition committee has looked at the situation in the MLB, and has told teams such as Pittsburgh and Florida to spend more money in order to at least "attempt" to be competitive.

 

I guess it boils down to owners being more "business man" first, and "competitive winner" second. Like you said, these guys buy these franchises to make money, not to run an organization that brings home championships.

 

The Steelers already said they would operate in the uncapped era almost the same as they did with the cap. They would set their own cap based on costs/earnings and fill the spots as best they can. If football goes the route of baseball, I'm done with it.

[Sho Nuff 720]

The Steelers already said they would operate in the uncapped era almost the same as they did with the cap. They would set their own cap based on costs/earnings and fill the spots as best they can. If football goes the route of baseball, I'm done with it.

 

I think NFP had an article about this how it seems more teams are pushing towards the cutting spending than to going out on a spending spree right now as far as the feeling is going.

There have not been a ton of rumors about any of the big names going out to spend spend spend in free agency at this point and we are just over a week away.

[jgcrawfish 232]

I think NFP had an article about this how it seems more teams are pushing towards the cutting spending than to going out on a spending spree right now as far as the feeling is going.

There have not been a ton of rumors about any of the big names going out to spend spend spend in free agency at this point and we are just over a week away.

 

yeah, Steelers beat writer is operating under the assumption that the team is going on a "last years cap + 10%" kind of philosophy. For as much as I detest the guy, Jerry Jones is a freakin genius for getting that stadium built when he did. The money he makes on concessions, personal seat licenses, etc tilts the field so much in his favor it's not even fair. He can afford to spend 2x what owners of smaller market/older stadium setups can.

 

On another note, apparently the idea is being floated of extending the current agreement one more year to allow negotiation time and keep the upcoming season from being uncapped.

[Sho Nuff 720]

yeah, Steelers beat writer is operating under the assumption that the team is going on a "last years cap + 10%" kind of philosophy. For as much as I detest the guy, Jerry Jones is a freakin genius for getting that stadium built when he did. The money he makes on concessions, personal seat licenses, etc tilts the field so much in his favor it's not even fair. He can afford to spend 2x what owners of smaller market/older stadium setups can.

 

On another note, apparently the idea is being floated of extending the current agreement one more year to allow negotiation time and keep the upcoming season from being uncapped.

 

Would they then go to 4 years for unrestricted free agency and many of these guys who would be restricted will be unrestricted?

[FlaHawker 24]

The Steelers already said they would operate in the uncapped era almost the same as they did with the cap. They would set their own cap based on costs/earnings and fill the spots as best they can. If football goes the route of baseball, I'm done with it.

Should have stuck with your Cowboys

[jgcrawfish 232]

Should have stuck with your Cowboys

 

I would, but I've never been a Cowboys fan...but fvckyouverymuch.

[FlaHawker 24]

I would, but I've never been a Cowboys fan...but fvckyouverymuch.

[kmbryant09 1]

Hey Pittnthat -

 

I just read an article that briefly mentions this philosophy. I'm not sure any rules relate to a signing bonus/roster bonus, but think of it logistically. If they gave a $50 million bonus in year 1, they'd have to have the cash on hand/cash flow to be able to write a check for that much money.

 

But there are limitations on a player's salary. Not sure about any more in-depth details, but a player's salary cannot change from one year to the next (under the same contract, of course), but more than 30%. So that limits teams to loading up the front end of a contract for a non-capped season. Also, I've read a few times that many teams wouldn't do this anyway, in fear of future punishment put in place once a cap is back in place.

[Yippie Skippy 0]

How many owners actually pull money out of their own pockets to supplement payroll? In any sport?

 

Whose pockets do you think pays the payroll?? In any franchise??

[pittnthat 0]

Hey Pittnthat -

 

I just read an article that briefly mentions this philosophy. I'm not sure any rules relate to a signing bonus/roster bonus, but think of it logistically. If they gave a $50 million bonus in year 1, they'd have to have the cash on hand/cash flow to be able to write a check for that much money.

 

But there are limitations on a player's salary. Not sure about any more in-depth details, but a player's salary cannot change from one year to the next (under the same contract, of course), but more than 30%. So that limits teams to loading up the front end of a contract for a non-capped season. Also, I've read a few times that many teams wouldn't do this anyway, in fear of future punishment put in place once a cap is back in place.

It's human nature to look at new rules and say how can I work the system. It might be illegal to do what I first posted but I think it would be a good idea to front load a contract year one.

Manning would be the best example because he will outwork anyone no matter the deal or money.

[LunaTick 30]

Two things affect this.

 

1. Spending nature of the owners

2. Minimizing Future Expenses (ie existing bonus/no guarantee contracts.

 

Factor that 8 teams are ouht of the running for the cap.

This leave only 1team with a history of over spending (redskins). This team is attempting not to be old Snyder (at least this year). This with the economy, don't expect over spending.

 

Without knowing what the CBA may do, no team is going to leverage their futures without a clue as to wth the next cba will be. A one year deal, yes, but nothing long term.

[DankNuggs 305]

With contracts not being guaranteed, whats to stop the guy from sitting out year 2/3/4 until they are cut and traded, all the money is already in the bank account.

[LunaTick 30]

With contracts not being guaranteed, whats to stop the guy from sitting out year 2/3/4 until they are cut and traded, all the money is already in the bank account.

 

Lion are about to successfully get a portion of a bonus check back from Rogers (think this is the right wr). This is a case in courts. They won one ruling on this thus far.