NFL voids CBA : 05/20/08

[motife]

NFL owners voted this morning to shorten the length of the collective-bargaining agreement by two years. Long expected, the move would end the CBA after the 2010 season. The NFL said it shortened the deal because the CBA penalizes teams for investing in new stadiums and other revenue-producing businesses; the absence of a rookie pay structure; and the ability of players who do not perform to their contracts to keep bonuses.

[Zool]

An NBA-type rookie scale would be great and eliminate pretty much all hold-outs. This might get ugly in 2 seasons.

[CaliforniaCheez]

So now there will be new negotiations with a deadline of of March 1, 2011 with regard to some things however, one clause is that the 2011 or next draft after expiration is covered by the old agreement.

With 2 years of time there is no reason for serious negotiations for at least a year. The lawyers have to delay to earn their fees.

I would bet that between end of season 2010 and 1 March 2011 that a deal gets done. Why rush it??

Don't panic for awhile. The rookie contracts this year will have some just in case clauses for either way this thing turns out.

This is part of the poor legacy of Paul Tagliabue. The worst Commissioner in NFL history.

[Patler]

I would bet that between end of season 2010 and 1 March 2011 that a deal gets done. Why rush it??


I think it gets done before 2010. The last year would be uncapped, and I doubt they will let it get to that.

[The Leaper]

This is about the OWNERS wanting a new deal...but the players are fine letting the current one run out, which now includes an uncapped year in 2010. The OWNERS are going to have to be the ones who make concessions in order to avoid that uncapped year in 2010...the union won't give a rat's ass.

[Freak Out]

Greedy billionaires fighting with greedy millionaires......should be interesting. A uncapped NFL is dead so one would expect cooler minds to prevail here....but you never know with these kinds of things.

[Patler]

This is about the OWNERS wanting a new deal...but the players are fine letting the current one run out, which now includes an uncapped year in 2010. The OWNERS are going to have to be the ones who make concessions in order to avoid that uncapped year in 2010...the union won't give a rat's ass.

There are a lot of reasons for the Union to want one, too. With a cap come minimum team total salaries, minimum individual player salaries, maximum rookie payments, etc. Without those, owners can chose to run the team more for personal profit, and very likely may choose to invest more in just a few players, and very little in the bulk of their roster. The rank and file player will likely earn less, as the stars and big name rookies earn even more. The cap and revenue sharing are joined at the hip. WIthout one, the other probably disappears too. An even smaller group of players will make even more money, and the rank and file even less.

The pre-lockout NHL was a good example of what can happen. Many, many teams had all their money tied up in one or two players, with the rest of their team earning well below what they do now. In some situations, one or two players each made more individually than the rest of the team combined.

If the union is looking out for the welfare of all their members and not just the upper 5-10%, there are many reasons for them to want a CBA with a salary cap and all the things that go with it.

[The Leaper]

My point is that the union really has no incentive to get a new CBA in place prior to 2011 and the owners have no incentive to bend over backwards to get a cap in place by 2010 after doing so the last time, only to discover it wasn't a deal they really wanted.

I don't expect a new deal to be done prior to 2010...I'm hopeful something can be hammered out prior to 2011. I expect 2010 to be an uncapped season.

[arcilite]

a deal needs to be done before 2010. if not, 2010 = uncapped year

and after being in an uncapped year, it is impossible to go back to the salary cap ways

[Patler]

My point is that the union really has no incentive to get a new CBA in place prior to 2011 and the owners have no incentive to bend over backwards to get a cap in place by 2010 after doing so the last time, only to discover it wasn't a deal they really wanted.

I don't expect a new deal to be done prior to 2010...I'm hopeful something can be hammered out prior to 2011. I expect 2010 to be an uncapped season.

But there are reasons for the union to get a deal done before 2010. If 2010 is uncapped, not only is there not a salary cap, additionally:

1. A group of players who would have been free agents in 2010 will not be, because the service years necessary for free agency increases. (There are some confusing, seemingly contradictory clauses in the CBA about whether the increase is one season or two seasons. It depends on some definitions and exceptions to exceptions, etc.)

2. #1 also applies to RFAs.

3. Minimum veteran salaries are capped at the 2009 level + $10,000. This will be less than the scheduled 2010 minimums under the CBA. (Note: Another clause of the CBA states, "....there will be no Guaranteed League-wide Salary, Salary Cap, or Minimum Team Salary in the Final League Year.")

4. # 3 above also applies to rookie minimum salaries.

#1 & #2 above are probably the biggest one for players

[motife]

currently a player can become a URFA after 4 years. In an uncapped year it would take 6 years.

For some players, that would be close to a career.

[motife]

Interesting provisions of the Uncapped Year :

Section 1. Application: The provisions of this Article shall apply only in any League Year during the term of this Agreement in which no Salary Cap is in effect.

Section 2. Top Four Teams: Each of the four Clubs that participated in the NFC and AFC Championship games the Prior League Year shall not be permitted to negotiate and sign any Unrestricted Free Agent to a Player Contract, except: (a) any Unrestricted Free Agent who acquired that status as a result of the NFL waiver system; (b) any Unrestricted Free Agent who was under contract to such Club on the last date of the
last League Year of the player's most recent Player Contract; and (c) any Unrestricted Free Agent signed pursuant to Section 4 below.

Section 3. Next Four Teams: Each of the four playoff Clubs that lost in the immediately preceding playoff games to the four Clubs that participated in the NFC and AFC Championship games the Prior League Year shall not be permitted to negotiate and sign any Unrestricted Free Agent to a Player contract, except: (a) any Unrestricted Free Agent who acquired that status as a result of the NFL waiver system; (b) any
Unrestricted Free Agent who was under contract to such Club on the last date of the last League Year of the player's most recent Player contract; (c) any Unrestricted Free Agent signed pursuant to Section 4 below; and (d) any Unrestricted Free Agent as follows:
(i) One such player for a Player Contract that has a first year Salary of $4,925,000 or more; and
(ii) Any number of such players for a Player Contract that has a first year Salary of no more than $3,275,000 and an annual increase in any future contract years of no more than 30% of the first contract year Salary, not including any amount attributed to any signing bonus. In addition, each such Club and each such player entering into a Player Contract pursuant to this Subsection may not renegotiate to increase the amount of Salary to be paid during the term of the Player Contract for a period of one year after the signing date of such contract.

Section 4. Replacement of Free Agents Signed by Other Club: Each of the eight Clubs subject to the provisions of this Article shall be permitted to negotiate and sign one Unrestricted Free Agent to a Player Contract ("New Player") for each Unrestricted Free Agent who was under contract to such Club on the last date of the prior League Year, who has signed with another Club ("Previous Player"), so long as the Player Contract for the New Player shall have a first year Salary of no more than the first year Salary of the Player Contract signed by the Previous Player with the New Club, and an annual increase in any future contract years of no more than 30% of the first contract year Salary, excluding any amounts attributable to any signing bonus. In addition, each such Club and each such player entering into a Player Contract pursuant to
this Subsection may not renegotiate to increase the amount of Salary to be paid during the term of the Player Contract for a period of one year after the signing date of such contract.

[CaliforniaCheez]

I would bet that between end of season 2010 and 1 March 2011 that a deal gets done. Why rush it??


I think it gets done before 2010. The last year would be uncapped, and I doubt they will let it get to that.

Anything involving lawyers always gets done later or near the last minute.

Lawyers on all sides drag it out so they can charge mure uf their hourly rate.

Even if they get an answering machine on a phone call they charge .2 hours. That's 12 minutes. Even when I used a stopwatch they would charge for preparation for the teleconference when it would be a call asking "What the heck is going on?"

"The hearing was postponed."

[Patler]

I would bet that between end of season 2010 and 1 March 2011 that a deal gets done. Why rush it??


I think it gets done before 2010. The last year would be uncapped, and I doubt they will let it get to that.

Anything involving lawyers always gets done later or near the last minute.

Lawyers on all sides drag it out so they can charge mure uf their hourly rate.

Even if they get an answering machine on a phone call they charge .2 hours. That's 12 minutes. Even when I used a stopwatch they would charge for preparation for the teleconference when it would be a call asking "What the heck is going on?"

"The hearing was postponed."

My point is 2010 is the time frame, not 2011. They will wait until the last minute, I agree, but it is because of the two groups as much as their lawyers.

[Patler]

currently a player can become a URFA after 4 years. In an uncapped year it would take 6 years.

For some players, that would be close to a career.

There are ways that it could be just 5 years, not 6.

It's six years if 2010 iss the "Final League Year" and if there is a salary cap in 2009:


ARTICLE LVI
FINAL LEAGUE YEAR
All of the provisions of this Agreement shall be the same in the Final League Year of this Agreement, except that the following rules shall apply only in that League Year:
Section 1. No Salary Cap: No Salary Cap shall be in effect during the Final League Year.
Section 2. Free Agency If Salary Cap In League Year Prior To Final League Year: In the event that a Salary Cap is in effect in the League Year prior to the Final League Year: (a) the number of Accrued Seasons required to be an Unrestricted Free Agent during the Final League Year shall be six or more Accrued Seasons; and (b) the provisions of Article XIX (Veteran Free Agency), Sections 2-4, shall apply to any player with five Accrued Seasons in the Final League Year,

"Final League Year" is a defined term:


Section 4. Further Definitions:
(aw) “Final League Year” means the League Year which is scheduled prior to its commencement to be the final League Year of this Agreement. As of the date hereof, the Final League Year is the 2012 League Year. The Final League Year shall always be an Uncapped Year. (ax) “Final Capped Year” means the League Year immediately prior to the Final League Year. The Final Capped Year shall be Capped unless the Salary Cap is removed pursuant to Article XXIV (Guaranteed Leaguewide Salary, Salary Cap & Minimum Team Salary), Section 2(b).


So the question will be whether 2010 meets the definition of "Final League Year" (which I believe it does, but some of that appears to be in side letters I have not seen) and whether or not a salary cap exists in 2009. If there is not a cap in 2009, the "Final League Year" provisions do not apply. The reasons for there not to be a salary cap in 2009 seem to be tied to the percentage of over all team costs compared to league revenues for salary cap calculations. THe owners would seem to want "Final League Year" provisions to apply, so should want 2009 to be capped. BUT, the interesting thing is that part of their argument is that their costs are so high compared to league revenues for salary cap calculations. For sake of later negotiations, it may support their position if the numbers come out such that 2009 is not capped. As yet another interesting tidbit, if 2009 is not capped, the requirement to be a free agent would go from 4 years to 5 years in 2009.

If "Final League Year" provisions do not apply either because 2010 does not meet the definition, or because 2009 is not capped, then the regular free agent rules apply and the increase is to 5 years, not 6,
Free Agency provisions state:


....any player with five or more Accrued Seasons, or with four or more Accrued Seasons in any Capped Year, shall, at the expiration of his Player Contract, become an Unrestricted Free Agent.

[Lurker64]

Also potentially interesting is that in addition to the hamstringing of the top 8 teams in FA, the potential "uncapped year" includes provisions to allow a team to use a franchise tag as well as two separate transition tags (as opposed to now when teams may use one franchise or transition tag).

So in essence, even if there is an uncapped year coming up, very few players will actually be hitting the market during it.

[Patler]

Also potentially interesting is that in addition to the hamstringing of the top 8 teams in FA, the potential "uncapped year" includes provisions to allow a team to use a franchise tag as well as two separate transition tags (as opposed to now when teams may use one franchise or transition tag).

So in essence, even if there is an uncapped year coming up, very few players will actually be hitting the market during it.

Yup. Virtually none of any interest in the first year.

[The Leaper]

Again, the fact that 2010 won't be a huge debacle just proves my point that there is no real pressure coming to bear on either side to avoid it.

I just don't see anything getting done before the deadline in 2009 to prevent 2010 from being an uncapped year. I'm not saying that is going to ruin anything. I expect things will get worked out by 2011 and we'll be back to a cap and probably have 18 regular season games instead of 16.

BTW, I don't get the 17 game season thing. How the hell does an odd amount of games work? Some teams get 9 home games and others only get 8? The NFL worked hard to get a balanced schedule in place that is extremely fair IMO...and they will throw it all away for 1 dumb game?

Goodell is a moron. Either go straight to 18 or don't bother.

[cpk1994]

Again, the fact that 2010 won't be a huge debacle just proves my point that there is no real pressure coming to bear on either side to avoid it.

I just don't see anything getting done before the deadline in 2009 to prevent 2010 from being an uncapped year. I'm not saying that is going to ruin anything. I expect things will get worked out by 2011 and we'll be back to a cap and probably have 18 regular season games instead of 16.

BTW, I don't get the 17 game season thing. How the hell does an odd amount of games work? Some teams get 9 home games and others only get 8? The NFL worked hard to get a balanced schedule in place that is extremely fair IMO...and they will throw it all away for 1 dumb game?

Goodell is a moron. Either go straight to 18 or don't bother.

According to ESPN.com, the extra game would rotate on a yearly basis between conferences. One year the NFC teams get the extra home game, the next the AFC gets it.

[The Leaper]

According to ESPN.com, the extra game would rotate on a yearly basis between conferences. One year the NFC teams get the extra home game, the next the AFC gets it.

Still seems dumb, regardless of how they do it...especially when they probably are still going to be playing games in China, Bangladesh and wherever else they can think of trying to spread the wealth.

[Patler]

Again, the fact that 2010 won't be a huge debacle just proves my point that there is no real pressure coming to bear on either side to avoid it.

I just don't see anything getting done before the deadline in 2009 to prevent 2010 from being an uncapped year. I'm not saying that is going to ruin anything. I expect things will get worked out by 2011 and we'll be back to a cap and probably have 18 regular season games instead of 16.


I guess you and I just see the same facts as having a different effect.

I think there is a lot of pressure on the Union to get it resolved before 2010 because of the very large group of players who will not become free agents. They will also be concerned that once the league goes to 6 years before free agency occurs it will never drop back to 4.

I think there is a lot of pressure on the owners to get it resolved before 2010 because the salary cap will go away. They will be concerned that once the league goes to an uncapped situation, they will not be able to get the players to again agree to a salary cap.

It seems you think those will not put sufficient pressure on the parties to get it done before 2010, and the only pressure point will be the expiration of the CBA and the threat of a possible lockout or strike. Could be. Sides in negotiations can become very hardheaded.

[vince]

Here are some Q's and A's put out by the owners, and some conclusions by Mike Florio.

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/05/31/cba-qa/


CBA Q&A
Posted by Mike Florio on May 31, 2008, 8:47 a.m.

A key component of the coming labor crisis between the NFL and its players union is the battle for the hearts and minds of the general public. With football fans possibly poised to throttle the golden goose due to the perception that this entire dispute arises from rich guys on both sides of the issue arguing over who’s getting richer the fastest, any gesture of sensitivity to the fog of confusion regarding the matters at issue can’t hurt the side that helps us all understand what’s going on.

And so on Friday the league wisely issued a Q&A document regarding the CBA. Here are some of the highlights (some of which we’ve mentioned here in various different postings):

1. The current CBA is in effect through the 2011 draft.

2. There will be no salary cap in 2010, but there will be additional restrictions on free agency, including the requirement that players have six years of service to become unrestricted free agents, not four, and limitations on the ability of the “final eight” teams from 2009 to sign new players at will.

3. In the uncapped year, player benefits likely will decline. The union agreed that in the uncapped year, clubs would be relieved of their obligation to fund numerous benefit programs, such as the 401K, player annuity, severance pay, and tuition assistance. The total league-wide contributions to such plans in 2009, the last capped year, are expected to be in excess of $225 million, or more than $7 million per club.

4. There might be a rookie pool in the uncapped year; the CBA gives the league the right to use one, if it so chooses.

5. In the uncapped year, there is no salary cap and no salary floor, meaning that teams can spend as much — and as little — as they want on players.

6. After the last game of the 2008 regular season, maximum signing bonus proration reduces from six years to five. (Last time around, the maximum proration entering the final capped season was four.)

7. In 2009, there is no June 1 rule. If a player is removed from the roster or his contract is assigned via waivers or trade at any time in the 2009 League Year, all remaining future signing bonus money will hit the 2009 salary cap.

8. In 2009, not-likely-to-be-earned incentives will hit the salary cap when earned, and won’t be pushed into 2010, the uncapped year.

9. In 2009, likely-to-be-earned incentives will be deducted from the team’s salary cap when they are no longer possible to earn. (This will be the subject of a separate item here regarding the 30-percent rule.)

10. Guaranteed salary from 2010 and beyond will be reallocated to capped years unless the entire 2009 salary is guaranteed.

11. Half of all guaranteed salary beyond 2012 will be reallocated to capped years. (We’ll be writing more about this one, too.)

12. The 30-percent rule restricts salary increases from 2009 to 2010. If a player has a $1 million salary in 2009, his maximum increase for 2010 will be $300,000.

13. A team can include only three veteran team incentives in a player contract covering 2009 and beyond. These incentives must also be coupled with a playtime requirement. Previously, clubs were limited to eight team incentives and no playtime requirement.

Bottom line? The uncapped year won’t be the wild-west spending spree that players might anticipate it to be. For players whose contracts expire after 2009, the cash for most of them won’t be flowing freely. And given the 30 percent rule, a player under contract who thinks that he can threaten to hold out for more money in the uncapped year because the team can’t hide behind the salary cap as a reason to give it to him will nevertheless be limited to a 30-percent raise over whatever he made in 2009.

[bobblehead]

I just had a thought...I know, unusual. What would happen if anarchy broke loose and TT decided that he was gonna make a point.

What if he decided that instead of trying to field a good team he would waive the roster, sign 54 guys who no one in the league wants to 10 year deals paying 100,000 a year.

Develope the hell out of them and try to win 3 games a year, in the meantime the packers bank a ton of money from TV contracts ect.

I think it would prove a point to jerry jones and snyder that they actually need the other teams to make money. It would also prove to the players that in reality they are overpaid playboys who aren't needed.

Think about it 5.4 million team salary with full share of TV revenues until the league decides to get a deal done....that would do wonders for the teams emergency funds.

I'm assuming if no contract then no cap, or minimum salary...I'm projecting a bit, but a humerous proposition nonethe less.

Remember, the owners broke the union once, only after being sued did we come up with this situation.

[RashanGary]

Except that the NFL has a minimum salary clause, I think the idea would be great.

[bobblehead]

I'm assuming with no collective bargaining agreement and no salary cap the minimum will be gone too, no??

[vince]

5. In the uncapped year, there is no salary cap and no salary floor, meaning that teams can spend as much — and as little — as they want on players.