The Start Of Free Agency To Be Delayed? (CBA Extension Talk)

[PhillyPhreak54]

NFL hopes to run delay on 'season'
BY GARY MYERS - February 14, 2006
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITER

The NFL free agent market is scheduled to open March 3, but it could be pushed back until April 1 if there is enough progress made in the next couple of weeks in negotiations for an extension of the collective bargaining agreement.

According to a source with knowledge of the talks, there have been advances in some areas since the Super Bowl ended 10 days ago that could lead to a delay in free agency. The NFL and the union still have a very long way to go, but the sense of urgency has intensified. The dance, for now, hasn't changed: One step forward, two steps back.

The sides met yesterday in New York. "The only good news is there is a lot of talk," the source said last night. "That is usually a good sign. Both sides are feeling pressure to get it done within a reasonable time period."

If the market opens without a CBA extension, it would make contract negotiations much more complicated. Signing bonuses can be prorated for only four years instead of what is usually a maximum of seven in the first year of a new CBA. With no extension, 2007 will be an uncapped year. As a result, the money in all new contracts, other than signing bonus, would be subject to the "30% rule" going into an uncapped year. That means if a player signs a deal for $1 million in base salary and roster and reporting bonuses in 2006, he can't get more than $300,000 (30%) increases in succeeding years.

The biggest names scheduled to be unrestricted free agents are league MVP and rushing champion Shaun Alexander and Colts running back Edgerrin James.

Obviously it would suck ass for those of us who are waiting for the signing frenzy to get started. But if it means that the greedy owners and players can work something out that'll help everyone then I'm cool with it. April would be a crazy month. FA and then the draft...

A new CBA is a MUST HAVE. As the article states...if there is no CBA then you cannot prorate SB's for 7 years. That would mean less FA signings and using more of the cap on fewer players.

[Rome]

That would mean only four weeks between the start of free agency and the draft.

Utter chaos, dude.

[Diomedes]

Utter chaos sounds good to me.

[MadMarchHare]

It would officially end all the trade talk on TO though.  No way we pay him March 6 on the off chance someone picks him up.

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

On the other thread this was discussed, we talked about this.  I don't see how they could delay the start of free agency but still keep wording for roster bonuses in contracts like T.O.'s the same.

[MadMarchHare]

You have much more faith than I.

[PhillyPhanInDC]

Lights fading on labor talks as deadline nears  
By Adam Schefter
Special to NFL.com


INDIANAPOLIS (Feb. 23, 2006) -- Amidst the buzz surrounding football's top prospects is the buzz kill of what is transpiring in the current labor talks.

Little progress, little hope -- big problem.

NFL Players Association Executive Director Gene Upshaw informed a group of 10 agents on Wednesday -- just as he is scheduled to address all agents Friday morning -- that he currently has no reason to be encouraged.

And then, after his Friday meeting, Upshaw is scheduled to leave Indianapolis, with no new Collective Bargaining Agreement deal in sight. NFL officials, who are no more optimistic than Upshaw, then would also leave Indianapolis, dealing a blow to any of the sides' remaining hopes.

The union has a soft deadline of Friday for a new deal, a hard deadline of next Thursday, before Upshaw insists there will be uncapped year in 2007. And then, potentially, a strike in 2008 -- a scenario nobody wants.

The 10 agents Upshaw spoke with Wednesday were Tony Agnone, Mark Bartelstein, Ralph Cindrich, Ian Greengross, Van McElroy, Paul Sheehy, Fletcher Smith, Jim Steiner, Mike Sullivan, and Angelo Wright. Their tones were far more somber than upbeat.

Meanwhile, each team trying to get under the salary cap or plot its offseason moves is waiting to see whether or not there will be a new CBA. At this point, it looks as if the teams can proceed as if there will not be one, which could be devastating to some.

The teams that will have the most restructuring and slashing to do by next Thursday are the Oakland Raiders ($31 million over the cap, as of Wednesday); the Kansas City Chiefs ($24 million over the cap); the Washington taterskins ($23 million over the cap); the Denver Broncos ($22 million over). And as of Wednesday, before they restructured running back Curtis Martin's contract and released some veterans, the Jets were $25 million over, a figure that is now considerably reduced.

Teams with the most space under the salary cap include the Arizona Cardinals ($23 million), the Minnesota Vikings ($21 million under), the Green Bay Packers ($19 million under), the Cleveland Browns ($18 million under) and the San Diego Chargers ($17 million under).

Teams over the cap this offseason are going to be squeezed without a new CBA. Teams under the cap this offseason are going to have a huge advantage over the other teams. Never will being under the cap mean more than it will this offseason.

Ok. Maybe I am a tard.

Since 2007 might be an uncapped year, doesn't that mean that teams could just blow tons of money on whoever they want? I understand why it will hurt some teams in 2006, but how would a new CBA help them for '06? Why does it affect FA signings for 06? Also, if it benefits the Eagles and the other teams under the cap, would it make sense for those teams to try to drag out the process? Make it more likely for the CBA to not get done?

[MadMarchHare]

It has to do with how contracts are structured.  Check out Florio's archives on profootballtalk.com.  He goes into it in depth.

[PhillyPhanInDC]

Found a really good write up by Clayton for anyone that is interested:

Lack of new deal would affect '06 free agency

By John Clayton
ESPN.com

Negotiations for a collective bargaining agreement extension continue to drag. Conference calls are going on daily with hopes of getting something done. The collective bargaining agreement runs out after the 2007 season, but March 3 of this year is perhaps the most important date in the process.

Even though two years remain in the agreement, the NFL Players Association and owners built incentives into the current CBA to encourage negotiations. The incentives include the uncapped year in 2007 and the equally painful transition year in 2006. If no deal is done by March 3, the NFL, as we've known it since the cap started in 1993, won't be the same. If a new deal isn't worked out, NFLPA executive director Gene Upshaw said the union will proceed to the uncapped year in 2007 and not look back. That could put pro football in the rare position to be the first sport to lose a salary cap.

Most experts think a last-minute deal will be completed, but what if it isn't? Here are a few answers to the questions.

• What is the problem in the negotiations?
The biggest problem is the lack of cohesion among the owners. The players have to settle on a negotiated percentage of total gross revenues, and Upshaw said that percentage must be in the 60s. They currently get 64 percent of designated gross revenues, but the sport has grown so much that the formula must change. Starting with an extension, the percentage will be based on total revenues. The NFL has grown into a $6 billion business and is expected to be a $10 billion business by 2010. Upshaw and commissioner Paul Tagliabue should be able to work out the number but not if there isn't improved revenue sharing among the owners, and that's what has been holding up a settlement.

Teams with new stadiums at the top of the revenue list don't want to share their profits with the lower revenue teams. Heading the list of high-revenue teams are the Dallas Cowboys, Washington taterskins, New England Patriots, Houston Texans and Philadelphia Eagles. Because eight votes can block any deal such as a CBA, they prevent a deal from getting done and it could cost the league the salary cap. Their position is strong.

The revenue differences in a league that made its success by sharing has grown apart. A top team such as the taterskins can make between $200 million and $240 million in gross revenues and that number should grow to $300 million. The lower-revenue teams are in the low $100-million range. What the high revenuers are hoping is that the union would do a deal without revenue sharing. Upshaw says that won't happen because he can't have a top revenue team pay 35-40 percent of its revenues on payroll while a low revenue team pays 70 percent. Conference calls over the past couple of days are moving the process but the negotiations are complicated. At some point, the owners have to settle their differences and take the best deal or they will lose the salary cap.

• With no extension, what problems would exist for the '06 season?
Because 2006 could be a transition year to no cap in 2007, rules change slightly and they take a lot of money out of the free agency pool. Teams will lose between $2.5 million and $5 million of cap room because of the transition. Because there is no cap in 2007, players who are released from multi-year contracts will have the cap hits on the 2006 cap. With no salary cap in 2007, there will be no June 1 adjustment date to release players with high cap numbers and delay the cap hits. With no cap in 2007, all incentives will count immediately.

Normally, incentives have to be earned during the season and are posted on the next year's cap. Teams have to leave room for the extra charges and that will take anywhere between $100 million and $150 million of cap room out of the free agent pool. With less room, fewer free agents will get big dollars, and fewer free agents will be signed. Another problem is the 30-percent rule for base salaries. Any contract that extends into an uncapped year limits the increase of a player's base salary to 30 percent a year. That kills the teams over the cap because they can't negotiate simple replacement deals in which they replace base salary with signing bonuses. The base salaries can increase only 30 percent a year so teams would have to negotiate two or three years of reductions. It will be harder for teams to free up money under the cap because of that.

Signing draft choices will be more difficult because teams can prorate signing bonuses for only four seasons. Already, agents figure the most a top draft choice can make under that scenario is $15 million, a major reduction from recent years. That leads to long holdouts by draft choices.

• What does the NFL lose if it doesn't negotiate a CBA extension?
Labor peace. In 2008, the NFL will either be on strike or the owners will lock out the players. That's not going to play well with networks investing a total of $100 million a year in rights fees. The union will decertify and then antitrust rules will apply. The NFL draft will go away in 2008 as part of a clause inserted in the current CBA if it expires. Naturally, the NFL will try to implement a system, but the NFLPA will sue and both sides will be spending all of their time in court. To get players out of college, it could be open negotiations. Minimum salaries for all players will be eliminated in 2007, so every contract, including those for rookies coming out of college, has to be negotiated individually and those players get what they can get. Players probably can sue if their contracts are traded. Every single move of the league will be under legal scrutiny.

• What do the players lose if there is no extension?
They will lose some protection. Even though it's more of a procedural thing that has to do with antitrust laws, the union will go out of business if there is no CBA. That will cause uncertainty for the players. Teams can change and cut down the benefits package that players receive, which is considered the best in sports. With no structure, teams can pay young players below the current minimums of $235,000, $310,000 and $385,000 a year.

• Will the NFL resemble baseball if there is an uncapped 2007?
Not really. There will be some restrictions of teams being able to go out and sign whomever they want. There will be what is called a "Final Eight" restriction for teams that make the playoffs in 2006. The final four playoff teams will be allowed to re-sign any of their own unrestricted free agents. However, they will be permitted to sign unrestricted free agents from other teams as replacements only if they lose one of their own free agents. A team that loses in the divisional playoff round will have the limitation of adding one unrestricted free agent with a salary of $1.5 million or more. So the final eight playoff teams won't be able to go out like the Yankees and Red Sox and grab all the players that are available in an uncapped year. There is no limitation on Fight Eight teams signing franchise or transition players from other teams but those players are hard to acquire and would cost top draft choices to sign. Teams in 2007 also will have one extra transition designation along with their one franchise tag, giving them a franchise tag and two transition tags to keep their top players.

• Will free agency be different in 2007?
Yes, players hit restricted free agency after three years and unrestricted free agency after four years under the current rules. If no CBA agreement is reached this year, players won't begin unrestricted free agency until after their sixth year. Players whose contracts end after third, fourth and fifth seasons will be considered restricted free agents and subject to qualifying offers.

[BigEd76]

I don't like the restiction on playoff teams signing free agents.  Under that scenario, a perennial playoff team like the Eagles could never sign anyone unless they lost their own FAs, while crappy teams like the taterskins and Cowboys would have no restrictions....

[The BIGSTUD]

Just get the damn deal done already.

[SunMo]

NFL | League moving closer to a labor deal?
Mon, 27 Feb 2006 09:29:18 -0800

Alex Marvez, of the Sun-Sentinel, reports the NFL appears on the verge of reaching agreement on a new labor pact with its players union. Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said Monday, Feb. 27, that progress has been made. An agreement reached this week would likely delay the start of the free-agent signing period, which is scheduled to begin Friday, March 3. Jones said negotiations between the league and the NFL Players Association could continue until Thursday, March 2.

[PhillyPhreak54]

A league source tells us that the NFL previously promised to disseminate on Monday the official crop report (a/k/a salary cap numbers) for 2006, and that the league ultimately failed to do so.



This development has prompted increased speculation among league insiders that a new CBA is imminent, since an extension would require the team-by-team salary maximums to be re-calculated pursuant to the formula set forth in the new agreement.



We've previously heard that the new CBA will determine the cap numbers based on a percentage of "Total Football Revenue." Current thinking in some circles is that the number will be 59 percent, and that the salary cap will be between $100 million and $110 million per team for 2006.



Raw revenue numbers suggest an even higher number, but we're told that there are certain deductions that will be made before the 59 percent figure is applied.



Anyway, brace yourself for what looks to be an inevitable announcement that peace and harmony will continue in a sport premised upon anything but

[PhillyPhreak54]

ESPN.com has confirmed that progress is being made on a new CBA, with a week delay to free agency looking more likely than ever.

Owners have a conference call on Tuesday and the NFL has delayed announcing the salary cap and restricted free agent tender numbers until after the call. Free agency was scheduled to begin this Friday, but a delay of a week or more appears likely if a deal comes this week.

Another goddamn week to wait.

[Rome]

Awsum!  That means T.O. will be an Eagle for an extra week!

There's still hope!!