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

[Diomedes]

These iceholes need to get their shtein together or...oh, right.  Or nothing.  The fans will watch and pay no matter what.

Carry on then.

[SunMo]

there's this from PFT...

POSTED 2:47 p.m. EST, March 4, 2006



NFL, UNION CLOSING IN ON A DEAL



A league source tells us that the NFL and its players union are getting closer and closer to reaching an agreement on an extension to the Collective Bargaining Agreement.



Per the source, the two sides have tentatively agreed that 58 percent of all football revenues will be devoted to player salaries.  The last remaining hurdle is the "cash over cap" limit, which is the device that the owners will utilize to ensure that franchises earning high amounts of unshared revenue cannot skew the competitive balance by making total cash payments in any given year that greatly exceed the salary cap for that season.



From the players' perspective, unlimited cash over cap helps to get more money into the hands of players sooner rather than later.  In a league where the only guarantee is the money already paid, placing a limit on this device is a potentially significant concession.



For owners, an agreement limiting the extent to which a team like the taterskins can borrow against future salary caps by pouring excess money into a team that might be only a couple of parts away from a championship run will make it easier for lesser-earning teams to compete for free agents.



Still, the key factor (as we see it) is the salary floor.  If teams like the Bengals and Cardinals choose to rebel against a salary cap amount driven higher by the enormous revenues generated by teams like the taterskins, the union needs to push hard for a high minimum.  Currently, the minimum is based on 54 percent of the so-called defined gross revenues.  We think that the new CBA should contain a per-team minimum of at least 50 percent of the total football revenues.



As to revenue sharing, our guess is that the NFL will continue its current system of equally sharing amounts that presently equate to roughly 80 percent of all dollars earned.  The league also is likely to tinker with its supplemental revenue sharing system, which already provides additional money to teams with a defined need for it.  Moving forward, our guess is that the NFL will tweak the formula for determining whether a team is entitled to supplemental revenue sharing -- and will require that the team demonstrate some tangible desire and effort to enhance its own revenues before the team will be eligible to share even more of the money earned by others.

 

[PhillyGirl]

ESPN report....gloomy

PFT totally different again. 

[SunMo]

yeah, i saw ESPN's too, seems to be a wide disparity huh?

[General_Failure]

So it's still a 50/50 shot.

[SunMo]

Spew's "blog" entry:

SATURDAY, 2:55 P.M.

The Internet is starting to buzz with the story that the new Collective Bargaining Agreement is shaping up, that a deal looks likely before Sunday night and that, in the end, the teams now hopelessly over the salary cap are going to find some real relief.

How would that impact the Eagles? Certainly, they wouldn't be in the driver's seat as far as cap room relative to the rest of the league, but they would still be in great shape, not only for 2006 but for many years to come.

Again, I don't think a surplus of salary cap room would dramatically change the way the Eagles conduct business in this free-agency period. I think they have a solid plan, a thorough plan, and they've identified needs and players to fill those needs.

Under a new agreement, we won't see the players pouring out onto the streets as we would have had the cap remained at $94.5 million.

Still, there is quality available. The Eagles are poised. Let's get this deal done and get to free agency!

[PhillyPhanInDC]

NFL.com is now reporting the talks are dead along the crawler on the bottom of the screen as well. Upshaw is already back in D.C apparently, and there is no new meeting scheduled. Likelihood of another meeting is extremely slim.

They have this on their website though:

No progress, but talks to resume March 5    
NFL.com wire reports 

NEW YORK (March 4, 2006) -- Talks between the NFL and its union broke off with no progress, although the sides agreed to meet again March 5.

The stalemate increased the possibility that many high-priced free agents would come on the market as teams struggled to get under the salary cap by 6 p.m. ET on March 5, the extended deadline for the start of free agency.

"No progress has been made, but we expect more discussions to take place before Sunday night," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said.

Union officials did not immediately return phone calls from The Associated Press.

Earlier in the week, negotiations broke off and the league set the salary cap for free agency at $94.5 million. Teams with a salary load far higher than that had anticipated an agreement that could have given them extra room to keep veterans, perhaps $10 million more with a new deal.

If not, it's likely a number of teams would have to make wholesale cuts, some involving big-name veterans such as Kansas City's Will Shields, Tampa Bay's Derrick Brooks and the New York Jets' Kevin Mawae and Chad Pennington.

Gene Upshaw, executive director of the NFL Players Association, said after the earlier talks broke off that the NFL was offering 56.2 percent of its total revenues to the players. Upshaw has said he will not go under 60 percent.

But the problem involves more than that, notably a dispute among owners over revenue sharing. Low-revenue teams complain that they would have to contribute a higher percentage of the money they get from advertising, naming rights and other nontelevision and ticket revenue than big-market teams.

Upshaw always has wanted that issue decided first among the owners, but that isn't likely happen in these last-minute talks, which began March 3 after the deadline for free agency was extended three days from 12:01 a.m. ET on March 3 until March 6 at the same time.

The labor agreement, extended several times since it was agreed to in 1992, has another two years to run. But 2006 would be the last year with a salary cap.

There would be no cap next year, but also many changes in the rules, including some the players find unappealing -- six years for a player to get to free agency instead of four, and no minimum amount that teams have to spend.

[Wingspan]

ESPN report....gloomy

PFT totally different again. 

so which one of the "never rights" is actually right?

[General_Failure]

Neither. The universe unravelled and you're dead. You're all dead.

[Feva]

Neither. The universe unravelled and you're dead. You're all dead.

Dammit... and the Eagles were gonna win the Super Bowl next year too.   

[MadMarchHare]

ESPN report....gloomy

PFT totally different again. 

Yeah, because ESPN is the end all of knowledge.  How 'bout we say how this pans out first.

[General_Failure]

Neither. The universe unravelled and you're dead. You're all dead.

Dammit... and the Eagles were gonna win the Super Bowl next year too.   

Well now the Cardinals will win the next 8, but it doesn't matter because you're all dead.

[Feva]

Neither. The universe unravelled and you're dead. You're all dead.

Dammit... and the Eagles were gonna win the Super Bowl next year too.   

Well now the Cardinals will win the next 8, but it doesn't matter because you're all dead.

Well... if they're winning the next 8... I guess we all ended up burning in  .

[Geowhizzer]

Neither. The universe unravelled and you're dead. You're all dead.

Dammit... and the Eagles were gonna win the Super Bowl next year too.   

Well now the Cardinals will win the next 8, but it doesn't matter because you're all dead.

Well... if they're winning the next 8... I guess we all ended up burning in  .

We won't be burning, because it had to have frozen over.

[PhillyPhanInDC]

PFT.com gets it's act together and joins the club:

POSTED 6:48 p.m. EST, March 4, 2006
DEAR DUMBASSES:  GIT 'ER DONE

Five hours of negotiation between the NFL and the NFLPLA resulted initially in more empty rhetoric from union officials, followed by a glimmer of optimism from the NFL, which has said that the .

On Saturday afternoon, we'd heard that significant progress had been made toward a new CBA.  Then, the negotiations ended for the day, with NFLPA lawyer Jeffrey Kessler proclaiming the talks "as dead as a doornail" (real original), and that it's "a sad day for the NFL."

Jeff, it's only a sad day for the NFL because guys like you are in a position to dictate the future of the sport.

Indeed, we've heard opinions from league insiders that Commissioner Paul Tagliabue and NFLPA executive director Gene Upshaw could get the deal done if they would hammer out the remaining issues face-to-face, man-to-man.  It's the other guys, we hear, such as Kessler and NFLPA general counsel Richard Berthelsen, who are preventing the thing from getting done. 

Like any other matter that is remotely adversarial in nature, ego can quickly get in the way of common sense, and men hoping to prove that they're smart and tough can be a distraction at a time when there are broader objectives in play.

In this case, the NFL, the owners, and the union aren't wrestling with issues like cash over cap because the present system is pushing the league to failure, but because the present system has yielded unprecedented, but disparate, success.  For the NHL, hammering out a new compensation system was a matter of life or death.  For the NFL, the golden goose could end up starving to death while the guys fighting over how to divvy up the eggs neglect the damn thing's food supply.

So get it done, guys.  You're all richer than most of the folks who pay for the tickets and generating the ratings points.  So it's really not wise to risk pissing us all off.

Just ask hockey.  And baseball.