Interesting Notes on the possible uncapped 2010 season

[Miller]

Was reading ESPN's Mag on the plane yesterday and came across some info that was very interesting on the upcapped 2010 year that will come to be if the league and the union fail to reach an agreement. Some I knew, some I did not.

Under the rules that govern the Final Year Deal of the current CBA there are many rules in there designed to keep money out of the players pocket...not the other way around. It is true that there is no salary cap, but the following are also included:

• Out with the 4 years needed to be a UFA and in with 6 years. That would mean approx 270 players, including Brandon Marshall, Greg Jennings, and Brandon Cofield to name a few, would be prevented from testing the UFA waters.
• Rules will also exist that would restrict the number of UFA's that 2009 Divisional playoff teams can sign in the offseason and how much they can sign them for. The example the article gives is if the Bears for to the NFC Confrence game and sign a UFA for 5 mil in his first year, they would be prevented from signing any other UFA to a deal worth more than 3.275 mil in the first year.....sounds confusing and limiting to say the least....
• Sure it clears the cap, also clears the cap floor (currently teams must spend at least 87.6% of the cap), with out the floor you could see recession strapped small market teams get real stingy.....we've seen this before, it's called Baseball.....
• Most informed players seem to be praying a deal gets done. Cofield stated: "not having a cap makes things worse, the guys who know the facts want a deal done between the league and the union." He went onto say "Guys are scared, they're praying a deal gets done.

The full article can be read in the current ESPN mag, an article by Seth Wickersham.

I know many feel the players will be playing hardball due to having the uncapped year as an ace in the pocket.....sounds like this could be more leverage for the owners than it will be for the players. I feel something will get done, and after seeing some of this I'm praying that I am right.

 

[Bayton]

The owners don't mind it going to uncapped. In fact, I believe that I've read somewhere(vague i know) that the owners would prefer no cap. Mainly due to the removal of the salary floor. Cheap owners are bad for everyone involved except themselves. Culverhouse is one example that hits close to home. I've heard speculation also that if it goes to an uncapped season, that it is not at all likely to go back. Even if it goes uncapped, team salaries are not likely to get to the extreme that baseball has. Baseball makes more of a majority of its money from gate receipts and concessions(game day profits) than football does. Where as football makes a killing on tv-broadcast rights. Thats why just out paying everyone (a la the yankees ) wont positively equate to increased profits from merchandise and game day profits. Where as decreased payroll/salaries does equate to increased profits. As we all know, owners don't stay owners long if they aren't making money. Anyways, I dont like things about the current version of the c.b.a., I dont like the idea and parameters that will come with the uncapped season. Why aren't they getting the ball rolling on negotiations? There is only a year left and we all know how quickly these things don't get done.