PFT says that Saints and Pats took Advantage of new CBA rule (this is for you Miguel) - New England Patriots Forums

DefenseRules · 06-06-2006, 10:47 AM

http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm

Quote:

PATS, SAINTS TAKE ADVANTAGE OF NEW CBA RULE

A league source tells us that Monday's trade between the Saints and Pats takes advantage of a little-known tweak to the CBA that permits the cap hit resulting from trades made after June 1 to be spread over two seasons.

Under the deal, the Saints sent defensive tackle Johnathan Sullivan to the Pats for receiver Bethel Johnson.

Previously, a trade resulted in the immediate acceleration of all unallocated bonus money into the current cap year. The rule was one of the reasons that player movement via trade had diminished over the past decade.

But now the cap consequences for a player traded after June 1 are the same as when a player is cut after June 1.

So the Pats will carry the cap charge for 20 percent of Johnson's original signing bonus in 2006, and 20 percent in 2007. The Saints will account for the cap charge applicable to Sullivan's bonus money in 2006, with all remaining "dead money" from his signing and option bonus counting against the cap in 2007. Under the old rules, both teams would have seen all of the remaining bonus money apply in 2006.

How obscure is this rule? We've scoured the CBA extension term sheet, and we don't see it in there anywhere.

Miguel I don't know how true this is, but I'm just passing this along to you for your reference.

JoeSixPat · 06-06-2006, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DefenseRules

Miguel I don't know how true this is, but I'm just passing this along to you for your reference.

That was brought up on the other "Saints get a BJ in return for Sullivan" thread - which understandably is gettting quite long...

Of course its not a lot of money in the first place - I'd think this rule is more significant to the Saints

Additionally Sullivan playing incentives void the last two years of his deal - which is academic for the Pats as they can cut him at anytime with minimal cap impact

Hopefully Sullivan will recognize the available incentive becoming a free agent 2 years sooner now

DefenseRules · 06-06-2006, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeSixPat

That was brought up on the other "Saints get a BJ in return for Sullivan" thread - which understandably is gettting quite long...

Of course its not a lot of money in the first place - I'd think this rule is more significant to the Saints

Additionally Sullivan playing incentives void the last two years of his deal - which is academic for the Pats as they can cut him at anytime with minimal cap impact

Hopefully Sullivan will recognize the available incentive becoming a free agent 2 years sooner now

Sorry about that. I didn't see it in the thread.

JoeSixPat · 06-06-2006, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DefenseRules

Sorry about that. I didn't see it in the thread.

I think that thread has gotten way too long... I think its appropriate to start new threads on these sort of topics in that situation... I for one am not going to fully read a 15 page thread

VJCPatriot · 06-06-2006, 04:51 PM

If that's the case it makes a LOT more sense why the Saints would try to trade Sullivan instead of flat out cut him. They get to spread out the cap impact. Pretty smart move by both team GMs in that case.

Give problem players a change of scenery. Maybe they work out maybe you cut em BUT you spread out the hurt that flat out cutting would have done to your cap.

JoeSixPat · 06-06-2006, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VJCPatriot

If that's the case it makes a LOT more sense why the Saints would try to trade Sullivan instead of flat out cut him. They get to spread out the cap impact. Pretty smart move by both team GMs in that case.

Give problem players a change of scenery. Maybe they work out maybe you cut em BUT you spread out the hurt that flat out cutting would have done to your cap.

Interesting in that this rule actually encourages trading rather than cutting - and might give those players who would otherwise languish at the bottom of the depth chart a fresh start with another team - before being cut if they really are useless

spacecrime · 06-06-2006, 05:37 PM

Why would the Pats want to push off cap hit money to next year?

VJCPatriot · 06-06-2006, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacecrime

Why would the Pats want to push off cap hit money to next year?

For cap room. Dollars you can spend now are always more valuable than dollars later.

Though admittedly the Saints get a bigger cap benefit since the signing bonus they paid Sullivan was a lot bigger than the signing bonus the Pats paid BJ.

Then again the Pats organization has always been known to max out their cap efficiency whenever they have a chance. And sometimes that means letting players go. In this case it was a low risk trade that still had positive cap impact.

***Miguel*** · 06-06-2006, 07:13 PM

Thanks for the heads ups.

AzPatsFan · 06-07-2006, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DefenseRules

http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm

Miguel I don't know how true this is, but I'm just passing this along to you for your reference.

I have been hoping that the league would do something like this. Unlike other sports football has been unable to do much trading because of the unfavorable accounting rules. If true, this levels the rules and should abet the player movement the NFLPA says it desires.

I would have preferred that it emphasize trading by say alllowing accounting in a beneficial way by amortizing over three years but at least it no longer is a disadvantage to trade a player.