Free agent signings for next year

[SoCal Pmen]

I was just reading a posting by Adam Shefter stating that in the upcoming uncapped year, teams that reach the final 8 cannot sign free agents unless they lose one. Pats could join this group tomorrow.

 

[mgteich]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

It is indeed true, but this only applies to UFA's signed from other teams that have not been waived. I believe none of our 2009 additions would ahve been subject to this limitation.

 

[mayoclinic]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

I was just reading a posting by Adam Shefter stating that in the upcoming uncapped year, teams that reach the final 8 cannot sign free agents unless they lose one. Pats could join this group tomorrow.

This has already been discussed:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...d/10/300763-how-top-8-teams-determined.html

Please note in particular posts 3 and 4, which reference language from the current CBA regarding transitional rules for an uncapped year.

1. The "final 8" is actual 2 separate groups of 4 - the "final 4" teams that make the AFC and NFC championship games, and the 4 teams which make it past the wild card round.

2. The "final 4" teams are prohibited from signing external FAs except to replace FAs that they lose. I don't believe this includes players who were waived.

3. The "second 4" teams are allowed to sign external FAs in limited quantities defined by the CBA in terms of contract value.

If we lose to Baltimore tomorrow then we are not restricted at all. If we win, then we are in the "final 8" and are restricted to some extent. If we win against both Baltimore and San Diego then we are in the "final 4" and are restricted to the extent which you described in the OP, though again, I think that it only applies to players who are not waived.

 

[SoCal Pmen]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

This has already been discussed:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...d/10/300763-how-top-8-teams-determined.html

Please note in particular posts 3 and 4, which reference language from the current CBA regarding transitional rules for an uncapped year.

1. The "final 8" is actual 2 separate groups of 4 - the "final 4" teams that make the AFC and NFC championship games, and the 4 teams which make it past the wild card round.

2. The "final 4" teams are prohibited from signing external FAs except to replace FAs that they lose. I don't believe this includes players who were waived.

3. The "second 4" teams are allowed to sign external FAs in limited quantities defined by the CBA in terms of contract value.

If we lose to Baltimore tomorrow then we are not restricted at all. If we win, then we are in the "final 8" and are restricted to some extent. If we win against both Baltimore and San Diego then we are in the "final 4" and are restricted to the extent which you described in the OP, though again, I think that it only applies to players who are not waived.

Got it. Thanks!

 

[pats1]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

Right, this has been discussed on here before.

 

[mgteich]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

A) I believe that almost everyone we signed last year were players who were waived and therfore not included in the restrictions.

B) The restictions for the final 8 are not very restrictive at all. We could sign one $5M free agents and as a many as we wanted under about $3.2M or so.

C) So, the bottom line is that we don't have to worry about these restrictions until we are are in the AFC Championshiop Game. We can discuss this isse at length then. FOr more info now, click mayo's reference and especially read miguel's posts included therein.

This has already been discussed:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...d/10/300763-how-top-8-teams-determined.html

Please note in particular posts 3 and 4, which reference language from the current CBA regarding transitional rules for an uncapped year.

1. The "final 8" is actual 2 separate groups of 4 - the "final 4" teams that make the AFC and NFC championship games, and the 4 teams which make it past the wild card round.

2. The "final 4" teams are prohibited from signing external FAs except to replace FAs that they lose. I don't believe this includes players who were waived.

3. The "second 4" teams are allowed to sign external FAs in limited quantities defined by the CBA in terms of contract value.

If we lose to Baltimore tomorrow then we are not restricted at all. If we win, then we are in the "final 8" and are restricted to some extent. If we win against both Baltimore and San Diego then we are in the "final 4" and are restricted to the extent which you described in the OP, though again, I think that it only applies to players who are not waived.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

A) I believe that almost everyone we signed last year were players who were waived and therfore not included in the restrictions.

B) The restictions for the final 8 are not very restrictive at all. We could sign one $5M free agents and as a many as we wanted under about $3.2M or so.

C) So, the bottom line is that we don't have to worry about these restrictions until we are are in the AFC Championshiop Game. We can discuss this isse at length then. FOr more info now, click mayo's reference and especially read miguel's posts included therein.

There is one other important issue: the final eight teams (and, therefore, especially the final four) cannot trade for a player they could not sign if he were a free agent.

 

[mayoclinic]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

There is one other important issue: the final eight teams (and, therefore, especially the final four) cannot trade for a player they could not sign if he were a free agent.

Good clarification.

Again, to clarify: if we lose tomorrow there are no restrictions. If we lose to SD we can sign (or trade for) one FA > $5M (such as Julius Peppers or Karlos Dansby) and any number under $3.2M. If we beat Baltimore and SD then we will be more restricted as to whom we could sign.

 

[mgteich]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

Unless we get to the championship game, the restrictions are almost meaningless to the pats.

Good clarification.

Again, to clarify: if we lose tomorrow there are no restrictions. If we lose to SD we can sign (or trade for) one FA > $5M (such as Julius Peppers or Karlos Dansby) and any number under $3.2M. If we beat Baltimore and SD then we will be more restricted as to whom we could sign.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

Good clarification.
Again, to clarify: if we lose tomorrow there are no restrictions. If we lose to SD we can sign (or trade for) one FA > $5M (such as Julius Peppers or Karlos Dansby) and any number under $3.2M. If we beat Baltimore and SD then we will be more restricted as to whom we could sign.

These "final eight rules" are flawed and there are loopholes for players to sign with any team they want. The Pats have Green and Burgess that are ready to become FA's. They can tell Green to take a hike and sign Peppers to a low contract. Then in a month or two or whenever, sign him to a long term deal. The NFL cannot tell a player how much they should make. There are so many loopholes it's not even funny. Good teams with lots of cash will find ways to get anybody they want. For years, the Broncos made a mockery out of the salary cap in the late 90's as did many other teams. I wouldn't even take these rules seriously.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

They can tell Green to take a hike and sign Peppers to a low contract. Then in a month or two or whenever, sign him to a long term deal.

Nice thought but per NFL Contract Guidelines, a team cannot terminate and recreate the same contract for a player twice in a 12 month period.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

Nice thought but per NFL Contract Guidelines, a team cannot terminate and recreate the same contract for a player twice in a 12 month period.

More importantly, the Final Eight Plan places limits on salary increases and prohibits renegotiations that raise the salaries of players signed under the plan for at least 12 months.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

If the Pats and Packers win today, the NFLPA's world is going to come down on them. Their biggest bargaining chip has been that without a cap, there will be teams that will throw crazy money at free agents and being in an uncapped year is an advantage for the players.

Unfortunately for them, some of the teams who are in the best position to spend like crazy (at least from a financial/profitability standpoint) are the Cowboys, Jets, Patriots, and Packers (Packers may not be a big market team, but they are a nonprofit organization that tends to generate a lot of revenue). The only teams really left in this scenario who are really in economic shape of spending like crazy are the Redskins, Giants, and maybe a few others. Also, none of the teams that would take advantage of no salary cap floor will be in the final eight.

I think this will make it more likely that there will be a deal in place before the end of the football year. I agree that the final eight isn't as restrictive as it looks on its surface, but based on the teams who look to be in that category, it seriously puts any idea of a crazy free agency out the window. The Redskins might spend like crazy, but it is doubtful that anyone else will. I think the NFLPA were counting on the Cowboys and the Jets to spend like crazy. Jerry Jones will spend anything to buy a championship and the Jets need to look like a contender to sell PSLs.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

I wouldn't expect to see the Patriots sign any big ticket FA irrespective of the restrictions because they aren't investing in anyone until they know there will be football played in 2011.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

If the Pats and Packers win today, the NFLPA's world is going to come down on them. Their biggest bargaining chip has been that without a cap, there will be teams that will throw crazy money at free agents and being in an uncapped year is an advantage for the players.

This was incredibly stupid on their part. There are so many advantages for the owners (e.g., no salary floor, reduced benefit payments, etc.) that the idea of an uncapped year should have been a non-starter.

On the flip side, the CBA places no restrictions whatsoever on what a team can spend to retain its own free agents (e.g., Wilfork).

As far as a new contract coming before March 1, I'd put the odds of that at less than 10 to 1 against; barring a complete collapse by the NFLPA, they're just too far apart at the moment. Plus there's the revenue sharing aspect that the owners have to workout amongst themselves.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

This was incredibly stupid on their part. There are so many advantages for the owners (e.g., no salary floor, reduced benefit payments, etc.) that the idea of an uncapped year should have been a non-starter.

As far as a new contract coming before March 1, I'd put the odds of that at less than 10 to 1 against; barring a complete collapse by the NFLPA, they're just too far apart at the moment. Plus there's the revenue sharing aspect that the owners have to workout amongst themselves.

We had these conversations two years ago. Most of the movement happened in that CBA negotiations within days of the deadline. This time the NFLPA have already intimated that they would make concessions. I still think the odds are very good that there will be a new CBA. It is a doomsday scenario for the players if they don't. The second there is no cap floor and teams like the Jags start cutting their payroll to $50-60 million range, any leverage the NFLPA has is gone.

The owners even have an advantage if there is a work stoppage in 2011 because their contracts with the networks, ESPN, and DirecTV require them to pay their fees in 2011 whether there is a season or not. So the league will actually be more profitable without a season in 2011 while many players will lose a year of their careers and millions of millions of dollars.

I personally would be surprised not to see a new CBA. The NFLPA has far too much to lose not to. How are they going to tell a guy like Logan Mankins that rather than having a chance for a long term contract and to become the highest paid guard in the league that he will have to play for an one year RFA tender for about $1.6 million and that he might be unemployed in 2011? How do they tell a high priced older veteran who is uncuttable with a cap that he is going to get cut and may have to settle for an one year deal that might not be that high and that his career could be over because there will be no football in 2011 and by the 2012 season he will be too old to mount a comeback?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

We had these conversations two years ago. Most of the movement happened in that CBA negotiations within days of the deadline. This time the NFLPA have already intimated that they would make concessions. I still think the odds are very good that there will be a new CBA. It is a doomsday scenario for the players if they don't. The second there is no cap floor and teams like the Jags start cutting their payroll to $50-60 million range, any leverage the NFLPA has is gone.

The owners even have an advantage if there is a work stoppage in 2011 because their contracts with the networks, ESPN, and DirecTV require them to pay their fees in 2011 whether there is a season or not. So the league will actually be more profitable without a season in 2011 while many players will lose a year of their careers and millions of millions of dollars.

It's a net positive, but not a gross positive; should a lockout/strike occur, the NFL would owe the respective agencies an equal amount later on (i.e., if the networks pay for six weeks of games that don't happen, they get six weeks for free).

And, right now, according to Adam Schefter, a lot of NFL insiders believe that it is far more likely that there's a lockout in 2011 than a new contract before the uncapped year starts.

How are they going to tell a guy like Logan Mankins that rather than having a chance for a long term contract and to become the highest paid guard in the league that he will have to play for an one year RFA tender for about $1.6 million and that he might be unemployed in 2011?

It's been suggested that one of those concessions might be throwing the potential free agent classes of 2005 and 2006 under the bus.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

It's a net positive, but not a gross positive; should a lockout/strike occur, the NFL would owe the respective agencies an equal amount later on (i.e., if the networks pay for six weeks of games that don't happen, they get six weeks for free).

And, right now, according to Adam Schefter, a lot of NFL insiders believe that it is far more likely that there's a lockout in 2011 than a new contract before the uncapped year starts.



It's been suggested that one of those concessions might be throwing the potential free agent classes of 2005 and 2006 under the bus.

Again, that was the talk the last CBAs. Even days before the new CBA was signed, there were talks that a lockout or strike was inevitable. If either side said that there was room to negotiate, they would lose their bargaining power. It is typical for negotiations is to say there is an impass and nothing is going to get done and then both sides wait for the other side to blink with one usually blinking.

As for the TV money, I did portray it a bit wrong. My point was the league would still have revenue coming in while the players wouldn't. It would also be more profitable for a lot of teams and if they invest it well, it would be more profitable in the long term even if they are broadcasting games for free in 2012.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

Again, that was the talk the last CBAs. Even days before the new CBA was signed, there were talks that a lockout or strike was inevitable. If either side said that there was room to negotiate, they would lose their bargaining power. It is typical for negotiations is to say there is an impass and nothing is going to get done and then both sides wait for the other side to blink with one usually blinking.

That said, I'm not as sanguine about the prospects because the last deadline was an apparently arbitrary one imposed by Gene Upshaw, while this one is written into the CBA.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Re: OT: Free agent signings for next year

It's a net positive, but not a gross positive; should a lockout/strike occur, the NFL would owe the respective agencies an equal amount later on (i.e., if the networks pay for six weeks of games that don't happen, they get six weeks for free).

And, right now, according to Adam Schefter, a lot of NFL insiders believe that it is far more likely that there's a lockout in 2011 than a new contract before the uncapped year starts.



It's been suggested that one of those concessions might be throwing the potential free agent classes of 2005 and 2006 under the bus.

Yeah, I believe I read somewhere that if there is a settlement it will retain the 6 year requirement for 2010 because it's existence had to be planned for in the prior season... That would be a real slam dunk for owners. And I think because of the economy and what happened in the last CBA it's gonna take a slam dunk for owners to avoid a lockout this time. They were disorganized last time and the union took too much advantage of it and this is payback as well as give back time.