If next year is "uncapped" because of no contract, then...

[BTTA]

are there other changes in the rules related to what teams can do with contracts? Does it leave more creativity with how salaries are structured?

 

[pats1]

are there other changes in the rules related to what teams can do with contracts? Does it leave more creativity with how salaries are structured?

How so?

The CBA is still in place, so all the rules that govern salary structure and signing bonus, etc. are all in place unless otherwise stated.

 

[Kontradiction]

What I want to know is, should the season be uncapped, would the Pats be able to frontload contracts of the people they need to resign? For instance, if we sign Vince to, say, an 8 year, $80 million contract, could we pay him $40-$50 million in the uncapped year and then divide the remaining balance of his contract for the next seven years? Keep in mind that this is just an example. I'm really kind of weak with the financial aspect to pro football.

EDIT: it would also probably do the forum a world of good to have a sticky up for questions pertaining to an uncapped year. Sort of like an FAQ section for the CBA.

 

[pats1]

What I want to know is, should the season be uncapped, would the Pats be able to frontload contracts of the people they need to resign? For instance, if we sign Vince to, say, an 8 year, $80 million contract, could we pay him $40-$50 million in the uncapped year and then divide the remaining balance of his contract for the next seven years? Keep in mind that this is just an example. I'm really kind of weak with the financial aspect to pro football.

EDIT: it would also probably do the forum a world of good to have a sticky up for questions pertaining to an uncapped year. Sort of like an FAQ section for the CBA.

No, because of this clause in the CBA:

Amounts Treated as Signing Bonuses. For purposes of determining Team Salary under the foregoing, the term “signing bonus” shall include:

(5)The difference between the Salary in the second contract year and the first contract year when Salary in the second contract year is less than half the Salary called for in the first year of such Contract;

That's called "OATSB," or other amounts treated as signing bonus. It essentially takes that overage from the first year and makes it a signing bonus, meaning it gets pro-rated over the life of the deal.

 

[upstater1]

The frontloading question is the big one, although I wouldn't want the Patriots to do anything drastic like give 50% up front.

Nonetheless, if you could frontload a reasonable amount, then you can set yourself up for a decade of strong football.

 

[Kontradiction]

No, because of this clause in the CBA:



That's called "OATSB," or other amounts treated as signing bonus. It essentially takes that overage from the first year and makes it a signing bonus, meaning it gets pro-rated over the life of the deal.

Thanks. 8910

 

[Bostonian1962]

Would somebody please answer this: If there ends up being no cap, why can't teams do the following. Players needing new contracts get the bulk of the money in this, an uncapped year. Then, in the out years they'd have all kinds of room under the cap.

That seems too easy, and so must no be possible. Does anybody know for sure?

 

[Bostonian1962]

No, because of this clause in the CBA:



That's called "OATSB," or other amounts treated as signing bonus. It essentially takes that overage from the first year and makes it a signing bonus, meaning it gets pro-rated over the life of the deal.

Oops. I just saw the answer. Thanks.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

The frontloading question is the big one, although I wouldn't want the Patriots to do anything drastic like give 50% up front.

Nonetheless, if you could frontload a reasonable amount, then you can set yourself up for a decade of strong football.

The CBA has planned to make that strategy unworkable if a new CBA continues to feature a cap. And there simply won't be a new CBA absent one from the owners point. You can sign as many big ticket players as you want (unless you are one of the final 8). You just have to be aware that if a cap comes back you will then be in it's hell...You can pay as much as you want up front on new deals, just have to realize if the cap comes back it will be spread across yours as if it's paid over 5 or 6 seasons like it always was. Can't get around it my calling it something else either because the rules anticipated that.

The Pats are waiting for a reason. It makes their lives more complicated in the short run but they don't want to jeopardize their franchise's financial stability in the long run. This is always the approach they have taken to the financial component of the business. Some teams seem less concerned, but then that was always the case in the face of the new or unknown (i.e. the salary cap). The media likes to point to them, but for now their continuing to do business as usual isn't the indicator some want to portray it as of the Pats just being difficult and using the CBA as an excuse.

Felger kept saying yesterday that there was no way guys like Jerry Jones and the Mara's sign off on a bad deal, ergo the Patriots a FOS with their wait and see approach. I guess he missed what got us all here, owners agreeing to a bad deal rather than no deal back in 2006.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Felger kept saying yesterday that there was no way guys like Jerry Jones and the Mara's sign off on a bad deal, ergo the Patriots a FOS with their wait and see approach. I guess he missed what got us all here, owners agreeing to a bad deal rather than no deal back in 2006.

Keep in mind there are two issues that the CBA deals with: (1) the relationship between owners and players, and (2) revenue sharing issues that involve the owners only.

In a perfect world, these two things should be handled separately, but they're not. It is quite likely that even if the players and owners reach common ground on their issues, the owners may still squabble amongst themselves over the revenue sharing.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

No, because of this clause in the CBA:



That's called "OATSB," or other amounts treated as signing bonus. It essentially takes that overage from the first year and makes it a signing bonus, meaning it gets pro-rated over the life of the deal.

Two things:

(1) A team could still get around this by having the second-year salary equal exactly half the first-year salary.

(2) We have no idea what the new CBA would do with the potential cap hits from the uncapped year, since that rule only applies to the current CBA, which ends after 2010.

 

[upstater1]

No, because of this clause in the CBA:



That's called "OATSB," or other amounts treated as signing bonus. It essentially takes that overage from the first year and makes it a signing bonus, meaning it gets pro-rated over the life of the deal.

There's still plenty of leeway though. The second year salary can't be less than half.

So let's say the Patriots agree with Vince on a contract of $8 million per year over three years.

You could still do $12 million the first year, $6 million the second and $6 million the third.

That's still a huge savings so I think Knotra's question is still in play.

 

[upstater1]

The CBA has planned to make that strategy unworkable if a new CBA continues to feature a cap. And there simply won't be a new CBA absent one from the owners point. You can sign as many big ticket players as you want (unless you are one of the final 8). You just have to be aware that if a cap comes back you will then be in it's hell...You can pay as much as you want up front on new deals, just have to realize if the cap comes back it will be spread across yours as if it's paid over 5 or 6 seasons like it always was. Can't get around it my calling it something else either because the rules anticipated that.

The Pats are waiting for a reason. It makes their lives more complicated in the short run but they don't want to jeopardize their franchise's financial stability in the long run. This is always the approach they have taken to the financial component of the business. Some teams seem less concerned, but then that was always the case in the face of the new or unknown (i.e. the salary cap). The media likes to point to them, but for now their continuing to do business as usual isn't the indicator some want to portray it as of the Pats just being difficult and using the CBA as an excuse.

Felger kept saying yesterday that there was no way guys like Jerry Jones and the Mara's sign off on a bad deal, ergo the Patriots a FOS with their wait and see approach. I guess he missed what got us all here, owners agreeing to a bad deal rather than no deal back in 2006.

What specifically can they do to make you spread the amount out? Pats1's link only shows you can't cut the salary the next year by more than half.

If that's the standard, it means the CBA already allows you to frontload contracts.

 

[PowerRunRevival]

What is Mike Lombardi talking about?

“Had they won the game, you and I both know – and all Patriot Nation knows – they weren’t going to win the Super Bowl,” Lombardi said. “If we go to the uncapped year in the National Football League, which all signs indicate we’re headed there, the final eight teams wouldn’t be allowed to sign free agents. They could only replace free agents they lost.

So the final 8 teams can not sign new free agents. Contracts can be frontloaded but not for more than double what is made the next year. There will be no cap next year. Not really sure what the NFL cap situation means, can we go and sign any player to any contract we want? When will we find out what the rules will be for guys signed during the uncapped year as far as counting against the cap once the NFL has a cap again? Does anyone know of a website that explains this that I could look at?

 

[pats1]

What is Mike Lombardi talking about?

“Had they won the game, you and I both know – and all Patriot Nation knows – they weren’t going to win the Super Bowl,” Lombardi said. “If we go to the uncapped year in the National Football League, which all signs indicate we’re headed there, the final eight teams wouldn’t be allowed to sign free agents. They could only replace free agents they lost.

So the final 8 teams can not sign new free agents. Contracts can be frontloaded but not for more than double what is made the next year. There will be no cap next year. Not really sure what the NFL cap situation means, can we go and sign any player to any contract we want? When will we find out what the rules will be for guys signed during the uncapped year as far as counting against the cap once the NFL has a cap again? Does anyone know of a website that explains this that I could look at?

I just created a thread to help you out on that one.

 

[pats1]

Two things:

(1) A team could still get around this by having the second-year salary equal exactly half the first-year salary.

(2) We have no idea what the new CBA would do with the potential cap hits from the uncapped year, since that rule only applies to the current CBA, which ends after 2010.

Right, there has been rumors that the new CBA could "punish" teams that overspent in 2010.

 

[pats1]

What I want to know is, should the season be uncapped, would the Pats be able to frontload contracts of the people they need to resign? For instance, if we sign Vince to, say, an 8 year, $80 million contract, could we pay him $40-$50 million in the uncapped year and then divide the remaining balance of his contract for the next seven years? Keep in mind that this is just an example. I'm really kind of weak with the financial aspect to pro football.

EDIT: it would also probably do the forum a world of good to have a sticky up for questions pertaining to an uncapped year. Sort of like an FAQ section for the CBA.

Just did so.

 

[upstater1]

Right, there has been rumors that the new CBA could "punish" teams that overspent in 2010.

I'd like to see that happen.
It's hard to believe when the current CBA already addresses what happens when a team frontloads a contract. In legal terms (not that legality matters) that establishes a precedent for teams.

 

[javajunky]

Is 2010 the year of the big trade? Shouldn't teams get into a trading frenzy with an uncapped year?

It's the low risk, high reward option for all teams involved. Small market teams can shed all the salary they want and yet acquire the talent needed to remain competitive. Most large market teams can buy all the high priced talent they want without fear of a new CBA crippling them.

Why deal with a burdensome signing bonus and it's future cap implications when trading make so much sense?

 

[pats1]

Is 2010 the year of the big trade? Shouldn't teams get into a trading frenzy with an uncapped year?

It's the low risk, high reward option for all teams involved. Small market teams can shed all the salary they want and yet acquire the talent needed to remain competitive. Most large market teams can buy all the high priced talent they want without fear of a new CBA crippling them.

Why deal with a burdensome signing bonus and it's future cap implications when trading make so much sense?

You bring up a good point.