Schefter reveals the framework of the new deal

[Deus Irae]

New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

Reiss reports that according to Schefter, that anyone asigned the Franchise tag will still be franchised. I doubt highly that the owners would agree to get rid of the franchise tag.
https://twitter.com/#!/AdamSchefter/status/83236841599418368

What I'm interested in is the players who weren't slapped with the tag because of their RFA status. With the RFA status gone, will teams get a second bite at the franchise tag apple?

 

[townes]

What will be interesting is whether or not the franchise and transition tags have been eliminated. If they have, what does that do to the guys who were tendered and signed their tenders.

It sounds like tags will continue to be in play but all those who lost out on free agency last year will be automatic UFA's. It sounds like a fair deal for all and it is clear the players aren't interested in eliminating the basic structure of the league and the draft, free agency etc... will continue to be used. Hopefully this gets done, it sounds like the ball is in the owners court and if the moderate owners have the votes the deal will get done.

 

[Shelterdog]

What I'm interested in is the players who weren't slapped with the tag because of their RFA status. With the RFA status gone, will teams get a second bite at the franchise tag apple?

It's an interesting thought but I can't think of a single player who qualifies. Can you?

 

[townes]

So rookies on their first contract are still held to that contract, correct (assuming there are no 7+ year contracts for rookies)?

RFA's with 1 more year on their contract are still RFA's it would seem? and obviously anyone under contract is still under contract (what am i missing or and I reading too much int othe "and" part of the quote and assumign there's a logic conenction )

it seems to be an omission about franchise/transition tags. The players are usually upset with the tag and you'd think they would have built this into the new CBA.

I think the players were willing to negotiate pretty much everything other than an 18 game season and the ceiling the owners were trying to impose on shared revenues, those were the dealbreakers and it's clear from the deal proposed that the players were willing to take a lower share and agree to con tinue with the same basic structures that have existed for years.

 

[Deus Irae]

It's an interesting thought but I can't think of a single player who qualifies. Can you?

Sure. There are lots of them. Just the Giants alone, for example, have players like

DE Mathias Kiwanuka
WR Steve Smith
RB Ahmad Bradshaw
DT Barry Cofield
TE Kevin Boss
OL Kevin Boothe
DE Dave Tollefson.


Whether anyone thinks such players are worth the tag is obviously open to question, but I'm just curious as to whether any agreement would give teams another chance to do it because of the big change in RFA/UFA rules.

 

[borg]

Will Brady still be able to wear fancy hats?

 

[Mike the Brit]

From 59.5 to 48% is a huge cut. Are there some compensations for the players?

 

[Deus Irae]

From 59.5 to 48% is a huge cut. Are there some compensations for the players?

The players weren't making 59.5% before.

 

[PatsFanStnfrd]

From 59.5 to 48% is a huge cut. Are there some compensations for the players?

Remember, the 59.5% applied to $9 billion only after $1 billion was taken off the top. In reality that is 53 %. So in aiming for 48 % of total without anything off the top, the players are willing to settle for a net swing of approx. $500 million. All this is short term, static sense -- not including new revenues and growth in future. In return, they get teams to spend on a cash bases the annual cap, as opposed to some clubs that were routinely 20 to 30 million below cap annually.

 

[Patspsycho]

I think you are underestimating what the teams lost. I think this is still going to kill the rookie class this season. Most of these kids are months behind in their getting acclimated to the NFL and their new team. I would expect fewer star rookies this season.

Also, a lot teams are going to be way behind with their timing between QBs and receivers. A lot of that work is done in the offseason.

Lastly, a lot of younger and back up players will suffer because many starters will need extra time in preseason games to work their ways back into shape.

Not in our case, for the most part. We picked 1 OT, 2 RBs, which are (by comparison) relatively simple transitions, and the one safety we picked is going to come off the bench anyway, and the QB we picked is 3rd string.

 

[lamafist]

From 59.5 to 48% is a huge cut. Are there some compensations for the players?

The 59.5% was after the money taken off the top, which totaled $1 billion, ~11% of the total. All told, the players made 52.7, 51.8, 51.0, 50.6 percent of all revenue under the first four years of the '06 CBA.

In return for the ~2-3% they gave up, they're getting a cash floor that's close to 100% of the cap figure, which will both protect them from being behind the curve in sharing in revenue windfalls as well as from bearing the brunt of the initial hit if revenues stagnate.

 

[Mike the Brit]

Thanks to PFS and Lama. That sounds like a pretty decent deal for the players (not so good for the Bengals).

 

[lamafist]

Overall I think it's a good, smart deal. I like that the split is based on "all revenue," a common-sense figure, with protections for both sides based on triggers instead of built into the unnecessarily complicated formulation of "Total Revenue."

What I don't see in this deal, however, is anything that really addresses the concerns of the low-revenue franchises that prompted the opt-out in the first place. In fact, with the narrowing of the gap between the salary cap and floor, I think this deal could very quickly prove to be harder on them.

If the 10-year length of the new CBA that I've heard floated is accurate, and there's no adjustment to the revenue sharing agreement coming out of this owners' meeting, I think we'll a lot of franchises up for sale as soon as the terms of the next TV deal become clear.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Before we get ahead of ourselves again and start debating details not yet agreed upon, the owners were tight lipped exiting the meetings but Kraft and Irsay said a lot of work remains to be done. And today there was not a lot of discussion about details, just the concepts they have been negotiating. The devil is always in the details.

 

[Rob0729]

Before we get ahead of ourselves again and start debating details not yet agreed upon, the owners were tight lipped exiting the meetings but Kraft and Irsay said a lot of work remains to be done. And today there was not a lot of discussion about details, just the concepts they have been negotiating. The devil is always in the details.

I agree that we don't really know how the details will be done, but is almost guaranteed at this point a deal will be done by early to mid July at the latest.

Today was always about the owners approving the framework of the CBA, not the details. From all accounts, they have even if they haven't officially voted on the framework.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Not in our case, for the most part. We picked 1 OT, 2 RBs, which are (by comparison) relatively simple transitions, and the one safety we picked is going to come off the bench anyway, and the QB we picked is 3rd string.

Spot on. However any future UDFAs (if any) at WR/DB positions are headed directly to the PS. The NFL needs to expand the PS and freeze members just for 2011.

 

[TealSox]

What sources of revenue were originally split? Ticket sales? Premium/Luxury sales? Merchandise?

 

[Uncle Rico]

Breer on Twitter:

Meetings between the players and owners will take place in the suburbs of Boston on Wednesday and Thursday, a ways from the city.

It'd be great to have it settled around here; wonder where it'll be?

Edit: Here's the Breer link ...
http://twitter.com/#!/albertbreer

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Here are some of the highlights:

- Players will receive 48% of all revenues
- No off the top credit (the owners were looking for $1 billion)
- The players are guaranteed that their percentage would not fall below 46.5%
- Owners will get some expense credits for new stadium construction
- Rookie wage scale will be included, but still needs to be tweaked
- A 16 game Thursday night schedule will be introduced in 2012 and the package will be sold to a network
- Significant increases in pensions and health benefits for retired players if revenues continue as expected through 2016
- All players with 4 or more years of experience and contracts expired after the 2010 season are UFAs.


No vote today, but it looks like the owners are on board with the direction. Looks like by the sounds of it, a new CBA is imminent and could be done before the July 4th holiday.


Lockout: Sources reveal details of proposed NFL CBA - ESPN

Thank you very much for taking the time to do that great summary!

 

[PatsFanStnfrd]

Breer on Twitter:



It'd be great to have it settled around here; wonder where it'll be?

Edit: Here's the Breer link ...
Twitter

Foxboro...