Colts sign another FA to a 5 year deal
 

http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/story/9265467

This time it is DL Raheem Brock, keeping him from being a FA. Does Polian know something the rest of the league doesn't? Is he banking on a non-capped year? How are they under the cap? I smell a 49ers like cap cheating.

They are under the cap because they have a lot of guys playing on rookie contracts to offset the high dollar guys. Not to mention they always find a few undrafted guys each year.

Aren't the Colts one of the teams holding out unless they get more revenue from other teams? If they won't budge, they can force an uncapped year.

Any of three sides can force an uncapped year: Players, revenue-giving teams, and revenue-receiving teams. All they have to do to stand by their demands. I'm not saying their demands are right or wrong, just saying they can force the issue if they want.

It does seem odd when most (all other?) teams are waiting to see what happens, one of the teams demanding more money from other teams is spending money like crazy. If they have so much, why are they demanding more?

The Colts aren't in a position to force anything. They can't exist without the cap and the revenue sharing that comes with it.

I think Polian is rolling the dice assuming a deal will get done and he's trying to get his guys off the market before the rush erupts if it does. If a deal doesn't get done it won't matter as the Colts window will slam shut.

As for the cap, they were right up against the assumed $93.5M as of last week. But you don't have to be under it until next 3/3. They will get under by charging Peyton and Marvin's $19M in 2006 roster bonuses on the old credit card. That alone will open up about $14M in cap space for these contracts, at least one more FA (but not Edge), RFA's, FA (though Polian seldom signs any) and draftees.

As for the standoffs, the union can certainly refuse to sign a deal that is already reportedly done and gave them the % of Total Revenue they supposedly wanted. Would be tough to explain this to it's constituents though once the checks stop coming. And the haves can hold up a new revenue sharing formula that gives the have nots the bulk of their revenue. It only takes 9 votes to kill any deal. But that alone won't stop a new CBA unless Upshaw cares more about power than money. I suppose the have nots could likewise nix any deal that doesn't give them that big chunk of the haves revenue, but since most of them can not survive without the revenue that is already shared, let alone in an uncapped league, that would be committing financial suicide. Franchise values would drop like a rock as well, so it would be like trying to sell your house after the nuclear contamination was discovered in the nearby wells.

We say this every year about the colts. Others say the same thing about the patriots. The colts understand the cap very well, and make their choices. One is to have a lot of low-paid players, at least a couple of which are expected to start each year, and of course, no star is allowed to get injured.

The colts cannot hold up the CBA, which requires 3/4 not 100% of the owners approving.

My inside source also tells me Polian is leading the chsse for Adam V. Go figure....

To quote Bill Simmons--even though I'm not surprised--I just threw up in my mouth. :(

Or a Broncos like cap cheating.

If they won't pay Vandy the money, I doubt they pay Vinatieri.

Vanderjerk is 37 and loses games. AV is three or four years younger and is a winner.