ESPN Says We're The #1 Most-Screwed Team In Case Of Uncapped 2010
 

Link:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/column...ohn&id=3415387

Re: ESPN Says We're The #1 Most-Screwed Team In Case Of Uncapped 2010
 

Oh no! The crypt-keeper has written our eulogy. Shocking!

Re: ESPN Says We're The #1 Most-Screwed Team In Case Of Uncapped 2010
 

What a useless article. How does anyone know what any team will look like two years from now. This is a league where teams can go from last place to first place in a division (and visa versa) in one year.

Besides, all these free agents that are up in 2010, are the Patriots barred from offering them contracts before they become free agents?

It is doubtful they will get to an uncapped year. Even if they do, it is impossible to know who is in good shape or who is not. The Bears last year had pretty much the same team that went to the Super Bowl the year before. How did that work out for them?

Re: ESPN Says We're The #1 Most-Screwed Team In Case Of Uncapped 2010
 

Seymour. Green. Wilfork. Vrabel. Bruschi.

The only one who would be a huge loss in 2010 is Vince.

Bruschi will be retired. Vrabel will be 35. Seymour will be 31 but will have a lot of miles on him. Green is what he is.

Are Bill and Tommy going to be here ? Yes ? Then we'll be fine. Thanks for thinking of us.

Re: ESPN Says We're The #1 Most-Screwed Team In Case Of Uncapped 2010
 

BTW, weren't people predicting doom for the Patriots at the end of the 2002 season because they were too old on defense?

Re: ESPN Says We're The #1 Most-Screwed Team In Case Of Uncapped 2010
 

Jeez, I hope we can sign Bruschi in 2010.:rolleyes:

Re: ESPN Says We're The #1 Most-Screwed Team In Case Of Uncapped 2010
 

An uncapped team may loose a few players but will also be free to sign anyone they want and pay him whatever he wants.

Re: ESPN Says We're The #1 Most-Screwed Team In Case Of Uncapped 2010
 

Firstly...who said that Clayton really understands the ins and outs of the cap...if he doesn't his projections aren't even close...and while THAT is looking at things now, it's almost as if NOTHING will change in a few years time. Do you NOT think that if there is no CBA that teams will not do SOME things to be ready for that?
My sense is that this is just more Clayton's wish than anything of substance...(Miguel...what are YOUR thoughts on 2010?? I would trust his thoughts on this far more than this ESPN tool.)

Re: ESPN Says We're The #1 Most-Screwed Team In Case Of Uncapped 2010
 

Good ol' John Clayton.

I like the article because Clayton tends to use his knowledge and not his opinion. On television, ESPN probably encourages him to do more opinion journalism which takes away from his value. Isn't they what they have First and 10, Around the Horn and PTI?

Interesting facts:

- The teams in the conference championship will not be able to participate in free agency until they lose a player in free agency.

- Teams will be provided both a transition tag and franchise tag. This allows them to keep two of their free agent players.

- Players cannot be unrestricted free agents without six years of service (instead of four).

What do we make of all this?

I don't think we need to get ahead of ourselves. While the lack of a CBA presents a ton of clouds on the horizon (end of the college draft, uncontrolled spending, death of the NFLPA), I think assumptions are getting out of control. First, I wonder how many teams will be the "Yankees" of the NFL and which will be the "Marlins" of the NFL. I'm not looking for names, but I am making a point that not all teams are going to blow up the market with obscene contracts because there is no cap. A team like the 49ers, Lions and Cardinals may decide on a individual-team cap that is drastically lower than the current minimum. Then you have the Cowboys who might just shoot their payroll figures to the moon.

A correlation with MLB will be evident and it might not be all bad.

Tom Brady should be paid like ARod is being paid by the Yankees. Instead, Matt Ryan is going to make more than the three time Super Bowl winner. And before we get ahead of ourselves and worry that some team will swoop in and steal him with a load of cash, the fact is that the New England Pats would have no excuse (because there is no cap) to not spend the money on him if they wanted him on the team. And then there is the obvious situation that a player can go where there is interest and not only where there is money.

I look at a guy like Javon Walker who signed with the Raiders. I wouldn't think he wanted to go to the Raiders, but the Raiders had the cap room (I don't know how) and Walker needed to get paid. Many other teams lacked money, which made them lack interest.

And hold outs?

I will venture to guess that contract hold outs would be more of a thing of the past. This should be especially true for veteran players that stand to lose the most by this uncapped situation. This is only a guess as the teams will still have the franchise and tranisition tags that will cause havoc for the team/agent relationship. Then again, wouldn't the value of each tag go up?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...trategy/1.html

Re: ESPN Says We're The #1 Most-Screwed Team In Case Of Uncapped 2010
 

Ain't that the truth!!
Think they'll sign Vince before then. Big Dog will be 31 and coming up for a new contract so the next couple of years we'll see a motivated Seymour who will show up and play. IMO the Patriots will gladly let Big Dog go in 2010. Richard motivates for contracts and that's not the Patriots way. He's not worth the money we're paying him now. Can you imagine how some team will overpay for Big Dog in 2010? Be scary for them and good for us.