Good news for the Pats if there is an uncapped year

Discussion in ' - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Rob0729, Dec 7, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rob0729

    Rob0729 Supporter Supporter

    #12 Jersey

    It was missed yesterday, but the league has announced that if there is an uncapped year, they are reducing revenue sharing by $100 million a year. This is big for the Pats because they are one of the teams that contributes quite a bit to that $100 million.

    With it looking that in an uncapped year it is going to be much like baseball where there will be as many teams looking to cut payroll as spend freely (probably many more looking to cut payroll), the Pats may have a real advantage in free agency next year.

    Granted this will most likely get to the better goal of forcing the NFLPA to make concessions on things like a rookie salary cap to avoid this. The NFLPA are really facing disaster if there is not a capped year with a lot of free agents getting crappy deals because there will be a lot of teams trying to dump salary.

    NFL to cut smaller revenue sharing - NFL-
  2. Snarf

    Snarf Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Feels a little cheap to get good players due to a lame technical advantage though, doesn't it?

    Sort of like "wow, the Yankees won, what an amazing accomplishment".

    I'd much rather we win on equal terms as everyone else.
  3. cstjohn17

    cstjohn17 Supporter Supporter

    #54 Jersey

    If there is a CBA next year the Patriots will have more losses. With no CBA Mankins and Ghost are Restricted Free Agents (RFAs) and under Patriots control. With a CBA they become Unrestricted Free Agents, it is never good to let probowl players in their prime walk.
  4. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 Supporter Supporter

    #3 Jersey

    FYPFY. The NFLPA is apparently willing to sell players like Mankins and Ghost down the river if necessary to avoid an uncapped year.
  5. DarrylS

    DarrylS Supporter Supporter

    Personally, do not trust an uncapped year... may lead to chaos... teams like the Redskins, come to mind.. if he could Snyder would become the next Steinbrenner.
  6. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 Supporter Supporter

    #3 Jersey

    Uncapped != unlimited. Even Snyder only has so much money he can spend.
  7. Rob0729

    Rob0729 Supporter Supporter

    #12 Jersey

    You know what? The Red Sox have won this decade because of these advantages. No the Red Sox don't spend like the Yankees, but they spend significantly more than almost everyone else.

    If the Pats play by the rules, I don't care. Domed teams have an advantage over outdoor teams in terms of croud noise. Northern teams have an advantage in winter months with home games. Southern teams like Miami have an advantage in September in home games. East coast teams have advantage over west coast teams when the game is played in the East Coast.

    There are a lot advantages that teams have that are unfair, but within the boundary of the rules. I never got all the complaints about the Yankees anyway considering the Red Sox do the same thing as the Yankees just not as much to the extreme. Besides, the Mets have one of the highest payrolls every year and they never go anywhere.
  8. TheComeback

    TheComeback 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    What a bunch of BS. The Red Sox are the same way as the Yankees. If the Pats don't use every advantage they have to win, they don't deserve to.

    Frankly I don't see us making any major moves in the offseason. Kraft and Belichick have proven they are too cheap to spend the big bucks like Snyder or Jerry Jones. I think they'll continue to be frugal and hope they can re-build the team through the draft. I hope they get someone who has leadership ability, the kind of person who "knows what to do" in any given situation, because the defense really, really needs it.
  9. ctpatsfan77

    ctpatsfan77 Supporter Supporter

    #3 Jersey

    And what exactly have Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder actually accomplished with those big bucks?
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2009
  10. AƟƟynormal

    AƟƟynormal Supporter Supporter

    The reduction by 100 Million is enough for us to go wild. For example, we contract players with zero amortization. This could give us a five year advantage. I think, from reports over time, that most of Kraft's fortune is linked to this team, directly and indirectly. Re-investing 5-10% would seem to make sense.

    As for the Yankee analogy, too bad for KC and the other wittle bittle markets, "WE ARE SPARTA" and they're not. I'm not losing any sleep over a comparative advantage ........... that advantage guarantees nothing.
  11. Rob0729

    Rob0729 Supporter Supporter

    #12 Jersey

    First off, Belichick has very little say about the cap of how much the Pats would pay in a season. Kraft gives him a budget and Belichick uses it as he feels fit.

    Second, Kraft isn't afraid to spend money (see how much he gave Law, Seymour, Milloy, Bledsoe, and Brady over the years) and has hinted that he will spend money in an uncapped year. He has said an uncapped year benefits a major market, big money generator like the Patriots.

    The Pats don't spend because of the salary cap. They know there is only so much available with the cap and they are consistently near the top in payroll. The Pats with a cap choose not to pay too many top players top money, but they pay well up and down the roster. With no cap, they might go crazy.
  12. jmt57

    jmt57 Moderator Staff Member Supporter

    I think this is a whole lot bigger news for the small revenue teams than it is for the Pats, or potential big spenders like the Cowboys and Redskins.

    "Nine franchises qualified to receive funds this year, although the league has not identified them."

    In other words 23 teams contributed on average about $4 million each, while nine teams received on average about $11 million each. In the grand scheme of things $4 million is not all that much in the Pats' operating budget. However, for teams like Jacksonville and Buffalo, $11 million will be sorely missed.
  13. HarkDawg

    HarkDawg Banned

    do not be like that. ALL REAL competitors want some sort of an advantage.:)
  14. If it helps the Pats, great. However, I don't want NFL football to turn into the laughable joke that pro baseball is (unless you live in New York/Boston). It's why the NFL is so much fun for everyone and MLB is only fun for a few.
  15. mgteich

    mgteich Veteran Supporter

    This is about pressuring the union. They already filed an objection.
  16. Rob0729

    Rob0729 Supporter Supporter

    #12 Jersey

    I think I read that the Jags got between $15-20 million of the money this year. The reason why the NFLPA is starting to bend over backwards for the league is because they now know that teams like the Jags are going to dump payroll. Teams like the Jags may go the route of the really small market teams in MLB and carry $50 million and under payroll next year. For every Vince Wilfork who will make a ton, there will be a dozen Adalius Thomas' who will be cut because there will be no dead money and a won't get more than the veteran minimum to sign elsewhere.
  17. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- Supporter

    #24 Jersey

    I would think Kraft would want to be all about showing fiscal responsibility vs buying a Lombardi.
  18. Rob0729

    Rob0729 Supporter Supporter

    #12 Jersey

    Of course it is. But the NFLPA is already blinking and giving the league an advantage. There is a better than good chance there will be a new CBA come the beginning of the next NFL year, but if it doesn't happen this is an advantage for the Pats.
  19. mgteich

    mgteich Veteran Supporter

    There is no reason to believe that Kraft will spend any more money on players with or without a new CBA.

    I do agree that it is better than even money that there will be a new agreement and a 2010 salary cap (and a team minimum and revenue sharing). The players need to understand that in total the players would likely receive LESS money if there is no salary cap. Many teams would not spend the current minimum. In the absense of revenues sharing, some others would spend above the current minimum, but probably less than before. I'm sure some teams would spend more with no cap.

  20. Urgent

    Urgent In the Starting Line-Up

    #24 Jersey

    Another note based on this season:
    Under an uncapped year, no penalty to releasing players like Adalius Thomas.

    He has a $13mm unamortized signing bonus remaining (including 2009). But it is sunk money, already spent. Under an uncapped season, no cost to releasing him, and the team saves $5mm in 2010 and $6mm in 2011. That could be money better spent elsewhere.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page