Interesting tidbit on CBA negotiations.

[hwc]

From today's ESPN cap negotiations story:

Representatives of the NFL and the players union will resume talks Friday in New York on an collective bargaining extension, ESPN's Chris Mortensen reports. The one major issue to tackle, according to Mortensen's sources, is the formula that determines how the league counts player bonuses over the life of a contract. It's a term that both sides commonly refer to as "cash over cap." The sides are working on a formula that will satisfy lower-revenue clubs' concerns that traditionally clubs with larger revenue streams pay more in bonuses, yet find ways in which that extra cash doesn't violate salary-cap rules.

This is an interesting wrinkle. This suggests to me that the owners may be offering more total dollars in exchange for shorter pro-ration of bonuses. I can't imagine that Upshaw and the agents union he represents would be interested in this as it would tend to drive down the size of signing bonuses.

It would be good business for the owners (and really for the game itself) to drive money out of bonuses and into salary. The dead money hits of bonues is really a drain on the game.

 

[flutie2phelan]

This is an interesting wrinkle. This suggests to me that the owners may be offering more total dollars in exchange for shorter pro-ration of bonuses. I can't imagine that Upshaw and the agents union he represents would be interested in this as it would tend to drive down the size of signing bonuses.

It would be good business for the owners (and really for the game itself) to drive money out of bonuses and into salary. The dead money hits of bonues is really a drain on the game.

Excellent point u make on bonus vs salary.

But your phrase about Upshaw ... boy, does THAT have the ring of truth!

 

[hwc]

But your phrase about Upshaw ... boy, does THAT have the ring of truth!

I noticed that in the original CBA, the veteran minimum salaries increased percentage point for percentage point with each annual increase in the cap (up to a max of 10% per year). In the last CBA extension, Upshaw got rid of the this in favor of a specified table of vet minimum salaries with neglible increases over time. In other words, he screwed the rank and file members of the union in favor of shifting basically all future CBA increases to the big money players (and the agents who represent them).

I would much prefer to see the vet minimums increase dramatically at the expense of the marquee rookie and free agent players (and their agents) looking for the pot of bling at the end of the rainbow. This would benefit the majority of players and stabilize rosters. But, it's the last thing Upshaw and the agents union wants to see. Who needs agents if most of the salaries are slotted?

The problem is that most of the players are probably too dumb (and too misguided by their agents) to even understand the importance of the veteran minimum salary schedules.

 

[mgteich]

I guess 75% of the owners need to be satisfied, as well as the union. If they agree, the deal can be done. And the teams that are unsuccessful as business folks will eventually go out of business, and others take over. It is the way of the world. And BTW, there is NO WAY that players should allow this nonsense to happen. Signing bonuses and roster bonuses are their key weapon. Salary means little since it is not guaranteed.

And just BTW, small market should review to TV markets, since it is TV revenue that is the basis of a huge percentage of the revenue. If a team is in a small TV market they are adding little to the pot of revenue, no matte rhow much they charge for luxury boxes. And yes, Boston is a small market, with a very successful owner making his business work.

 

[hwc]

Boston is not a "small market". It's the fifth biggest TV market in the country, fourth if you add in Providence.

http://www.nielsenmedia.com/DMAs.html

Yes, guaranteed bonuses are good for the marquee players (and the agents that Upshaw represents). However, the rank and file players don't see these bonuses to any large degree. You could accomplish exactly the same thing by guaranteeing the first two or three years of a contract and/or by signficantly increasing the vet minimums.

IMO, the seven year bonus proration is a net negative for the league. The heavy backloading of the contracts as a cap dodge causes a lot of problems for the teams and the fans.

 

[MagicMarker]

The way around that is to just guarantee a portion of salary, which is not unheard of now. Phifer had parts of his salary guaranteed as part of his last deal. The total guaranteed money can stay the same.

The player should still get the same money, is just might stop the big up front cost like the $39 million ,or whatever it was, that Manning got. And, allow less cash-rich players to stay in the bidding.

 

[fgssand]

Boston is not a "small market". It's the fifth biggest TV market in the country, fourth if you add in Providence.

http://www.nielsenmedia.com/DMAs.html

Yes, guaranteed bonuses are good for the marquee players (and the agents that Upshaw represents). However, the rank and file players don't see these bonuses to any large degree. You could accomplish exactly the same thing by guaranteeing the first two or three years of a contract and/or by signficantly increasing the vet minimums.

IMO, the seven year bonus proration is a net negative for the league. The heavy backloading of the contracts as a cap dodge causes a lot of problems for the teams and the fans.

Also, the Boston / Providence TV market is the #1 AFC market - even larger than NY which is predominatley Giant country.

 

[fgssand]

Details on the final issue - "cash over cap" Very interesting to note that the have not owners seem to be winning here.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=2352890

 

[flutie2phelan]

Details on the final issue - "cash over cap" Very interesting to note that the have not owners seem to be winning here.

Cash Over Cap, however ... can be cured simply
by agreed changes to the league's accountancy rules.
Does not require redistribution of earnings!