Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Deus Irae, Mar 9, 2011.
Per Jason Cole of Yahoo!:
Sources: Agreement reached on rookie scale - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
If the negotiation extensions were promising enough, both sides agreeing on the rookie pay scale could only develop into a foundation for a happy ending. I've been growing more and more concerned on how hard the NFLPA wanted to push for more financial documents.
One thing to note about the final agreement: first-round deals would be limited to four years, and all subsequent rounds would be limited to three yearsâ€”but all such players would be subject to restricted free agent tags. I'm guessing that it wouldn't really be a vast difference from the current system, and that the RFA tenders would effectively replace the escalator clauses found in most rookie deals (that is, instead of saying, "OK, if you play 50% of the snaps your first three seasons, we'll give you an extra $500K in year four," teams would be able to look back and decide what was appropriate for them).
i think this is the only thing they can agree on, still are ways away from the actual cba getting done... espically after today..
One possibility is that they sign an agreement, as an ammendment to the last CBA regarding the pay scale so the pay scale can be effective during this year's draft.
That way if there is no agreement when the 2010-2011 contract year is allowed to end, the draft would be in place including a rookie pay scale.
Otherwise, even with a CBA in May or June, the rookie pay scale would be delayed unit 2012, something no one wants.
There is nothing else that needs to agreed to immediately.
The result of this would be that there would be the lockout, the de-certification and a delay of a couple of months.
Obviously, it would be better to have a complete agrement, but that may not be possible.
The reports of an agreement may be premature. That said mg, when are you going to come to grips with the fact that they don't need to agree on that piece before the draft as long as it is part of a new CBA. Absent one the rookies will either be locked out with the veterans until a new deal is done or working under owners work rules as the result of decertification and an injunction against a lockout...
In the absence of a CBA, are teams allowed to sign rookies?
There seems to be agreement that the draft can go forward and teams would own the rights, but cannot sign udfa's. Can teams sign their own picks?
No and No. Which is why it doesn't matter if the CBA gets done now or in May as far as the rookie pay scale is concerned.
Some funny tweets out there tonight. Rosenhaus is like the proverbial cat on a hot tin roof. Wants to know how much more the union can be expected to give up if the rookie wage scale has been agreed to... Apparently no one told Drew the money won't be going to the owners in anyone's plan. It will be going to either active or retired players in some form or another... An agent on his level can't be as dumb as he's projecting, so it must be for effect... Trying to rally the fans.
Come to grips, call it what you want.
I do not believe that the new CBA will call for changing the conditions of the current draft which takes place under the old CBA without a rookie pay scale in place UNLESS the new CBA is signed beofre the draft. While I understand that a CBA signed in May could try to backdate that condition (since contracts won't have been signed), I don't think that this would happen. It is simply poor contrct protocol. I've been part of lots of contract negotiations in my life, and have viewed lots more contracts. That just isn't the way contracts are written. Both the NFLPA and the owners want a rookie cap, and they both want to avoid an immediate law suit. If there no agreement until May, then I predict the rookie sclae will start in 2012.
I cannot make a personal guarantee since I am not an attorney representing anyone. HOWEVER, if the CBA is signed after the draft and there is a rookie pay scale applying to an event before the signing (the 2011 draft), I suggest that representatives of those drafted in the top ten of the draft would and SHOULD sue. After all, tens of million of dollars would be at stake.
I dont understand.
When the CBA is agreed to, assuming it is after the draft, it will include rules for the 2011 season and beyond.
Those players are not part of the union until they sign, so the expired CBA would have nothing to do with them. I guess you could argue the draft takes place under the old CBA, but the old CBA ends there, and does not address rookie salaries in 2011. As I see it they HAVE to address 2011 rookie pay in the new CBA and start the new plan this year, because the old doesnt address what the 2011 rookies pay scale would be.
Players would be drafted under the old CBA, and with no new rules. It is really that simple.
An agreement signed after this draft should affect future drafts, not the 2011 draft.
This is an argument that would be made by those who would lose tens of millions by a contract signed after the fact.
The players could win or lose. But the argument will be made, in court.
I DO NOT believe that the owners and players would take this risk.
Assuming there is no new CBA before the draft then it is quite likely the new rules will not take effect until 2012.
That said, the only "aggrieved" players would be the juniors who declared early.
I think you are wrong. The current CBA calls for a draft, but does not call for rules for pay scales for those players. You are infering that one means the other, but they are different issues.
You are suggesting that players drafted in 2011 should have a pay scale based on 2010 rules? There are no 2011 rules, so you must wait until they set them.
No, they wouldn't be. The old CBA allowed for their to BE a draft. It ended prior to it and made no stipulation as to what the players drafted would be entitled to...beyond within the context of a league they don't have to choose to play for their rights would be the property of the teams who drafted them. Those teams will not even be allowed to talk to them once they are selected. They are not presently members of the union that agreed to that stipulation as part of an expiring CBA, although they have chosen to take part in the exercise under terms previously agreed to and they won't be members of the union until a new CBA is entered into or signing contracts or playing unless there is an NFL to play for in 2011 which will either be operating under a new or amended CBA or under workplace rules implemented by owners possibly forced by injunction to either operate as 32 seperate entities with no revenue sharing or collective rules or as a collective operating in violation of anti trust laws.
Everybody in North America seems to realize this except you. If a new CBA is agreed upon in July or September rookies will be treated according to it's terms - as will FA and existing players - and they won't have the ability to sue because the CBA their NFLPA entered into precludes that. They do however have the right to walk away...and persue some career other than as an NFL player.
I just want them to play football!
Im scared of there being no season....
I think this is the part that seems to be confusing some people. As far as I realize, there currently is not a CBA in place right now. Is that true? From what I understand, the CBA expired as of the start of the league year, which was last week. Just because they agreed to extend the discussions, does not mean that they are still operating under the old CBA, hence a rush of deals that took place before it ended last Thursday at midnight (ex: Marcus Stroud). This is why there is no free agency, because there is no CBA. Am I correct in this assessment?
If that is the case, then I would have to agree with you wholeheartedly regarding the future rookie cap rules. This years draft class would either be operating under the NEW CBA which would include the new rookie cap rules, or rules, as you said, that would be in place in case of decertification. Regardless, it certainly seems as though there is no way that any rookie cap rules would resort backwards in time, to an old expired CBA that ended on March 3rd or 4th--especially considering the fact that the new draft picks would have had absolutely nothing to do with the old, prior deal.
To me, it seems pretty cut and dry, but I am not pretending to be an expert either. Maybe you could tell me if I am on the right track, because it seems rather simple. So simple, that I am afraid I am missing something. Lol.
well can you say litigation and lawsuit boys and girls.. or how bout decertify... That looks like the rout we are heading...
Separate names with a comma.