Uncapped Year FAQ

[Nonentity]

The National Football Post released the league's guide to the CBA issues today. Looks helpful although not that comprehensive.

 

[ayjackson]

Good catch. I didn't read that section closely enough today. Would seem to keep teams from dumping salary in an uncapped year without penalty.

It still provides some relief of spreading the dead money hit out over the contract rather than accelerating it into one year. Which can be attractive in maybe a few situations.

I'm thinking a guy like Roy Williams who was just re-signed and basically sucks. Outside of the final capped year, his dead money would be accelerated into the year he was cut or traded, which would make cutting him one year into his contract unthinkable. But spreading the dead money over three or four years and saving future salary as well, might make it amenable.

Having said that, I have no idea what Roy Williams' contract was like.

 

[Pessimistic Pete]

So if it\'s an uncapped year, who exactly will be a free agent that the Patriots can get?

 

[Miguel]

So if it\'s an uncapped year, who exactly will be a free agent that the Patriots can get?

Everyone who is an UFA, RFAs, and players released by their team.

 

[jmt57]

In the first couple pages of this thread there were some comments made about rules preventing teams from dumping contracts in the uncapped year, and those salaries being amortized to 2011, 2012, etc.

How can that be if the CBA expires at the end of February 2011? In other words, how can a rule be put in to place to take effect after the contract expires? From what I read in the links there was talk about free agents, but unless I missed something I didn't see anything about cap numbers going in to those years. Besides, nobody even knows for sure that there will even be a cap at that point in time.

Can someone explain, or am I completely overlooking something?

 

[pats1]

In the first couple pages of this thread there were some comments made about rules preventing teams from dumping contracts in the uncapped year, and those salaries being amortized to 2011, 2012, etc.

How can that be if the CBA expires at the end of February 2011? In other words, how can a rule be put in to place to take effect after the contract expires? From what I read in the links there was talk about free agents, but unless I missed something I didn't see anything about cap numbers going in to those years. Besides, nobody even knows for sure that there will even be a cap at that point in time.

Can someone explain, or am I completely overlooking something?

It's no different than unamortized bonus money counting against the cap even after a player is released. Before June 1, that acceleration stays on the cap even though the player is no longer after contract. After June 1, that acceleration gets spread over two years.

Those are the capped season rules (except for the final capped season, i.e. 2009). The 2010 uncapped rules just extend keep those bonus amortizations where they are. But in either case, they are applying rules after the contract expires. Nothing has changed in that respect.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

In the first couple pages of this thread there were some comments made about rules preventing teams from dumping contracts in the uncapped year, and those salaries being amortized to 2011, 2012, etc.

How can that be if the CBA expires at the end of February 2011? In other words, how can a rule be put in to place to take effect after the contract expires? From what I read in the links there was talk about free agents, but unless I missed something I didn't see anything about cap numbers going in to those years. Besides, nobody even knows for sure that there will even be a cap at that point in time.

Can someone explain, or am I completely overlooking something?

Same way this CBA can stipulate there will be a 2011 draft after it expires. And these rules don't "take effect" after it expires, they simply continue to effect it after it expires because those terms were agreed upon by the owners and the NFLPA as part of an agreement (on how to operate under an expiring CBA). When they eliminated acceleration of amortized dead cap they reaffirmed that once amortized money cannot be moved, ergo it remains where it was initially placed. That placing is merely a bookeeping tool, and as such if they return to a capped system in 2011 or later they won't wipe out the books but merely pick them up where they left off - because for all the union bluster about never returning to a capped system, owners won't return without one.

There was an interesting piece up yesterday on a potential alternative to a lockout in 2011. It was written by an agent who wanted to be commissioner this last time out. He stated that IHO there would not be a lockout but rather the union would decertify as it did back in the late 80's and take it's case to court where it won concessions over a period of years that led to FA as we know it. In that event, the league would continue to operate but under the terms of the last CBA offered by ownership prior to decertification (i.e the owners would have developed the rules and those would be what the league and players would be bound by for the duration (until/unless the courts ruled otherwise or one side of the other gave up their case). Of course that is a very risky strategy for both sides as the league could end up losing it's anti trust expemption or being forced to agree to concepts it can't tolerate in the process but a generation of players could also end up playing absent a union for upwards of 5 years...and in the end gain little beyond marginal tweeking of FA rules going forward if anything.

I don't see that as a viable alternative for either side, although initially it would appear to favor management as they can continue to operate under terms they favor (although the union likely would spin itself as winning as their former members continue to get paychecks...while they rattle their anti trust sabre through the court system). The winners in this would supposedly be the fans who would not be exposed to a work stoppage and the sides who would both avoid blame for inflicting that on us...and the lawyers who would be on bazillion dollar retainers for the next half decade hashing their merry way through arguments from federal court to appeals court to the supreme court if they're lucky...


The league will always operate under a set of rules, whether those are collectively bargained or not. Otherwise it won't operate (i.e. a lockout). Even MLB, absent a hard cap, has rules.

 

[jmt57]

Thank you pats1 and MoLewisrocks for your explanations. Not to be a pain the butt, but after perusing the CBA - http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/cba/nfl-cba-2006-2012.pdf - with apologies to cap czar Adam and you two, I'm still not seeing where the concept that teams will be prevented from dumping salaries is spelled out.

To save you or anyone else that cares to look time, jump to page 102 (Section 7. Valuation of Player Contracts), or more specifically page 104 (Acceleration) of that pdf. I'm only seeing wording that relates to the final capped year, and nothing that relates to the uncapped year in terms of this topic.

Unless I'm missing something, I do believe that there is nothing to prevent teams from dumping salaries in the uncapped year that wish to do so, and the statement about salaries of soon to be cut players being prorated into future (i.e., 2011, 2012, etc.) years is incorrect.

 

[pats1]

Thank you pats1 and MoLewisrocks for your explanations. Not to be a pain the butt, but after perusing the CBA - http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/cba/nfl-cba-2006-2012.pdf - with apologies to cap czar Adam and you two, I'm still not seeing where the concept that teams will be prevented from dumping salaries is spelled out.

To save you or anyone else that cares to look time, jump to page 102 (Section 7. Valuation of Player Contracts), or more specifically page 104 (Acceleration) of that pdf. I'm only seeing wording that relates to the final capped year, and nothing that relates to the uncapped year in terms of this topic.

Unless I'm missing something, I do believe that there is nothing to prevent teams from dumping salaries in the uncapped year that wish to do so, and the statement about salaries of soon to be cut players being prorated into future (i.e., 2011, 2012, etc.) years is incorrect.

See the 12th post in this thread, by Miguel.

 

[jmt57]

See the 12th post in this thread, by Miguel.

I have re-read that post by Miguel (I assume you meant post 20) as well as that portion of the CBA. All I am seeing is references to what is accelerated in the final capped year (2009), and the year prior to that (2008) - but that's not what we are talking about here. I'm still not seeing anything in the CBA that says those cap numbers get carried forward (to 2011 and beyond) following 2009.

In other words, it looks to me that teams could cut players this offseason with nothing on the books for 2010 (since it will be an uncaped year) and also nothing on the books for 2011 and beyond (since it would have all hit the books in 2010.) Maybe I'm wrong, but that's my interpetation of what I am reading.

Now I'm not going to pretend I know the cap or CBA better than people like Miguel or Adam but I just don't see anywhere in the CBA where salaries would be carried forward for cap purposes into future years for players that are cut this offseason.

 

[Metaphors]

I have re-read that post by Miguel (I assume you meant post 20) as well as that portion of the CBA. All I am seeing is references to what is accelerated in the final capped year (2009), and the year prior to that (2008) - but that's not what we are talking about here. I'm still not seeing anything in the CBA that says those cap numbers get carried forward (to 2011 and beyond) following 2009.

In other words, it looks to me that teams could cut players this offseason with nothing on the books for 2010 (since it will be an uncaped year) and also nothing on the books for 2011 and beyond (since it would have all hit the books in 2010.) Maybe I'm wrong, but that's my interpetation of what I am reading.

Now I'm not going to pretend I know the cap or CBA better than people like Miguel or Adam but I just don't see anywhere in the CBA where salaries would be carried forward for cap purposes into future years for players that are cut this offseason.

I think it is legalese. "Any League year" implicitly refers to 2011, 2012, 2176, etc. "Except for the final capped year" implicitly includes every year into the future.

Really doesn't matter much since the next CBA will have rules that either explicitly codify these implicit rules or change them. The only importance to the bonus acceleration wording is that it hints that unless you want to count on the next CBA having no cap or changing the acceleration rules, don't expect the cuts in 2010 to completely disappear off the books.

 

[pats1]

I have re-read that post by Miguel (I assume you meant post 20) as well as that portion of the CBA. All I am seeing is references to what is accelerated in the final capped year (2009), and the year prior to that (2008) - but that's not what we are talking about here. I'm still not seeing anything in the CBA that says those cap numbers get carried forward (to 2011 and beyond) following 2009.

The implication, if you read Miguel's conclusion, is that players cut during the uncapped year (2010), the year after the Final Capped Year, do not have any language in that part of that section, therefore that acceleration does not apply to them. This is not, as you described above, a clause being executed in a post-Final League Year year (i.e. 2011). This is something that is being done in 2010, under a CBA.

These cap numbers are not being "carried forward." They are simply staying where they are, i.e. Thomas' signing bonus hits would stay in 2010 and 2011. There is simply no acceleration taking place, therefore there is no need to explicitly lay that out in the wording.

In other words, it looks to me that teams could cut players this offseason with nothing on the books for 2010 (since it will be an uncaped year) and also nothing on the books for 2011 and beyond (since it would have all hit the books in 2010.) Maybe I'm wrong, but that's my interpetation of what I am reading.

I'm not following you. I don't see where you're getting "since it would have all hit the books in 2010."

Now I'm not going to pretend I know the cap or CBA better than people like Miguel or Adam but I just don't see anywhere in the CBA where salaries would be carried forward for cap purposes into future years for players that are cut this offseason.

The salaries are not being carried forward at all. Once you release a player, his salaries disappear from your current and future cap numbers. The only thing that remains is the signing bonus (or option bonus) prorations from previously earned bonuses. If you cut Player X in 2010, he may have $4M of signing bonus left on his 2010 cap number, 2011 cap number, and 2012 cap number.

If he is released in an uncapped year (2010), then those prorations simply stay where they are, per AdamJT13 and Miguel. But if he was released in 2008 and had $4M in bonus amortization in 2008 and 2009 (and 2010, 2011, 2012), then the June 1/June 2 rules would come into play. Before June 1, and the future bonus money ($4M x 4 = $16M, 2009-2012) accelerates in the current year (2008), giving you a cap hit of $4M + $16M = $20M. After June 2 and the acceleration only goes into the next year, so it would be $4M in 2008 and $16M in 2009.

 

[Fencer]

I haven't read this thread, so please feel free to just point me at prior posts, but:

Did they write the rule to more or less pro-rate the big bonus in the following scenario?

2010: $20 million bonus, vet minimum salary
2011-15, annually: $2 million roster bonus, vet minimum salary

 

[pats1]

I haven't read this thread, so please feel free to just point me at prior posts, but:

Did they write the rule to more or less pro-rate the big bonus in the following scenario?

2010: $20 million bonus, vet minimum salary
2011-15, annually: $2 million roster bonus, vet minimum salary

Specify "bonus" in 2010. Do you mean a signing bonus? In that case, it's automatically pro-rated. If you mean roster bonus, then there is a rule that prevents a >50% decrease in the cap number from one year to the next; so the difference over 50% would be treated as signing bonus and pro-rated.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Specify "bonus" in 2010. Do you mean a signing bonus? In that case, it's automatically pro-rated. If you mean roster bonus, then there is a rule that prevents a >50% decrease in the cap number from one year to the next; so the difference over 50% would be treated as signing bonus and pro-rated.

Assuming, of course, that the NFL and NFLPA did not agree to grandfather an exception in the new CBA. For example, they could, in theory, completely exempt 2010 signing bonuses from ever counting against any cap. [I don't think the owners would agree to that amongst themselves, though.]

And remember that the rule you cited states that if the salary drop is more than 50% of the first-year salary, the entire difference between first and second year salaries is treated as a signing bonus.

 

[pats1]

Assuming, of course, that the NFL and NFLPA did not agree to grandfather an exception in the new CBA. For example, they could, in theory, completely exempt 2010 signing bonuses from ever counting against any cap. [I don't think the owners would agree to that amongst themselves, though.]

And remember that the rule you cited states that if the salary drop is more than 50% of the first-year salary, the entire difference between first and second year salaries is treated as a signing bonus.

Thanks for the reminder. How much we forget in one month...

 

[Fencer]

there is a rule that prevents a >50% decrease in the cap number from one year to the next; so the difference over 50% would be treated as signing bonus and pro-rated.

OK, that makes sense, as do the comments about grandfathering. Thanks!

But $32 million, $16 million, $8 million, $4 million, $2 million paid in sequence over 5 years would seem like a way to give a player >$12 million per year with an average cap hit of $7.5 million in capped years.

 

[spacecrime]

OK, that makes sense, as do the comments about grandfathering. Thanks!

But $32 million, $16 million, $8 million, $4 million, $2 million paid in sequence over 5 years would seem like a way to give a player >$12 million per year with an average cap hit of $7.5 million in capped years.

Wow. If I paid a player $48 mil over the first two years of his contract, I'd be afraid to let him on the field!

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Wow. If I paid a player $48 mil over the first two years of his contract, I'd be afraid to let him on the field!

No kidding...Not to mention I'd be terrified of what if anything I'd get in those last 2 years when the $56M he's already pocketed in the first 3 is long forgotten and all he wants to talk about is the lousy $6M in remaining salary being an insult for a player at his level... Nothing to stop him from demanding a new deal with a new chunk of front money or a trade to someone who will give him that or simply walking away at that point and no recourse because none of it is recoverable as close to $13M of a signing bonus would be.

About the only guys on the planet you get away with trusting on that kind of deal structure are HOF lock QB's like TFB and PM, although the total value is about $20M shy of where theirs needs to be. And still the risk of career ending injury becomes potentially devastating. How many contracts structured like that can any franchise afford to be operating under... Whereas injury risk aside, giving that deal to a 325 lb. (or so...) NT on the eve of a potential lockout or even a freakishly talented DE to OLB conversion project with questionable drive where football is concerned would be just asking for trouble.

 

[jmt57]

OK, that makes sense, as do the comments about grandfathering. Thanks!

But $32 million, $16 million, $8 million, $4 million, $2 million paid in sequence over 5 years would seem like a way to give a player >$12 million per year with an average cap hit of $7.5 million in capped years.

Wow. If I paid a player $48 mil over the first two years of his contract, I'd be afraid to let him on the field!

No kidding...Not to mention I'd be terrified of what if anything I'd get in those last 2 years when the $56M he's already pocketed in the first 3 is long forgotten and all he wants to talk about is the lousy $6M in remaining salary being an insult for a player at his level... Nothing to stop him from demanding a new deal with a new chunk of front money or a trade to someone who will give him that or simply walking away at that point and no recourse because none of it is recoverable as close to $13M of a signing bonus would be.

About the only guys on the planet you get away with trusting on that kind of deal structure are HOF lock QB's like TFB and PM, although the total value is about $20M shy of where theirs needs to be. And still the risk of career ending injury becomes potentially devastating. How many contracts structured like that can any franchise afford to be operating under... Whereas injury risk aside, giving that deal to a 325 lb. (or so...) NT on the eve of a potential lockout or even a freakishly talented DE to OLB conversion project with questionable drive where football is concerned would be just asking for trouble.

If I'm not mistaken that's the kind of contract Drew Rosenhaus had a habit of negotiating for his clients - and then sure enough he and the player were demanding to have the contract renegotiated with a year or two to go. I'm guessing most of the owners have wised up and don't go for these type of contracts any longer.