Waiting for a ruling...why top draft picks have not signed; issues regarding

[Pats726]

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/07/16/agents-teams-await-special-master-ruling/

Interesting in light of the fact that so few top picks have signed..a week or so before camps open.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I guess the union should have thought about that before they signed off on these expiring CBA provisions... Maybe that is why Upshaw and Mawae weren't invited to the last meeting.

There were similar cries the last time poison pill provisions made it impossible to do what had always been done with (for example) Manning and Harrison's bonus money - prorate it into the future. How that happened with Condon in the mix is beyond me since he is supposedly THE contract and cap genius of all time and Upshaw's agent to boot~ In that case I believe Polian appealed and the special master agreed with the executive committee's interpretation of the rules and Polian then threatened to take the NFL to court he was so miffed. But in the end he had to get Marvin and Peyton to agree to actually forego bonus money or he would have had to make deep roster cuts to accommodate their cap hits. Unfortunately Jonathan then brokered the worthless deal that landed us in this same mess just two years later but after Indy off the hook since a new CBA was signed.

This is the reason Atlanta overpaid for their rookie QB - just to get him signed before 4PM on the day the owners voted to opt out. They knew contract structure was not going to allow for the guaranteed money top rookies demand or much signing bonus proration, and they wanted him in camp and not holding out. I believe his agent is also Condon - you'd a thought he would have given his union president client better advice and counsel...LOL

The special master should come to the same conclusion that he did last time - tough noogies.

 

[midwestpatsfan]

Should we start getting concerned about the rookies?

I know that the first round pick usually does not sign until a day or 2 before camp starts, but the Patriots have not signed anyone higher than Slater, who was the 5th round pick.

Also, it seems like quite a few of the 1st rounders have signed, both before and after Mayo, so you would think that it would not be too hard to get him signed on time or early.

Has anyone heard anything about negotiations with rookies. I cannot think of a time that the patriots didn't have all their non-first rounders in camp on time, and even the 1st rounders are few and far between when it comes to getting to camp late.

Here is to hoping I am just freaking out because football is so close.

 

[Miguel]

But in the end he had to get Marvin and Peyton to agree to actually forego bonus money or he would have had to make deep roster cuts to accommodate their cap hits.

Please provide a link because that is not the way I recall what happened.

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/...name=manning&player=1448&loc=interstitialskip

If Peyton and Marvin forego bonus money as you contend, please tell us the approximate amount and for what years.

I remember that the Redskins would have had serious problems if the CBA was not extended.

 

[Miguel]

Re: Should we start getting concerned about the rookies?

My answer is no. Start worrying on the 24th, not on the 16th

 

[Pats726]

I tend to agree...it is interesting about this ruling and how it will have an effect MORE on the second rounders...but..all teams have this problem...and I am sure that if the draftees are not signed...others will be brought in so the roster will be 80...not a worry at all.

 

[mgteich]

Not to worry. The union has a good point and is trying to protect its members.

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2008/07/16/agents-teams-await-special-master-ruling/

Interesting in light of the fact that so few top picks have signed..a week or so before camps open.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Please provide a link because that is not the way I recall what happened.

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/...name=manning&player=1448&loc=interstitialskip

If Peyton and Marvin forego bonus money as you contend, please tell us the approximate amount and for what years.

I remember that the Redskins would have had serious problems if the CBA was not extended.

This article in the Washington Post covers the run up to the incident I noted. It was written right after Burbank ruled. In the days that followed Polian threatened to sue the league before he and Condon hammered out new deals that would allow the Colts to get back under the cap if the CBA were not extended. Those deals resulted in Manning and Harrison agreeing to forego their 2006 roster bonuses although there was some language that would have eventually seen them recoup the money as I recall.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/02/02/BL2006020200779_pf.html

When Burbank ruled against them it put the Colts $6M over the 2006 cap. They were allowed to restructure the contracts of Manning and Harrison and hold those in abeyance pending the clock ticking down on the CBA. When the compromise was reached and a new CBA agreed to those restructures were torn up because the roster bonuses could again be prorated. I distinctly recall we spoke of it here...

 

[Miguel]

This article in the Washington Post covers the run up to the incident I noted. It was written right after Burbank ruled.
In the days that followed Polian threatened to sue the league

I am not disagreeing about this.

before he and Condon hammered out new deals that would allow the Colts to get back under the cap if the CBA were not extended. Those deals resulted in Manning and Harrison agreeing to forego their 2006 roster bonuses although there was some language that would have eventually seen them recoup the money as I recall. When Burbank ruled against them it put the Colts $6M over the 2006 cap. They were allowed to restructure the contracts of Manning and Harrison and hold those in abeyance pending the clock ticking down on the CBA.

The above is the part I do not believe what happened. I do not believe for a second that teams would be allowed to hold contracts in abeyance.

When the compromise was reached and a new CBA agreed to those restructures were torn up because the roster bonuses could again be prorated. I distinctly recall we spoke of it here...

On March 6th Mike Chappell, of the Indianapolis Star, reports the Indianapolis Colts restructured the contract of WR Marvin Harrison, creating about $7.5 million in salary cap relief. His $14.4 million cap hit is now down to about $6.9 million. On March 8th the NFLPA and the owners reached a deal. Are you saying that there are postings on this forum that Manning signed a contract in which he gave up $9 million in roster bonus money??

http://blogs.indystar.com/coltsinsider/archives/2006/03/

QUESTION: Now that the Colts have restructured the contracts of Peyton Manning and Marvin Harrison, do they have enough cap space to keep Edgerrin James?
-- from Decoby Askew, Indianapolis
ANSWER: It all comes down to whether the team believes James is worth the investment. If the answer is yes, the Colts will find a way to make it work. If the answer is no, he's gone and the team will be looking for a replacement. A lot hinges on whether the NFL and players union reach common ground on an extension to the labor agreement. An extension will bump the current salary cap of $94.5 million by nearly $10 million.

This is what I believed happened.
1.) The special master ruling.
2.) The Colts complained about losing the ruling.
3.) A couple of days later and before March 6th the Colts find a way to convert the roster bonuses into signing bonuses.
4.) The CBA is extended on March 8th.

Here's where we disagree - At that time of the roster bonuses conversion there was no agreement to extend the CBA so all contracts submitted had to be in compliance with the rules in effect on that day. You contend that the Colts were allowed to submit contracts that were contigent on a CBA extension. I do not believe that was true.