Uncapped year article and beyond

[Willie55]

Not sure if something like this has been posted yet as I haven't really followed the comings and goings of the CBA up until now. But now that the season is over I'll probably start reading up on it more.


Newsroom

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Didn't want to start another thread, but this article over on NFP sheds some more insight on what the new landscape the Patriots are approaching conservatively may look like. Lower caps and small increases going forward. Teams who spend freely or have over the last couple of seasons anticipating the cap would continue to expand sufficiently could well end up in the kind of crunch/hell Tennessee was in several years ago. And that's true if owners just get half of what they are seeking.

Owners seek double-digit cut in player salaries | National Football Post

Also think what Condon said about the number of competing teams being severely limited by design or choice doesn't bode well for a guy like Vince hoping to parlay his body of work into a lucrative long term deal any time soon... As teams assess need they may find themselves choosing between adding A big time FA or several mid range guys, some of whom may be available as floorless or capless casualties. And while Vince can spin it any way he chooses, it would be worse to be a RFA...at least he's a franchise tag candidate.

 

[mgteich]

From 2005 to 2009, the cap went from $80M to $128M. That kind of increase is not sustainable.

 

[Rob0729]

From 2005 to 2009, the cap went from $80M to $128M. That kind of increase is not sustainable.

Yeah, I agree. The thing is even if the owners win a cap growth halt and not a retraction over the next few years, there are a lot of teams that will be screwed by this whether it is by making massive cuts or not being able to retain their best players. You got guys like Felger blasting the Pats for talking about how the cap is irrelevant, but if the owners get half of what they are asking for the cap becomes a harsh reality for a lot of teams.

 

[Willie55]

Didn't want to start another thread, but this article over on NFP sheds some more insight on what the new landscape the Patriots are approaching conservatively may look like. Lower caps and small increases going forward. Teams who spend freely or have over the last couple of seasons anticipating the cap would continue to expand sufficiently could well end up in the kind of crunch/hell Tennessee was in several years ago. And that's true if owners just get half of what they are seeking.

Owners seek double-digit cut in player salaries | National Football Post

Also think what Condon said about the number of competing teams being severely limited by design or choice doesn't bode well for a guy like Vince hoping to parlay his body of work into a lucrative long term deal any time soon... As teams assess need they may find themselves choosing between adding A big time FA or several mid range guys, some of whom may be available as floorless or capless casualties. And while Vince can spin it any way he chooses, it would be worse to be a RFA...at least he's a franchise tag candidate.

I wonder if the Pats would write into, and wonder if Wilfork would accept, language in his contract that says he gets a certain percentage of the salary cap for that year.

 

[Rob0729]

I wonder if the Pats would write into, and wonder if Wilfork would accept, language in his contract that says he gets a certain percentage of the salary cap for that year.

I don't think that if he even was willing to do something like that, that it would pass the rules of the current CBA. It would be rejected by the league.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

From 2005 to 2009, the cap went from $80M to $128M. That kind of increase is not sustainable.

the rate of increase is tied to the rate of increase in league-wide revenues.....the cap went up in proportion to the league revenues.

 

[mgteich]

I understand how the cap went up. This system is now irrelevant since teams are having trouble spending the minimum without charity from the successful owners.

It the next year and half, the owners and players need to figure out how to build a system that works better for all. My suspicion is that there will be games missed and teams relocated to larger markets. I don't see total player compensation going down much, but the increases will stop. The players need more money in benefits and retirement, and also need shorter rookie contracts.

IMO, it is the teams in poor markets (and their fans) that have brought us to where we are. These teams take welfare payments from the other owners as well tax breaks and stadium monies from the league and local taxpayers. We all need a league where teams are successful.

the rate of increase is tied to the rate of increase in league-wide revenues.....the cap went up in proportion to the league revenues.

 

[DaBruinz]

the rate of increase is tied to the rate of increase in league-wide revenues.....the cap went up in proportion to the league revenues.

The cap went up in proportion to them including a lot more revenue streams in the figuring.

I said the league gave up too much back then when it didn't insist on the top level being 59.5% of the total revenue.

 

[Miguel]

This system is now irrelevant since teams are having trouble spending the minimum without charity from the successful owners.

Please prove the latter part of your sentence.