According to New York Times NFL journalist Judy Batista, the NFLPA made a last ditch move in the face of the upcoming uncapped year.
the N.F.L. Players Association made a public plea Tuesday for last-ditch negotiations with team owners and renewed a proposal for a one-year extension of the current salary cap, which owners have already rejected. In a statement on its Web site that it also announced on Twitter, the union also offered to negotiate a longer extension if the N.F.L. guarantees that the cap will not go down.
Owners opted out of the deal two years ago, and have shown no interest in revisiting it. Negotiations toward a new deal have gone nowhere, leaving players to face the uncertainty of a season without a salary cap – which they no longer view as a potential windfall – and without a salary floor.
Rather than opine in this space, I’m more curious to hear what you readers think about this move by the NFLPA.
Too little, too late, Unemployment is @ 10% and this “Union” wants a guarantee that the cap will not be lowered?
How about approaching the Owners and saying “lower the cap x% for 2010 and put in clauses tied to the CPI that raise it each year, and that rookies make the league minimum regardless of where they are drafted.” This way the bulk of the $ is going to players who have proved they can play in this league.
The more this goes on ..the more it looks like a work stoppage .. The Union is going to fight a rookie cap (why by the way ??- it is a must!) .. there many issues – try the HGH drug testing now – that is rearing its ugly head ..
no salary floor ..wow …
While it’s not technically collusion, I think that salaries may actually go down this year with owners citing the bad economy and crying poor. Otherwise, there’s no reason why the two sides shouldn’t just extend the current agreement while they hammer out a new one.
Funny… I heard on the NFL Network that the owners asked the players union for an extention of the cap for an additional year 2 days ago… and the player union said no?
Strange
This is a joke. The NFL is a multi-billion dollar operation and your telling me there ain’t enough money to go around so everyone’s happy? Selfish owners, selfish players and the only ones who will end up suffering are the fans a football players who are over the hill and looking to cash out next season.
I could care less about the owners and the players, they are millionaires fighting over pennies. I’ll watch the CFL and college footballl for my Sunday fix.
Not good. But in the end they’ll work something out. Its not midnight until next year around this time. That said: hockey was really losing money, and they seemed to have bounced back OK. But look at baseball. The sport never fully covered after the last strike. I would hope Jerry jones and the other smart owners in the NFL would try and avoid a work stoppage at all costs. (Note: I hate the Cowboys, but Jones is good owner in my opinion.)
This does raise a hypothetical situation. If an eleventh hour deal is struck to extend the current agreement, the Jets would have had no other option than to cut TJ for cap relief. Right now, waiting until the 5th to release him is prudent from the Jets point of view, as Jones’s options would undoubtedly decrease going from an uncapped to a capped year, and perhaps a restructure would be agreed to by the 9th, when his roster bonus would be due. Again, all hypothetical (but else is there to talk about until then?)
Many teams are going to behave as if there’s a cap anyway. Other than that, there will probably be fewer teams that spend more than usual than teams that cut back because there is no minimum spend. The players are realizing that the uncapped year is not as good as they thought it might be. A select few will be overpaid and maybe some guys will benefit by getting more money up front, but I think teams are going to operate as cheaply as possible, so a lot of players will find themselves earning a lot less than they expected if they want to stay in the league.
I’m not surprised they aren’t going to throw a spanner in the works at the last minute because that would mess up a few teams’ plans (although there is still time).
While I feel there should be some type of rookie cap, I think with the way the current CBA stands you can understand why the players don’t want a rookie cap.
The slotting system props up average salary figures for respective positions. So while it sucks the a VG is stealing money. Agents lump his salary in when it’s time to sign their clients to a mega bucks deal.
Sucks for veterans that get cut but it’s good for the athlete that is in his prime and can actually play. you want as many high salaries at the position as you can.
The sad facts are that a group of pass along owners (remember WE pay for everything via tickets, foods, souvineers, cable TV etc)dealing with players that are “real world immature” by virtue of being spoiled all their lives and treated differently than you or I, will simply raise prices
Mole – Cap or no cap, they have to release him on or after the 5th because they have hardly any cap room and cutting him before that gives rise to a cap hit that would put them over the 2009 cap. (That’s the same reason the Porter release was delayed).
However, the sudden inclusion of a cap into the mix might (as you say) make TJ think twice about whether he can get the same money on the open market. Personally, I don’t think it makes much difference, as only the top FAs are likely to be overpaid for.
It would raise several other hypothetical situations. My favorite is that Ronnie Brown would become a UFA. The Redskins would also be in a bit of a mess.
@ ED,
Isn’t Jones one oft he reasons there’s going to be a lockout? He doesn’t want to share profits of his megalopolis with the poorer owners.
A big swath of middle ground:
Rookies can make no more than 2x the league minimum and can not be locked into a contract any longer than two years out of the draft.
5% cut to the Salary cap w/ a 3% bump to the players’ cut of ancillary income.
Everyone helps fund the retirement/medical benefits for retirees.
i think a number of teams will spend a lot less in 2010 because of the no cap floor. teams that are losing money like jacksonville, detroit, oakland, etc….the easiest way to control costs is to cut players. think about how many administrative people they would need to lay off just to save the salary of one player.
you might see teams like dallas and the redskins spend more, but overall i would say that total payroll will decrease in 2010
I think that the Jets cutting TJ was partially because they’re preparing for the possibility that there will be no football in 2011. I see a lot of people saying “There’s no cap in 2010, why not just pay TJ the money since there’a no cap hit to worry about.” Well if there is no football in 2011 and no revenue coming in other than the money from the TV deals, that $5.8 million they saved in 2010 becomes a much bigger deal. It might save some people their jobs with the organization if there’s no football being played.
The union has apparently been pushing for some time for something like this. Whether its delaying the start of the year to keep negotiating or reinstating the rules for 1 year (with or without the RFA tags) they want a cap. I think their big worry is the reduction in the cap floor is going to really hurt them. Most teams are going to operate under a team cap because they dont want to screw up future seasons when/if a new CBA is hammered out. So the high spenders are basically out o the uncapped year. But there are a number of teams (Cincy, Buffalo, Tampa, Kansas City) that will use this to slash payroll like there is no tomorrow. That is what the real fear is.
@ Wolf
” I’ll watch the CFL and college footballl for my Sunday fix.”
You obviously don’t have the Bombers for a home team.
I think this shows just how weak the Union position is. Now that more and more of this “Uncapped Year” comes out, it is clear that the owners completely snookered the players. The players clearly expected that regardless of what happened, it was a win win for them. If the owners were crazy enough to allow an uncapped year, the big market teams would spend into oblivion and everybody would be lifted up. That’s just not going to happen. In the name of “competitive balance,” the owners have created a very restrictive environment where teams will be reluctant to do anything of major long term significance, either becausee they don’t know when a cap might hit or for how much, or because 2011 looks like no football and again, why tie yourself down to something that could have implications beyond 2012. Interestingly, players at the end of their careers like TJ may actually get paid for a year, but the Josh Cribbs of the world are just screwed. I also think the players have a few PR nightmares to deal with (Gholston and rookie caps; retired player benefits; perception of being overpayed and churlish, etc.). I think the NFLPA needs to push for a different relationship, something along the lines of “ok, you want to be protected against economic downside with things like stadiums, we’re in. Happy to share all economic burdens. However, we get the non-football upside that these venues generate too.” Pushing that one issue is the weakest argument the owners have, and may actually get the owners back to the table. Jerry Jones’ pantheon to excess is a perfect example of doing something he didn’t need to do, to satisfy his ego, and blaming veerybody else for the mess. Regardless, things are not looking good for the NFL right now.
essentially, the union is asking the owners to have the same rules as last year, but why would the owners do that? under the uncapped year rules, the owners get to keep 5th and 6th year players for relatively low salary, can dump unproductive players with no cap ramifications and save tons of money by not having a cap floor. having no cap is pretty much worthless right now since nobody is going to spend all that much given the economy and uncertainty. the uncapped year rules were in favor of the owners before the recession, it’s much more so now.
the players got a really good deal last time and they know it. the owners are going to ask for a much cost-efficient deal this time.
smack in the face of the players, and their telling them that they are in control.
The current salary structure has it’s roots in the pre-merger days when the AFL had to offer more to get the best young, exciting college players to sign with the upstart league. Although this eventually forced owners of the older NFL to agree to a merger, it left the pattern of paying draftees big bucks to sign with a team.
We have a large percentage of players who’s biggest payday is potentially draft day. We’ve all seen workout wonders at The Combine (drafted 1st, 2nd round) out-performed by those either drafted in the later rounds or not at all.
In my opinion the union has to propose reversing the salary pyramid. Like all other careers, start at the bottom of the salary structure and work your way up based on performance and time in the league. Then put some money in to a retirement fund and med benefits for players who’ve laid it on the line for the league and their teams.