2007 Uncapped Year
 

Based on this article in SI it sure looks like this scenario will play out.

[url="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/don_banks/03/16/labor.notes/index.html"]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/don_banks/03/16/labor.notes/index.html[/url]

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

This is interesting stuff, and someone should post a reply so I might as well be the first...

I have nothing to say. Need to read more about the situation but I just can't see them going to an uncapped year. There's no turning back after that

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

I would love to comment on the article, as it appeared to be interesting. But after 10 PM, my ADD really kicks in, and I realize that i cant see more than 6 months into the future.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

The NFLPA had an "uncapped situation" as soon as the Federal Judge ruled that the NFL "limited free agency" was illegal. The NFLPA negotiated away that status in favor of the cap situation. People need to go back and read that last sentence one more time so they might understand the history of the salary cap that exists now.


It is rhetorical flourish to say that if the NFL "ever went uncapped" there is no turning back. They turned back once before and they can do it again.


There IS a Redskin danger here. Given the propsect of an uncapped year, imagine the spending binge that Danny Boy will undertake. Then they will need to conform to a cap. Can you say "Salary Cap Hell"?

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon]There IS a Redskin danger here. Given the propsect of an uncapped year, imagine the spending binge that Danny Boy will undertake. Then they will need to conform to a cap. Can you say "Salary Cap Hell"?[/QUOTE]
I can picture some interesting contracts, actually.

LDS: We'll pay you $50 million this year, thoughwe'll be deferring most of that, and league minimum for the next seven years. What do you say?

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon]It is rhetorical flourish to say that if the NFL "ever went uncapped" there is no turning back. They turned back once before and they can do it again.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, well...maybe I was going for "rhetorical flourish". Didn't think about that, now did you?

Curmudgeon, I'm guessing what you were referring to was Plan B Free Agency right? But I must say I didn't realize that there was a cap before then. I thought the cap came after the judge ruled Plan B illegal

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

From the article:

[QUOTE]The union wants the players' salary cap based on teams' total football revenues, rather than the current system[/QUOTE]

Are they fucking serious? The whole reason the cap exists is to level the playing field. 64% of Redskins revenue is 156.8 million (245 million * 0.64). 64% of Arizona Cardinal's revenue is 83.84 million (131 million * 0.64). This seems like a disastrous idea to me. I'd rather there be NFL labor stoppage.

[URL=http://www.forbes.com/lists/results.jhtml?passListId=30&passYear=2004&passListType=Misc&searchParameter1=unset&searchParameter2=unset&resultsStart=1&resultsHowMany=32&resultsSortProperties=%2Bnumberfield1%2C%2Bstringfield1&resultsSortCategoryName=Rank&category1=category&category2=category&passKeyword=]Forbes : NFL Revenues[/URL]

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

Or maybe the want to add up the total teams' revenue and then divide that number by 32 teams and then multiply that number by 64%. If this is what they want then the salary cap would jump to 106.6 million (5330 billion / 32 * 0.64) based on current figures.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

[QUOTE=saden1]From the article:



Are they fucking serious? The whole reason the cap exists is to level the playing field. 64% of Redskins revenue is 156.8 million (245 million * 0.64). 64% of Arizona Cardinal's revenue is 83.84 million (131 million * 0.64). This seems like a disastrous idea to me. I'd rather there be NFL labor stoppage.

[URL=http://www.forbes.com/lists/results.jhtml?passListId=30&passYear=2004&passListType=Misc&searchParameter1=unset&searchParameter2=unset&resultsStart=1&resultsHowMany=32&resultsSortProperties=%2Bnumberfield1%2C%2Bstringfield1&resultsSortCategoryName=Rank&category1=category&category2=category&passKeyword=]Forbes : NFL Revenues[/URL][/QUOTE]

I hope they strike, if they do I will bet the farm we win the SB!

2-0 in strike year's baby!:headbange

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

Any huge increase like what the PFA are looking for will just cause more problems . There are two caps in football the calculated salary cap enforced by the NFL and then the actual amount of money teams can afford to pay out . This would lead to a situation of a splitting fo the teams between the haves and have nots .

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

That is exactly the point why they can not come to an agreement. The NFLPA want the haves, such as the Redskins, Cowboys, Texans, to include more of their revenue stream in the calculation. Local advertising, local TV, suites, and club seats are among the items that teams are exempt from sharing. Since Danny and Jerry have come to town they have found ways to raise that revenue stream. Now the players want a share of that to. Since the CBA already states that there will be a no cap year at the end of the agreement, 2007 has always been in play. Thats why I have been constantly stating the Redskins based on there contracts last year and this year have been angling fo the 2007 season. I believe if you ask Crazy he also sees the wisdom in this.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

If there is an uncapped year, we need to sign all of the players we would like to keep to long term contracts that year. NO SIGNING BONUSES. Huge 1st year money with minimum salaries over the remainders of the contracts. Then, we pay a huge amount one year to keep the core guys we want while arranging for lots of cap space in upcoming years.

For example, take Samuels new contract. Currently he makes 52 million over the next seven years. We could rework his contract to be 46 million in base salary in the uncapped year and 1 million per for the next 6 years. If we take that same type of approach with our top 5 contracts (Samuels, Arrington, Griffin, Portis and Springs **leaving out the Brunell contract for obvious reasons**), then we would play these 5 players around 150 million in base salary in the uncapped year and we get to keep them for another 6 years past the uncapped year at 5 million per year for all 5 of them. Thats around 20-30 million per year in extra cap space that we would save by taking a huge hit in the uncapped year.

Of course, I don't actually think there will be an uncapped year, but here's to delusions of grandeur.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

[QUOTE=Skinsfanatic]If there is an uncapped year, we need to sign all of the players we would like to keep to long term contracts that year. NO SIGNING BONUSES. Huge 1st year money with minimum salaries over the remainders of the contracts. Then, we pay a huge amount one year to keep the core guys we want while arranging for lots of cap space in upcoming years.

For example, take Samuels new contract. Currently he makes 52 million over the next seven years. We could rework his contract to be 46 million in base salary in the uncapped year and 1 million per for the next 6 years. If we take that same type of approach with our top 5 contracts (Samuels, Arrington, Griffin, Portis and Springs **leaving out the Brunell contract for obvious reasons**), then we would play these 5 players around 150 million in base salary in the uncapped year and we get to keep them for another 6 years past the uncapped year at 5 million per year for all 5 of them. Thats around 20-30 million per year in extra cap space that we would save by taking a huge hit in the uncapped year.

Of course, I don't actually think there will be an uncapped year, but here's to delusions of grandeur.[/QUOTE]

I was just going to post the same idea. Sign everyone to long term deals with it heavily loaded in the '07 season.

Seems like the league is asking for trouble, I'm sure Snyder is drooling at the idea of an uncapped year.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

What happens if one of those players gets disgruntled? ala Coles.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]I was just going to post the same idea. Sign everyone to long term deals with it heavily loaded in the '07 season.

Seems like the league is asking for trouble, I'm sure Snyder is drooling at the idea of an uncapped year.[/QUOTE]
LDS wouldn't even have to come up with the cash. I believe he could defer payment of the base salary over the length of the deal - Samuels would count for 46 million, but he could still get paid 6-7 million a year.

The uncapped year is perhaps the greatest potential boon to players currently in the league - ever. 2008 rookies will do better as well, since current players will all average, oh, [i]league minimum[/i] if the system is abused to its full advantage. A free agent in 2007 will actually walk around making "cha-ching" noises.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

Question: What happens if one of those players gets disgruntled? ala Coles.

Answer: F'Em. At that point, they play or they sit. They are only making 1 mil per after the first year, so if they become disgruntled, they can come to the games and watch from a good seat on the bench. And if that makes them sad, then boo hoo.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

We could also dump Brunell in '07 (if he's not already gone) and take the cap 'hit' then too.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

[QUOTE=cpayne5]We could also dump Brunell in '07 (if he's not already gone) and take the cap 'hit' then too.[/QUOTE]
Oh. My. God.

So interested in acquiring players that I forgot about cleaning house.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

Dump Brunell in the uncapped year?! Brilliant.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

The way things have been set up already with contracts screams this is their intention. Dan is a wizard in working the system.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

[QUOTE=cpayne5]We could also dump Brunell in '07 (if he's not already gone) and take the cap 'hit' then too.[/QUOTE]

The way his deal is structured that could have been the plan all along.

I think Canuck said that it's likely we'll see Brunell cut after June 1 next year.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

Nah! Brunnell will be here for the entire HOF Coach Gibbs tenure! After all, he saved his life during their first meeting!

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

[QUOTE=backrow]Nah! Brunnell will be here for the entire HOF Coach Gibbs tenure! After all, he saved his life during their first meeting![/QUOTE]

:laughing2

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

Brunell will probably take over as head coach when Gibbs leaves

:coach:

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Brunell will probably take over as head coach when Gibbs leaves

:coach:[/QUOTE]

President of Football Operations and Owner as well...heck the Skins will be playing in Mark Brunell Stadium by 2010

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

Now that's just plain silly!

Let's get back to some serious issues like "Question 3" and the correct punctutation for "Gibbs".

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

[QUOTE=JoeRedskin]Now that's just plain silly!

Let's get back to some serious issues like "Question 3" and the correct punctutation for "Gibbs".[/QUOTE]

how about the correct spelling for "punctuation" :silly:

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

The uncapped year is a horrible idea.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

[QUOTE=CrazyCanuck]The uncapped year is a horrible idea.[/QUOTE]

If we didnt have a cap, what would our poor neighbor to North....(Oh Canada, My home and native land....) have to contribute. Are you honestly telling me that we wouldnt get the monthly cap breakdown? I dont even want to think about a world without that.:eek:

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

Canuck needs job security. The cap stays. ;)

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

Hello all....The CBA has some rules for the final league year which is uncapped. In a different section of the CBA it tells about severe restrictions on the final 8 meaning the teams which lasted the longest in the playoffs the previous year. They can only sign FA's if they lose FA's. Here is the CBA section for the final capped year.

[center][b]FINAL LEAGUE YEAR[/b][/center]

All of the provisions of this Agreement shall be the same in the Final League Year of this Agreement, except that the following rules shall apply only in that League Year:

[b][i]Section 1.[/i][/b][b] No Salary Cap:[/b] No Salary Cap shall be in effect during the Final League Year.

[b][i]Section 2.[/i][/b] [b]Free Agency If Salary Cap In League Year Prior To Final League Year:[/b] In the event that a Salary Cap is in effect in the League Year prior to the Final League Year[i]:[/i] (a) the number of Accrued Seasons required to be an Unrestricted Free Agent during the Final League Year shall be six or more Accrued Seasons; and (b) the provisions of Article XIX (Veteran Free Agency), Sections 2‑4, shall apply to any player with five Accrued Seasons in the Final League Year, as if such player had four Accrued Seasons, except that the Qualifying Offers specified in Article XIX (Veteran Free Agency), Section 2(b)(ii) shall be $50,000 greater for the Qualifying Offers originally stated to be $325,000, and $100,000 greater for the Qualifying Offers originally stated to be $700,000 or $900,000, subject to any additional increases in the base amounts in accordance with the rules set forth in Article XIX (Veteran Free Agency), Section 2(e).

[b][i]Section 3.[/i][/b] [b]Free Agency If No Salary Cap In League Year Prior To Final League Year:[/b] In the event that a Salary Cap is not in effect in the League Year prior to the Final League Year, the number of Accrued Seasons required to be an Unrestricted Free Agent during the Final League Year shall be five Accrued Seasons.

[b][i]Section 4.[/i][/b] [b]Franchise and Transition Players:[/b] As set forth in Article XX (Franchise and Transition Players), Section 3, each Club shall be permitted to designate one Unrestricted Free Agent as a Transition Player between February 1 and February 15,in the Final League Year, notwithstanding that Transition Players may not be designated in the League Years after the 1994 League Year(except as provided in Article XX (Franchise and Transition Players), Sections 3(a) and 11).

------------

One reason you wouldn't want to load up on salary in a final league year is there is no certainty that they would reinstate a cap so you may have overpaid a player for 1 year for no reason and have made it in his best interest to become a problem and try and get the team to release him so he can get some more big money.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

Welcome to the board Pocono, nice first post!

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

Nice first post, Pocono.

The relative safety of loading up salaries in the final year is that only a few owners could do it. The majority of the league will scream for a cap shortly thereafter.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

[QUOTE=Pocono]Hello all....The CBA has some rules for the final league year which is uncapped. In a different section of the CBA it tells about severe restrictions on the final 8 meaning the teams which lasted the longest in the playoffs the previous year. They can only sign FA's if they lose FA's. Here is the CBA section for the final capped year.[/QUOTE]
Ofcourse there are rules. Look at all of Snyders contracts and the lengths. Most of them set us up for our supposed Cap hell in 2007, which then will erase the mess. They have backloaded every contract to end about 2007. They would be able to quickly rebuild based on the so called replace a FA with a FA rule based on the fact they would lose a mass of players to FA and would only be required to sign a replacement for at least that particular players 1st year salary. So they will have a quicker way to get out of the cap hell which usually takes teams 5 years to escape from.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

Thanks TAFKAS and BrudLee. CRT3...I don't think you can make an argument that Snyder is preparing for an uncapped year in 07 when it seems he's gambling everything that there is a CBA extension before 3/1/06. I'm not sure what Cap Hell is but if there is no CBA extension before 3/1/06 it will be very difficult to get the Skins under the cap for the 06 cap year.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

[QUOTE=Pocono]Thanks TAFKAS and BrudLee. CRT3...I don't think you can make an argument that Snyder is preparing for an uncapped year in 07 when it seems he's gambling everything that there is a CBA extension before 3/1/06. I'm not sure what Cap Hell is but if there is no CBA extension before 3/1/06 it will be very difficult to get the Skins under the cap for the 06 cap year.[/QUOTE] Read the article in the 1st post of the thread. Experts agree that they would be far from completting a new CBA based on the union wants more of the revenue pie from the owners.

Cap Hell is like what happened to Tennesee this year and Jacksonville 2 years ago. You have to purge all of your star players in order to get under the cap number for that year. And/Or you have such much dead cap money that you can not go out and sign players. I am not talking about one or 2 star players but more like 6 and above. The Redskins are actually fine for 2006, check the numbers. The trade of Coles and the cap hit this year on him leaves us with a great position for next year. With the other players such as Trotter we take a 16 mil hit on dead cap which will not be there next year. Right now we have 32 mil towards bonuses for 2006. We will have to drop one or 2 players next year. But where we would normally have to drop a mass amount of players would be in 2007. Expect in 2007 that the Redskins front load contracts with smaller bonuses and this will enable us to use the uncapped year to our advantage. I am not a lawyer or an accountant but I did go to high scool with Danny, does that count?

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

Sure I want the Skins on top every year. No salary cap and there would not be a better team than the Skins. But the NFL is not one team and the salary cap gives the fans a great level of competition through out the league.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

Plus 3 mil, carry the 7, subtract 5 mil. ...... F@#! it, I give up. I am glad that someone keeps up with the business side of things, because I sure as hell cant. To be honest I don't care to either. As long as the sport does not go away, and the skins are always in washington I will be happy.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

[QUOTE=CRT3]Read the article in the 1st post of the thread. Experts agree that they would be far from completting a new CBA based on the union wants more of the revenue pie from the owners.

Cap Hell is like what happened to Tennesee this year and Jacksonville 2 years ago. You have to purge all of your star players in order to get under the cap number for that year. And/Or you have such much dead cap money that you can not go out and sign players. I am not talking about one or 2 star players but more like 6 and above. The Redskins are actually fine for 2006, check the numbers. The trade of Coles and the cap hit this year on him leaves us with a great position for next year. With the other players such as Trotter we take a 16 mil hit on dead cap which will not be there next year. Right now we have 32 mil towards bonuses for 2006. We will have to drop one or 2 players next year. But where we would normally have to drop a mass amount of players would be in 2007. Expect in 2007 that the Redskins front load contracts with smaller bonuses and this will enable us to use the uncapped year to our advantage. I am not a lawyer or an accountant but I did go to high scool with Danny, does that count?[/QUOTE]

Wow...I could stay in a Holiday Inn Express for a month and that wouldn't come close to going to the same High School[probably called Danny Snyder High School now] as Danny. They wanted both parties to extend the agreement early so the last capped year is tough on both the players and the teams. The % shared with the players drops 1% in 06 so what was a 5M increase in 05 would only be 3.5M in 06. Also if there's no extension by 3/1/06 they won't be able to prorate about 20M of roster bonuses in 06 and all guaranteed money in contracts after 06 will count in 06. I think the cap chart here is missing 1.5M of extra hits in 06 from restructures done with Harris Ramsey and Noble and about 5-6M of guaranteed money due to be paid after 06 which would count against the 06 cap if there is no extension.

I think the 06 total is closer to 110M than 102M and when they extend Moss and sign their draft it will be around 115M for 06. There are also incentives/escalators in contracts for Ramsey Harris Brunell and Taylor that could easily add another 5M before the start of the 06 cap year. If Ramsey stays healthy he will earn a large escalator and also earn a nice incentive for Brunell because the O will do better than last year because Brunell isn't on the field. I think it's in both parties best interest to extend before 3/1/06 but if they don't it could get real interesting for some teams in 06.

Re: 2007 Uncapped Year
 

I don’t want to be a nay-sayer here but 2007 is still 2 years away. Do you guys really think that after watching the NHL debacle and maybe contraction in baseball that the NFL and the players will allow this to happen?

I mean at some point both sides will realize, were going to all be millionaires regardless if its 50 million or 45 million over the length of the contract.

Isn't one of the biggest fears that owners whose team makes more money like our own Dan Snyder plus the two Texas owners, don’t want to share his revenue with low earners like the Colts? SO if there is a strike, it could be Dan’s fault. Hopefully we just win a Superbowl next year and calm down Dan’s ego.