Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Another Mort update on the CBA as of 3/3 AM

waterwagen

By waterwagen
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

bnacpa

bnacpa

Posted
Posted
Good explination. Basically, with a new deal, you want to restructure under the new rules anyways, because you probably can get more out of their contract that way. For example, you don't have to shorten Portis' contract to make things work.

Jason

Exactly ... with a new CBA/extension we won't have an uncapped year next year so certain scenarios such as voiding off years on a contract because we may be able to give them some nice love with no cap don't become reality when you have the cap and must work within those rules.

On a different level ... it is funny how every example given by the national media says that the Redskins are the worst off of any cap strung team and that Daniel Snyder will be finally paying the price for dancing with the cap devil all these years ... when in reality it looks like he is one of the smartest owers in the league: He didn't prematurely cut anyone on Wednesday, his players have opted to work with him for the betterment of the team (which validates the amazing impact Gibbs has had on the culture w/ the Redskins), and any reworkings that have been agreed to in principal will not be finalized unless an agreement with the NFLPA doesn't go through.

Worse case scenario at this point is that we don't have an exteded CBA and don't have as much room to manuever in free agency as we may have with an extension ... plus we have to renegotiate contract extensions next offseason when there is no penalty for giving up big $. It looks like we are going to be more than ok in either scenario with the cba. That is great management and planning by the Redskins - specifically Dan, the front office, and Gibbs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Winning Season Please!

Winning Season Please!

Posted
Posted

I did not want to start a yet another thread on the CBA, but I found this interesting.

BIRK BODY SLAMS GENE

Vikings center Matt Birk, has taken aim squarely at NFLPA executive director Gene Upshaw.

Birk was candid in his comments with The Minneapolis Star Tribune regarding the union and Upshaw's leadership of it in conjunction with the ongoing CBA negotiations.

"Don't put this in the paper ... no, wait, go ahead and put it in," Birk said. "Gene Upshaw is a piece of [insert colorful language here]."

And Birk isn't just some garden-variety pissed-off lineman spewing venom. Birk's pedigree gives him plenty of credibility. The dude went to Harvard, and he didn't get a six or a seven or a 16 on his Wonderlic.

He's smart, he's perceptive, and he's very dangerous to guys who hope to manipulate others through emotion.

As to the status of the on-again, off-again labor talks, Birk said: "It's a joke, it really is. Everyone is making money. A lot of money. You think anyone wants to hear about the money problems of the NFL owners or players? It's bad pub for the league. It's bad for all of us."

Birk told us a few weeks back that the union has left the players "[p]retty much in the dark" regarding the status of the talks. "One thing about the union, in my opinion, they're always watching out for the union," he told us.

Per Friday's story in The Star Tribune,Birk was at one point a player representative to the union, but he quit due to what he called "propaganda and poor leadership."

"When you go to those CBA meetings, you always feel like you're being sold something instead of being given the straight facts," Birk told The Star Tribune. "Through all the meetings leading up to this, it was always: 'The owners don't want an uncapped year. We'll get a deal, and if we don't, so what? There will be an uncapped year and there will be crazy money out there.' The reality is that's not the case. And you're seeing that it's not the leverage we were told it would be. . . .

"Instead, you go there and it's like some kind of religious revival. You don't feel you're getting the true message. And they're always talking too fast."

With all that said, we're still convinced that the deal between the league and the union will get done in a heartbeat as soon as the owners figure out what to do with revenue sharing. But if Upshaw really is willingly playing the bad guy as cover for the owners in the hopes that he'll be the next Commissioner, the owners might want to ponder the wisdom of an Ivy Leaguer before making a selection based on gratitude.

Gratitude, after all, is just another emotion.

58 PERCENT EQUALS $104 MILLION SALARY CAP

We've been suggesting in this space for the past couple of days that the supposed gulf between the NFL and the NFLPA of 3.8 percentage points of total football revenue is a gap that easily can be resolved by essentially splitting the difference.

The league is at 56.2 percent of total football revenue, and the union is at 60 percent. Logic tells us that the deal gets done at 58 percent.

And we've picked up some info that corroborates our belief in this regard. Per a league source, it's been projected that 56 percent of total football revenue equates to a $100 million salary cap -- less than $5.5 million more than the current cap number of $94.53 million. It's also been projected, we're told, that each additional percentage point will result in another $2 million per team in cap room.

At 58 percent, the team-by-team cap is $104 million, which is right in the middle of the ballpark that we've been hearing for much of the week as to what the new salary cap will be if/when a new agreement is reached.

Which tells us that the NFL already has resigned itself to going to 58 percent.

Which tells us that the NFLPA likely would drop to 58 percent.

Which tells us that, as we've believed all week, it all comes down to whether the owners can get their act together on revenue sharing or, as we now understand the operative term to be, "cost transfer."

:applause:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Seabee1973

Seabee1973

Posted
Posted
stupid question:

why the hell wern't they negotiating a year ago if they knew this would happen?

I am sick of unions and powerplays. I work at a company that employess a ton of teamsters and they routinly try and screw us.

its like the new york transit strike, rediculous.

They actually did start last year They always start early and low ball each other then met in the middle somewhere

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkinsNeverDie

SkinsNeverDie

Posted
Posted
Also, we already had players restructure in anticipation of a deal not getting done so we may have even MORE money to spend.

Your sig is a bit ridiculous man...I dont know Sean as a person. He is on my favorite team, but there is NO way i would go to jail for him. If he did it, he needs to serve it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DoGood28

DoGood28

Posted
Posted
Fox guys this morning brought up some interesting points. Seems like the players would probably be happy if the NFL implemented a minimum cap. That way, owners like the Bidwells and Luries can't pocket all that extra money. Then it will make it's way to the players. That way, both parties give up something.

A minimum salary cap is a GREAT IDEA. Then these small market teams wouldn't have any argument about not being competitive with the bigger teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...