Top 8 Teams Unable to Sign Free Agents Next Year unless They Lose One.

[DGREENHULK]

Im just Glad we hired Bruce Allen...Im sure he understands all this mumbo jumbo LOL...

[squatch66]

If the year is uncapped Mr. Snyder will be throwing money like hes in a strip club

i think that most people miss the point of the uncapped season for us. there wont be as many ufa's out there and with our new regime i doubt we will see the 2000 skins all over again. but this will be our golden opportunity to get out from under all the bloated, back loaded contracts that had us in this cash over cap situation every year. if we get rid of randy thomas, chris samuels(not due to performance, but due to retirement), and clinton portis, we will be able to get any accelerated cap hit and any dead money that we still have out there completely wiped clean. not only that but the bulk of haynesworths guaranteed money comes next season so even if we have a cap the season after his cap number goes back down to something like 3.5 mil. this is perfect timing for allen and shanny to take over the team imo. they will save snyder from himself :hysterical:

[Rufus T Firefly]

Here's another issue, all the players who are scheduled to be RFAs won't necessarily demand draft picks if they're signed to a new team.

I thought this was pretty interesting because some teams might be willing to pay for the right of first refusal, but not high enough for a draft pick, especially if they've got multiple strong players at that position, or they just can't afford them (Buffalo and some other small market teams). Now if a guy is ACTUALLY worth a 1st, then 2 million is a pretty small price to pay, but if we're talking about a team 3 or 4 deep at RB, they're not going to want to pay the last couple guys 2 millions, especially if they've got some guys who are already ridiculously paid at that position. What this tells me is that there will be some very good, not STAR, players available. So, that list of UFAs will definitely be growing before we get to signing season.

There will be some players tendered at a low level. Always are. But those amounts of money are all basically chump change to NFL teams, There won't be any players with any kind of real value who will be tendered at a level lower than the 2nd round compensation mark.

[jflow78]

There will be some players tendered at a low level. Always are. But those amounts of money are all basically chump change to NFL teams, There won't be any players with any kind of real value who will be tendered at a level lower than the 2nd round compensation mark.

Yes, there will be. Because of the number of RFAs this year, as apposed to all the UFAs there would have been, there's going to be an enormous number of RFAs that are expected to be tendered, some teams aren't going to be able to sign ALL the RFAs AND the UFAs they want because, unlike the Cowboys, Skins, and Patriots, some NFL Owners have to run their team off of a budget that has nothing to do with the salary cap.

So yes, there will be some quality guys available with only the right of first refusal. For example, the Raiders have 17 FAs this year, a combination of UFAs (5) and RFAs (12). That number is ridiculously high compared to a normal offseason. Not to mention, the UFAs that teams may want to resign are going to demand a larger salary without a cap, I'd assume.

Arizona has 15 FAs this season

Baltimore 16

Dallas 14 (including a UFA Ware, who's going to demand a HUGE contract)

Green Bay 15

In a normal season, most of these guys are signed for a vet minimum with (maybe) a bonus that is spread out over a number of years, but this season, that won't be happening, more than half of these guys are going to demand a salary of 1.5 - 2 million a piece to keep ALL of them. That's 24 million the Raiders would spend, just on RFAs, not including their UFAs that may demand higher contracts, and the Raiders franchise LOST money last season so I doubt Davis can afford to just drop dollars all over everyone, some owners can, some can't. It's going to be interesting once everything gets under way.

[Soup]

With a high draft pick, a couple of smart guys in the Head coach and GM, add the fact its going to be uncapped, there is a good shot the redskns can turn this around during the offseason and be able to good sooner than later

[Rufus T Firefly]

Yes, there will be. Because of the number of RFAs this year, as apposed to all the UFAs there would have been, there's going to be an enormous number of RFAs that are expected to be tendered, some teams aren't going to be able to sign ALL the RFAs AND the UFAs they want because, unlike the Cowboys, Skins, and Patriots, some NFL Owners have to run their team off of a budget that has nothing to do with the salary cap.

So yes, there will be some quality guys available with only the right of first refusal. For example, the Raiders have 17 FAs this year, a combination of UFAs (5) and RFAs (12). That number is ridiculously high compared to a normal offseason. Not to mention, the UFAs that teams may want to resign are going to demand a larger salary without a cap, I'd assume.

The difference between right of first refusal only and 2nd round compensation is less than 600K. For players in the 25-28 year old range.

Again, if they are worthy of a starting spot, it's hard to imagine a team letting them go for nothing to save an amount that is roughly equal to 2 or 3 minimum salaried players.

[jflow78]

The difference between right of first refusal only and 2nd round compensation is less than 600K. For players in the 25-28 year old range.

Again, if they are worthy of a starting spot, it's hard to imagine a team letting them go for nothing to save an amount that is roughly equal to 2 or 3 minimum salaried players.

I agree, but when most of these guys would be getting 500k for this season (vet min + incentives or whatever) the price is going to go up really fast (say 6 FAs that in a normal year would cost about 3 mil are going to cost 9-12 this season, that's a big difference, maybe not a deal breaker, but teams are going to think twice). I'm not saying it's going to make stars available that will fix everything for the Skins, I'm just saying that there's going to be a much bigger selection than what we're looking at now, and that in that selection, I would bet there will be some quality guys we can sign.

I agree, there's no quick fix this season, but I'm kind of thankful for that. Especially if you look at the fact that we'll probably be looking for smaller quicker linemen, rather than the huge kind most teams really covet. Hopefully anyway.

[Chicken Fried]

Kind of irrelevant.

No, because some of them will have to be cut if those top teams want to sign anybody.

[Rufus T Firefly]

I agree, but when most of these guys would be getting 500k for this season (vet min + incentives or whatever)

What guys? You're losing me.

[Rufus T Firefly]

No, because some of them will have to be cut if those top teams want to sign anybody.

The post I responded to was asking for a list of FAs those teams have, not who they were gonna cut. Cut players don't count as FAs lost anyway.

Unless yu mean them letting FAs leave (not cutting players) so they can sign other guys. But that's getting a little out there, if we're making lists to assume SB contenders are gonna let FAs leave, and then trying to guess which ones they will be.

[MrJL]

I just don't see any down side to an uncapped year for the Skins. Danny has his down falls but nobody can complain about his open wallet........especially if we're uncapped.

only that there will be fewer people available unless they go after RFA's.

[jflow78]

What guys? You're losing me.

I'm saying that because most of these guys would be UFAs in a normal season, and most UFAs (solid not great players) are paid a vet min salary for their first year in a contract, the difference will add up because now they're all going to be costing between 1.5 and 2 mil if the team wants to restrict them enough to cost a draft pick.

Most FAs don't make a ton of money in the first year of their contract. Only the huge signings make a ton of money in the first year. Most of these RFAs would be UFAs in a capped year, and most would cost a little over the vet min., but because there's no cap, they'll cost at least 1.5-2 mil to restrict them and demand draft picks. I'm just saying that I think several teams, especially smaller market teams, are still going to pay the 500 thousand (about the vet min for a 4-5 year player) and opt for right of first refusal rather than restricting them to a draft pick and paying 3-4 times as much.

[Rufus T Firefly]

I'm saying that because most of these guys would be UFAs in a normal season, and most UFAs (solid not great players) are paid a vet min salary for their first year in a contract, the difference will add up because now they're all going to be costing between 1.5 and 2 mil if the team wants to restrict them enough to cost a draft pick.

Players in their 4th-6th year who can only sign for 500,000 are exteremly marginal players.

A lot of guys get 500,000 or so in salary in the first year fo a multi-year deal, but that's AFTER getting a signing bonus, which would be a lot more money than 1.5 mil.

[jflow78]

Players in their 4th-6th year who can only sign for 500,000 are exteremly marginal players.

A lot of guys get 500,000 or so in salary in the first year fo a multi-year deal, but that's AFTER getting a signing bonus, which would be a lot more money than 1.5 mil.

I'm looking at this from the perspective of a 4-12 team that needs all the help they can get. Not a playoff team that's trying to fill a leak. WE can get starters from this, THEY can't. Not many guys in the NFL get huge bonuses.

Last year the salary cap was approximately 120 million. If you're paying 54 guys 2 million a piece, then you're already at 108 million, that obviously doesn't account for all the stars teams like the Cardinals have, then the average contract for a "good not star" player goes WAY down.

The team with the highest average salary (including bonuses and including star player contracts and scrubs contracts) this season was the 49ers, and they had an average of 1.325 million. The team with the lowest, the Rams, paid an average of 488 thousand per player. NO team is going to start suddenly paying 2 times the amount they were paying, per player.

2 million - 500 thousand looks like a small difference to us, but these teams don't average paying guys 2 million, regardless of where they are in their careers.

Here's the link if you'd like to see more of the contract numbers:

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/

[Rufus T Firefly]

I'm looking at this from the perspective of a 4-12 team that needs all the help they can get. Not a playoff team that's trying to fill a leak. WE can get starters from this, THEY can't. Not many guys in the NFL get huge bonuses.

Last year the salary cap was approximately 120 million. If you're paying 54 guys 2 million a piece, then you're already at 108 million, that obviously doesn't account for all the stars teams like the Cardinals have, then the average contract for a "good not star" player goes WAY down.

The team with the highest average salary (including bonuses and including star player contracts and scrubs contracts) this season was the 49ers, and they had an average of 1.325 million. The team with the lowest, the Rams, paid an average of 488 thousand per player. NO team is going to start suddenly paying 2 times the amount they were paying, per player.

2 million - 500 thousand looks like a small difference to us, but these teams don't average paying guys 2 million, regardless of where they are in their careers.

Here's the link if you'd like to see more of the contract numbers:

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/

Again, your scenario seems to apply only to young players who would earn less than 1 mil per year as Unrestricted Free Agents. Those are really marginal players.

And keep in mind that we're talking about the small number of players who will be RFAs.

[cphil006]

Yep, it's been discussed in uncapped threads...

[MrJL]

the top eight teams being unable to sign guys seems a little strange to me with the number of people restricted. It seems like it was just something they threw in there.

[jflow78]

Again, your scenario seems to apply only to young players who would earn less than 1 mil per year as Unrestricted Free Agents. Those are really marginal players.

And keep in mind that we're talking about the small number of players who will be RFAs.

No, the majority of players earn less than 1 million per year. Only 5 teams (1. 49ers, 2. Falcons, 3. Titans, 4. Eagels, and 5. Seahawks) in the entire NFL paid out more than 1 million dollars per player. The VAST majority of NFL players get paid less than 1 million per year, the only reason it seems otherwise is because you only hear about BIG FA contracts.

The majority of FAs this year are RFAs (182), the minority are UFAs (142). That isn't normal, and it's only that way this year because of the uncapped year. If it weren't for the CBA, those numbers would have been apprx 260 UFAs (I lost count around 240) and 53 RFAs.

Here's a list of all the RFA and UFAs with the uncapped year:

http://forums.denverbroncos.com/showthread.php?p=3118137

I just found another site that has the cost for RFAs a little higher than the previous site I'd given:

2nd round tender: 1.7 million

1st round tender: 2.4 million

1st and 3rd round tender: 3.0 million

You keep saying "players in their 4-6 years". It's not like we're talking about 25 and 26 year olds. A lot of these guys are 27 or 28 due to redshirts and things like that, heck Campbell is 28. Some teams aren't going to be willing to pay these guys 2 or 3 times what they would normally to keep these guys, just because they "have" to due to no CBA.

[SkinsHokieFan]

the top eight teams being unable to sign guys seems a little strange to me with the number of people restricted. It seems like it was just something they threw in there.

All of these uncapped year rules are very draconian and strange. They are that way of course in hope that when the union and owners saw these bizzare rules they'd come up with an agreement.

Looks like the owners are willing to go to war on the CBA issue

[jflow78]

All of these uncapped year rules are very draconian and strange. They are that way of course in hope that when the union and owners saw these bizzare rules they'd come up with an agreement.

Looks like the owners are willing to go to war on the CBA issue

Yeah, seriously. I really hope they come to an agreement too.

[Stonoman]

unhappy? Put your season tickets up for sale and see how long before they are sold.I bet 5 minutes.

[MrJL]

Yes, there will be. Because of the number of RFAs this year, as apposed to all the UFAs there would have been, there's going to be an enormous number of RFAs that are expected to be tendered, some teams aren't going to be able to sign ALL the RFAs AND the UFAs they want because, unlike the Cowboys, Skins, and Patriots, some NFL Owners have to run their team off of a budget that has nothing to do with the salary cap.

So yes, there will be some quality guys available with only the right of first refusal. For example, the Raiders have 17 FAs this year, a combination of UFAs (5) and RFAs (12). That number is ridiculously high compared to a normal offseason. Not to mention, the UFAs that teams may want to resign are going to demand a larger salary without a cap, I'd assume.

The problem is that everyone is going to at least get a tender, because teams won't want to lose a potential draft pick. People willavoid them to so they don't lose draft picks and they'll revert to their original team at the end of the RFA signing period.

[jflow78]

The problem is that everyone is going to at least get a tender, because teams won't want to lose a potential draft pick. People willavoid them to so they don't lose draft picks and they'll revert to their original team at the end of the RFA signing period.

But that's what I'm saying, teams won't tender ALL the RFAs this season to a point that costs a draft pick (1.7 million at least for a 2nd round tender).

In the capped year, the teams would have an average of 1-2 RFAs, this year they have an average of 7-8. They're going to be spending at least 12-13.5 million to keep all those guys (even the older RFAs), if some of them aren't starters, you're spending almost twice as much on that ONE guy than you'd normally spend.

So teams won't be able to restrict ALL their quality (I'm not JUST talking about starters here) players, and they won't necessarily be able to match the offer that comes from another team either. Especially when some teams have guys that are RFAs at 28 and 29 years old. These guys aren't worth spending that kind of money on if they're only backing up your stars. They'll want to get someone younger to come in and groom, while for us, we'd be more than happy to have a guy that backs up a fantastic player come in and start for the next couple years since we've got plenty of holes to fill.

[Rufus T Firefly]

No, the majority of players earn less than 1 million per year.The VAST majority of NFL players get paid less than 1 million per year, the only reason it seems otherwise is because you only hear about BIG FA contracts.

Yeah, and the majority of players in the NFL are back-ups and players in their first 4 years in the league. Good veteran starters who have hit Free Agency do not make 1 mil or less.

Only 5 teams (1. 49ers, 2. Falcons, 3. Titans, 4. Eagels, and 5. Seahawks) in the entire NFL paid out more than 1 million dollars per player.

That's just completely wrong. You are, I guess, looking at only salary, which has nothing to do with how much is actually paid.

Here is a link the actual money paid (2008)

http://www.altiusdirectory.com/Sports/nfl-salaries.php

The LOWEST team expenditure was KC, at 82 mil, or more than 1.5 mil per player on their roster.

The majority of FAs this year are RFAs (182), the minority are UFAs (142). That isn't normal, and it's only that way this year because of the uncapped year. If it weren't for the CBA, those numbers would have been apprx 260 UFAs (I lost count around 240) and 53 RFAs.

That averages less than 6 RFAs per team. Now subtract all the really good players who this won't apply to and all the really marginal players. That's a really narrow list of players who are going to be left. And a really small percentage of team's payrolls.

Here's a list of all the RFA and UFAs with the uncapped year:

http://forums.denverbroncos.com/showthread.php?p=3118137

OK, let's look at one position form that list. I'll use RBs (the first one after QBs who are their own special case):

RB Mike Bell (New Orleans)

RB Ronnie Brown (Miami)

RB Kenneth Darby (St. Louis)

RB Jerome Harrison (Cleveland)

RB Le’Ron McClain (Baltimore)

RB Jerious Norwood (Atlanta)

RB Clifton Smith (Tampa Bay)

RB Kolby Smith (Kansas City)

RB Jason Snelling (Atlanta)

RB Pierre Thomas (New Orleans)

RB Danny Ware (NY Giants)

RB Leon Washington (NY Jets)

RB Lendale White (Tennessee)

RB Cadillac Williams (Tampa Bay)

RB DeShawn Wynn (Green Bay)

There is just no way most of those players are non-tendered to save a few hundred grand. The only ones I would say are possible are: Kenneth Darby, Kolby Smith, Jason Snelling (unlikely), Danny Ware, DeShawn Wynn.

That's, as I said, a very marginal pool of talent. Nothing to be excited about at all.

You keep saying "players in their 4-6 years". It's not like we're talking about 25 and 26 year olds. A lot of these guys are 27 or 28 due to redshirts and things like that, heck Campbell is 28. Some teams aren't going to be willing to pay these guys 2 or 3 times what they would normally to keep these guys, just because they "have" to due to no CBA.

Yeah, and Campbell, as a 5th year player who stayed 4 years in college and graduated high school at the age of 18.5, is on the upper end of RFAs, age-wise. As I said, the overwhelming majority of these RFAs will be 25-28.

You're just over-stating the case here. I watch the RFA tender list every year, and every year there are a couple of guys I find interesting for no compensation, or low compensation. But even those players are guys who are "sleeper" types and haven't done much. Really good players (really anyone who you would consider starting) get tendered at at least the 2nd round level.

For example, last year the Bengals (the epitome of small market, low payroll teams) gave 2nd round tenders to back-up LBs Brandon Johnson and Rashad Jeanty. Even guys like that from on a cheap team didn't come with no compensation.

[BLEED-B&G]

I just don't see any down side to an uncapped year for the Skins. Danny has his down falls but nobody can complain about his open wallet........especially if we're uncapped.

The downside is there won't be many free agents to choose from; Jason Campbell a perfect example. Would have been unrestricted but is now restricted.

We can sign restricted FAs but are going to have to give up more than cash to do it.