Chrisbob74 Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 This could be very good news if they can get this worked out before March 2nd. It would mean contracts can have their pro rated bonuses spread over 7 instead of 5 years Also, it indicates a big jump in future caps, which helps with some of those big numbers coming up in 2006...... http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=1992603 League, union continue talks on extending CBA By Len Pasquarelli ESPN.com With only two weeks remaining until the NFL begins a new fiscal year, league officials will meet Wednesday with NFL Players' Association representatives in an effort to forge some progress on an extension to the existing collective bargaining agreement. The two sides have been negotiating the proposed deal, which would extend the labor accord from 2008 to at least 2011, for several months. Progress has been slow and, while the talks certainly have not taken on the animus that marked the labor strife of 15 years ago, commissioner Paul Tagliabue and NFLPA executive director Gene Upshaw have both conceded that the bargaining has been tough. One element that could provide momentum, however, is the NFL's seeming willingness now to share all local and national revenue with players. The current agreement defines the players' share as 64.75 percent of so-called "designated gross revenues," but does not account for all the monies brought in from local broadcast rights, luxury suites, stadium naming rights and sponsorships. Those relatively new but lucrative revenue streams, Upshaw has charged, have exploded in recent years. And since they are not included in setting the salary cap, the NFLPA has contended that the amount of revenue in which the players currently don't share has risen from 30 percent to about 37 percent. To this point, the NFL has remained steadfast in its stance that not all revenues should be shared with the players. Offering to do so would represent a major philosophical change. Of course, if the NFL includes all revenues in the kitty for players, which would mark a monumental shift in the league's stance, it certainly will ask for concessions in return. Part of what the league would seek, it appears, is a mechanism to address the debt service many teams now carry, either from franchise purchase fees or stadium construction. Upshaw and other union executives have suggested that league revenues are now in the $5 billion-$6 billion range. If the NFL agreed to share all monies, and changed nothing else in the system, the player pool could increase by nearly $400 million. But the NFL is likely to seek a reduction in the percentage of revenues in which the players share, if the overall pool is dramatically increased. Some low-revenue and small-market teams, which have voiced their concerns over the increasing disparity in the so-called haves and "have-nots, might also ask for some subsidies from the higher-revenue franchises. Upshaw said at a league meeting near Detroit in October that there are eight franchises whose revenues far exceed those of the other 24 teams. It is important that a new deal is in place a year before the current one expires. If not, the salary cap would disappear in the final year of the collective bargaining agreement and owners would be free to spend as much as they wanted on player costs. On the flip side, in an "uncapped" year, players would have to accrue six seasons, instead of four, to gain the right to unrestricted free agency. Upshaw repeated during Super Bowl week that, if the salary cap ever disappears for even one season, the league will never be able to restore it. Most owners agree that, without a salary cap, competitive balance would be all but destroyed. The league office has told owners to hold open the March 2 date for a possible meeting in Atlanta to discuss labor matters and ongoing television negotiations. March 2 marks the start of the free agency period and, essentially, the beginning of a new NFL fiscal year. Upshaw long ago set the date as a target for competing an extension to the labor accord, since a deal would have to be in place by then to affect the 2005 season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkins Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 I hope they don't extend it. Imagine Snyder without a cap. Even if it means a strike shortened season, we have a coach that has won 2 Superbowls in those seasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Upshaw may have something coming to him if he thinks that the expiration of the collective bargaining agreement signals the clock striking twelve for the cap. If negotiations continue until the end and the parties reach a post-expiration impasse, the NFL can, as they did in Brown v. NFL, implement their last, best, and final offer on the cap. Upshaw should also be careful when saying things like "if you don't get a cap deal done before the expiration of the current agreement, there won't be one in the future." That's just grist for the mill for the NFL to file an unfair labor practice charge against the NFLPA for bad faith bargaining if and when things go sour on the cap issues. Of course, if the NFL isn't careful for its own part, they may blow the nonstatutory antitrust exemption they have and get hit with an antitrust suit if they act too hastily. Hopefully, the parties will be able to hash things out and up the cap just in time for the Danny to start spending wildly again. LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wskin44 Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 The issues and stakes are just too large to be worked out in the next few weeks. No real pressure to do anything will occur until this time next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.