CBA agreed in principle (1 Viewer)

[perry147]

He also told me that Jerry Jones continues to be the ring leader against a new CBA and that he is still trying win votes from other owners to block an extension. MSO and the GM will be in the meeting all day and he told me that the next news he hears from his GM will be yea or nay on the extension.

I would be more interested in why Jerry Jones is opposed to it. As much as I don't like the man, I still have a great amount of respect for him as a business man.

I'm a fan of a small market team but I see JJ's point. He's really been aggressive in securing marketing deals above and beyond the NFL deals to benefit the Cowboys. Add to that the popularity of his brand (the Boys) and what that means in terms of merchandising and TV viewership. It's safe to say he is responsible for a big chunk of the NFL pie and he feels he shouldn't have to share it all. I can understand that. But he also needs to realize he benefits from a healthy NFL and it's important to keep the league and all of its teams financially strong.

But if you were in his shoes would you want to share with teams that don't have any desire to make special deals and try to make more money. This IMHO kinda sets the tone the owners meetings.

 

[scooper]

He also told me that Jerry Jones continues to be the ring leader against a new CBA and that he is still trying win votes from other owners to block an extension. MSO and the GM will be in the meeting all day and he told me that the next news he hears from his GM will be yea or nay on the extension.

I would be more interested in why Jerry Jones is opposed to it. As much as I don't like the man, I still have a great amount of respect for him as a business man.

I'm a fan of a small market team but I see JJ's point. He's really been aggressive in securing marketing deals above and beyond the NFL deals to benefit the Cowboys. Add to that the popularity of his brand (the Boys) and what that means in terms of merchandising and TV viewership. It's safe to say he is responsible for a big chunk of the NFL pie and he feels he shouldn't have to share it all. I can understand that. But he also needs to realize he benefits from a healthy NFL and it's important to keep the league and all of its teams financially strong.

But what is his counter-point to the proposed CBA agreement by the players?

Any proposal accepted as the new CBA will include the language on revenue sharing. My speculation (and that's all it is) is that the player's proposal includes a revenue sharing plan that Jones doesn't like. I don't think his argument is with the players, but with other owners. This thing really is a three-way negotiation.

 

[Bri]

Chris Mortensen, on ESPN Sportcenter, just now stated that there IS an agreement in principle, and it will be with a revenue figure at 59.5% and some cap over cash limitations.

Said that the NFL accepted Upshaws last proposal ten minutes after the deadline. It still needs to go to the owners for final ratification and approvel, so its not definite. But a deal has been reached.

so Mort was full of ....eh?

I think the original post was misleading and the original poster misunderstood what Mortensen was saying.

could be

 

[BlueOnion]

Any proposal accepted as the new CBA will include the language on revenue sharing. My speculation (and that's all it is) is that the player's proposal includes a revenue sharing plan that Jones doesn't like. I don't think his argument is with the players, but with other owners. This thing really is a three-way negotiation.

Ok, we might be going in the right direction now. Possibly the proposal from the NFLPA is not exclusive to just their own cut (59.5%), but it also tells Jerry Jones how much money he should have to share. I can understand Jerry Jones' position, "A third party is telling him what he has to do with his own money."

 

[scooper]

Any proposal accepted as the new CBA will include the language on revenue sharing.  My speculation (and that's all it is) is that the player's proposal includes a revenue sharing plan that Jones doesn't like.  I don't think his argument is with the players, but with other owners.  This thing really is a three-way negotiation.

Ok, we might be going in the right direction now. Possibly the proposal from the NFLPA is not exclusive to just their own cut (59.5%), but it also tells Jerry Jones how much money he should have to share. I can understand Jerry Jones' position, "A third party is telling him what he has to do with his own money."

I think that's the gist of it.

 

[BlueOnion]

Any proposal accepted as the new CBA will include the language on revenue sharing.  My speculation (and that's all it is) is that the player's proposal includes a revenue sharing plan that Jones doesn't like.  I don't think his argument is with the players, but with other owners.  This thing really is a three-way negotiation.

Ok, we might be going in the right direction now. Possibly the proposal from the NFLPA is not exclusive to just their own cut (59.5%), but it also tells Jerry Jones how much money he should have to share. I can understand Jerry Jones' position, "A third party is telling him what he has to do with his own money."

I think that's the gist of it.

And I can certainly understand why small markets would want to villify Jones for his opposition to the CBA. If you were a small market owner and your employees came out with a labor proposal that required a company making much more money then yours to share their profits with your organization, I don't think I would object to the proposal either.

 

[fatness]

same person again

My source told me a few minutes ago that their staff saw the ESPN update that, if the new CBA is approved, that free agency won't start until 12:01 friday instead of thursday. The opinion in their meeting room is this: if the owners are close on a revenue sharing plan then the union will probably extend the cut deadline again but probably for just one day. Remember, THIS IS ONLY THEIR OPINION. THEY DID NOT HERE THIS FROM THE OWNER OR THEIR GM.

They still think the CBA will get approved though.

You think you are frustrated, you should here how frustrated their personnel guys are. They don't even give a sh** right now what happens they just want SOMETHING to be decided.

They are baffled that it took the owners this long to start seriously debating the revenue-sharing issue.

 

[David Yudkin]

As of a few hours ago, it looks like the owners were still jabbering away at each other without even a fledgling amount of consensus. I was not aware that there are 3 different plans that they are discussing.

LINK

 

[LTsharks]

From ESPN.com

Should the owners vote against Upshaw's proposal before tonight's deadline, free agency will start at midnight ET and the NFL's economic model will begin to change over the next three years. This season would be the last in which there is a salary cap(unless they negotiate a new CBA next offseason). In 2007, there would be no cap and and players would have to wait until after their sixth season to become a free agent(unless they negotiate a new CBA next offseason). In 2008, the CBA expires, and if no deal is done before then, the NFLPA would likely decertify. A lockout would come next.

The bolded sections are my edit. Why is that never included in these stories. I know the players have said they won't ever have a cap again, but they also want this deal done now. I guess it just doesn't sound as scary. I almost hope there isn't a deal so we can go through all of this crazy drama again next offseason.

 

[B-Deep]

From ESPN.com

Should the owners vote against Upshaw's proposal before tonight's deadline, free agency will start at midnight ET and the NFL's economic model will begin to change over the next three years. This season would be the last in which there is a salary cap(unless they negotiate a new CBA next offseason). In 2007, there would be no cap and and players would have to wait until after their sixth season to become a free agent(unless they negotiate a new CBA next offseason). In 2008, the CBA expires, and if no deal is done before then, the NFLPA would likely decertify. A lockout would come next.

The bolded sections are my edit. Why is that never included in these stories. I know the players have said they won't ever have a cap again, but they also want this deal done now. I guess it just doesn't sound as scary. I almost hope there isn't a deal so we can go through all of this crazy drama again next offseason.

Because there is not much incentive for players to agree to a CBA right before an uncapped season. Most of the players think (right or wrong) that the salary cap is a burden and that it limits they will make more money and be better off without it. There's NO WAY they let a bunch of vetrans get cut this year because the restricted cap rules, and then come to an agreement right before they get the cap lifted.

 

[BlueOnion]

From ESPN.com

Should the owners vote against Upshaw's proposal before tonight's deadline, free agency will start at midnight ET and the NFL's economic model will begin to change over the next three years. This season would be the last in which there is a salary cap(unless they negotiate a new CBA next offseason). In 2007, there would be no cap and and players would have to wait until after their sixth season to become a free agent(unless they negotiate a new CBA next offseason). In 2008, the CBA expires, and if no deal is done before then, the NFLPA would likely decertify. A lockout would come next.

The bolded sections are my edit. Why is that never included in these stories. I know the players have said they won't ever have a cap again, but they also want this deal done now. I guess it just doesn't sound as scary. I almost hope there isn't a deal so we can go through all of this crazy drama again next offseason.

If a new CBA is not reached this year, the players in the NFL will pay dearly this immediate year. Very unlikely we get to 2007 and the NFLPA says, "Boy we got screwed last year in 2006, but sure we'll consider a new cap for 2007."

 

[BlackHole]

From ESPN.com

Should the owners vote against Upshaw's proposal before tonight's deadline, free agency will start at midnight ET and the NFL's economic model will begin to change over the next three years. This season would be the last in which there is a salary cap(unless they negotiate a new CBA next offseason). In 2007, there would be no cap and and players would have to wait until after their sixth season to become a free agent(unless they negotiate a new CBA next offseason). In 2008, the CBA expires, and if no deal is done before then, the NFLPA would likely decertify. A lockout would come next.

The bolded sections are my edit.  Why is that never included in these stories.  I know the players have said they won't ever have a cap again, but they also want this deal done now.  I guess it just doesn't sound as scary.  I almost hope there isn't a deal so we can go through all of this crazy drama again next offseason.

Because there is not much incentive for players to agree to a CBA right before an uncapped season. Most of the players think (right or wrong) that the salary cap is a burden and that it limits they will make more money and be better off without it. There's NO WAY they let a bunch of vetrans get cut this year because the restricted cap rules, and then come to an agreement right before they get the cap lifted.

I think the incentive lies with the majority vote. I tried to find a way to gather the information on the number of players under 5 years in the league as to the number 5 years and over. I am not a stat guru and could not find a good source. What I'm wondering is where the majority is, due to the actual advantage for each type of player.If I have under 5 years of service. I know I am looking at 2 more years until I can be a free agent without a CBA. That is not a good proposition for the average player. They are probably up for free agency before that time period and due to the new set up, would be ineligible for free agency, thus forced into a negotiation situation that is unfavorable. This type of player can not be too happy with the thought of no CBA. The ones that are in the 5-6 year range and ahve a contract coming to an end have the most to gain with an open market. The players outside of the 6 year time period are generally (not the star players/studs of course) are looking at the tail end of their careers and want a big pay day. However if they really look at it, with an open market due after next year, how many would receive a big long term contract right now? Not many of the average players IMO. Then you look at the players that are in the twilight of their careers. They gain nothing from being cut this year due to the salary cap not going up and other teams under paying for them due to the restrictions.

I think the players have just as much and even more to lose on an individual basis as the owners do. If the CBA is not signed, I will be surprised. Not shocked, but surprised.

Just my lame $.02 on this.

 

[LTsharks]

From ESPN.com

Should the owners vote against Upshaw's proposal before tonight's deadline, free agency will start at midnight ET and the NFL's economic model will begin to change over the next three years. This season would be the last in which there is a salary cap(unless they negotiate a new CBA next offseason). In 2007, there would be no cap and and players would have to wait until after their sixth season to become a free agent(unless they negotiate a new CBA next offseason). In 2008, the CBA expires, and if no deal is done before then, the NFLPA would likely decertify. A lockout would come next.

The bolded sections are my edit.  Why is that never included in these stories.  I know the players have said they won't ever have a cap again, but they also want this deal done now.  I guess it just doesn't sound as scary.  I almost hope there isn't a deal so we can go through all of this crazy drama again next offseason.

If a new CBA is not reached this year, the players in the NFL will pay dearly this immediate year. Very unlikely we get to 2007 and the NFLPA says, "Boy we got screwed last year in 2006, but sure we'll consider a new cap for 2007."

I see your point and agree to an extent. But you also have to consider that if they didn't get a deal done before the '07 season (cap or not), they would be looking at no deal at all for '08. That isn't a good scenario for anyone, so my point is there still would be considerable motivation to do a deal next offseason as well.

 

[Bri]

Chris Mortensen, on ESPN Sportcenter, just now stated that there IS an agreement in principle, and it will be with a revenue figure at 59.5% and some cap over cash limitations.

Said that the NFL accepted Upshaws last proposal ten minutes after the deadline. It still needs to go to the owners for final ratification and approvel, so its not definite. But a deal has been reached.

so Mort was full of ....eh?

I think the original post was misleading and the original poster misunderstood what Mortensen was saying.

could be

why oh why hasn't FBG or frenzy changed it then? I keep thinking "finally!" and click on it to be fooled. Why I keep falling for it...I don't know. Pretty soon his post will be accurate.