DeAngelo Williams UFA/RFA status (1 Viewer)

[cobalt_27]

If I have this correct, a number of players like DeAngelo Williams were slated to become unrestricted free agents this off-season. However, some teams (like the Panthers with DW) elected to still tender a formal offer to these players as though they were restricted free agents on the off-chance that a new CBA might allow for this act on players with 4+ years of service (or 5+ or whatever).

Assuming the lockout is lifted for good and we play under 2010 rules, the actions of the teams like the Panthers is moot, right? DeAngelo Williams is an unrestricted free agent and can sign with whomever he wants, is this correct?

 

[fruity pebbles]

Not sure but if you play under 2010 rules, hed be a restricted free agent like Mankins and Vjax wouldnt he?

 

[cobalt_27]

Not sure but if you play under 2010 rules, hed be a restricted free agent like Mankins and Vjax wouldnt he?

No, I think we're dealing with two separate issues.VJAX and Mankins were slapped with the franchise tag, if I'm not mistaken.Restricted free agents are those with 3 years experience who can test out the FA market, but the Prior Clubs have the right to match any qualifying offer.Unrestricted free agents are those with 4+ years experience who can test out the FA market without the Prior Club having any rights to do anything.DW was slated to be a UFA this year, but in sort of an unusual move...the way I understood it, the Panthers extended him an offer as though he were a RFA because there was the possibility that a new CBA might say that teams could do this with players who have 4 years experience, instead of 3. I'm asking this because my understanding of the system and DW's status is murky at best. But, this is/was my interpretation, and if I'm right, and if Nelson's ruling holds, my understanding is DW is free to go wherever he wants.

 

[fruity pebbles]

Not sure but if you play under 2010 rules, hed be a restricted free agent like Mankins and Vjax wouldnt he?

No, I think we're dealing with two separate issues.VJAX and Mankins were slapped with the franchise tag, if I'm not mistaken.Restricted free agents are those with 3 years experience who can test out the FA market, but the Prior Clubs have the right to match any qualifying offer.Unrestricted free agents are those with 4+ years experience who can test out the FA market without the Prior Club having any rights to do anything.DW was slated to be a UFA this year, but in sort of an unusual move...the way I understood it, the Panthers extended him an offer as though he were a RFA because there was the possibility that a new CBA might say that teams could do this with players who have 4 years experience, instead of 3. I'm asking this because my understanding of the system and DW's status is murky at best. But, this is/was my interpretation, and if I'm right, and if Nelson's ruling holds, my understanding is DW is free to go wherever he wants.

Yeah you're mistaken. Both Mankins and Vjax were restricted free agents through a snafu in the rules. Both had 5 years in the NFL but were not allowed to be unrestricted free agents because of the lack of a CBA.

 

[cobalt_27]

Not sure but if you play under 2010 rules, hed be a restricted free agent like Mankins and Vjax wouldnt he?

No, I think we're dealing with two separate issues.VJAX and Mankins were slapped with the franchise tag, if I'm not mistaken.Restricted free agents are those with 3 years experience who can test out the FA market, but the Prior Clubs have the right to match any qualifying offer.Unrestricted free agents are those with 4+ years experience who can test out the FA market without the Prior Club having any rights to do anything.DW was slated to be a UFA this year, but in sort of an unusual move...the way I understood it, the Panthers extended him an offer as though he were a RFA because there was the possibility that a new CBA might say that teams could do this with players who have 4 years experience, instead of 3. I'm asking this because my understanding of the system and DW's status is murky at best. But, this is/was my interpretation, and if I'm right, and if Nelson's ruling holds, my understanding is DW is free to go wherever he wants.

Yeah you're mistaken. Both Mankins and Vjax were restricted free agents through a snafu in the rules. Both had 5 years in the NFL but were not allowed to be unrestricted free agents because of the lack of a CBA.

Hmm. Well, that muddles things.So, crap...all things today being equal, is DW going to be a Panther in 2011?

 

[fruity pebbles]

Not sure but if you play under 2010 rules, hed be a restricted free agent like Mankins and Vjax wouldnt he?

No, I think we're dealing with two separate issues.VJAX and Mankins were slapped with the franchise tag, if I'm not mistaken.Restricted free agents are those with 3 years experience who can test out the FA market, but the Prior Clubs have the right to match any qualifying offer.Unrestricted free agents are those with 4+ years experience who can test out the FA market without the Prior Club having any rights to do anything.DW was slated to be a UFA this year, but in sort of an unusual move...the way I understood it, the Panthers extended him an offer as though he were a RFA because there was the possibility that a new CBA might say that teams could do this with players who have 4 years experience, instead of 3. I'm asking this because my understanding of the system and DW's status is murky at best. But, this is/was my interpretation, and if I'm right, and if Nelson's ruling holds, my understanding is DW is free to go wherever he wants.

Yeah you're mistaken. Both Mankins and Vjax were restricted free agents through a snafu in the rules. Both had 5 years in the NFL but were not allowed to be unrestricted free agents because of the lack of a CBA.

Hmm. Well, that muddles things.So, crap...all things today being equal, is DW going to be a Panther in 2011?

Beats me. But if they open up free agency without a CBA im assuming the rules will be similar to last year.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

If they play under the 2010 rules, Williams will be a RFA. The Panthers could still trade him for less than his 1 and 3 tender though.

 

[Donnybrook]

If they play under 2010 rules then the final 8 rules will also apply. http://weblogs.balti...ncapped_ye.html

 

[Hoosier16]

If they play under the 2010 FA rules without a CBA, then his name will be at the top of the antitrust lawsuit.

 

[az_prof]

My assumption would be that any FAs, UR or R, are now free. If the CBA is no longer active then there are no rules in place beyond individual contracts. If you don't have a player under contract, he is free to negotiate with other teams.

 

[David Dodds]

My assumption would be that any FAs, UR or R, are now free. If the CBA is no longer active then there are no rules in place beyond individual contracts. If you don't have a player under contract, he is free to negotiate with other teams.

This is how I expect this to go as well. The owners could set up new rules, but if they are in breach of anti-trust laws (where damages are treble), they really would be playing with fire.

 

[Blackjacks]

So does anyone have an idea on when FA's can start to sign?

Did yesterday's descion change anything with trading NFL current players during the NFL draft?

 

[Holy Schneikes]

My assumption would be that any FAs, UR or R, are now free. If the CBA is no longer active then there are no rules in place beyond individual contracts. If you don't have a player under contract, he is free to negotiate with other teams.

That's one possibility. The other possibility is that this injunction just "extends" the last active CBA until something else gets worked out. In which case, all of the rules from last year carry over to this year. Otherwise, why is there going to be a draft? Wasn't that part of the CBA? If no CBA, aren't all players not under contract free to sign with any club they choose? I think that's why some teams went ahead and tagged guys like Williams - just in case.I have yet to hear anyone with any kind of real "authority" (or knowledge) say for sure which way this is going to go. It doesn't seem like ANYONE really knows at this point, and that includes the league and the players. Various teams seem to be operating under different assumptions, and various agents etc seem to be have differing opinions as well.One thing is for sure - it's going to be an interesting Summer.

 

[David Yudkin]

My assumption would be that any FAs, UR or R, are now free. If the CBA is no longer active then there are no rules in place beyond individual contracts. If you don't have a player under contract, he is free to negotiate with other teams.

This is how I expect this to go as well. The owners could set up new rules, but if they are in breach of anti-trust laws (where damages are treble), they really would be playing with fire.

If they revert to the 2010 rules, Williams would be a RFA, just like Mankins and VJax were (UFA would jump from 4 years to 6 years of service). I don't even think that there is much wiggle room to think otherwise. Similarly, if they use the 2010 structure, there would still be franchise tags as well.There have been times when the league played without a CBA for several years while things played out in court. IIRC, they simply kept using the expiring CBA rules until a new one was agreed upon or the court ruled.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

I dont think that anyone knows the status until we know if we are getting a stay, and if not Im assuming the owners will roll with 2010 rules,which anything they do might be cause for more litigation.

Seriously just get back to the bargaining table already