Upshaw tells agents to prepare for uncapped '07

The Brain

Defiler of Cornflakes
Joined
Jan 8, 2003
Posts
32,125
Reaction score
1
Points
38
Location
Over There ---->
Website
Visit site
Well at least this would make some sense in the whole Foster deal, and if I'm Hurney I restructuring EVERY damned player I've got so the biggest cap hit would be for THIS season, but that would prevent any Free Agent signings outside of the team's current free agents.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2343073

Upshaw tells agents to prepare for uncapped '07

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By John Clayton
ESPN.com

NFL Players' Association executive director Gene Upshaw told a seminar of agents on Friday to prepare for a 2006 season without an extension to the collective bargaining agreement, setting up an uncapped year in 2007.
"March 3 will be the beginning of a new league year and we are just not there yet," Upshaw said. "I'm taking the position now that it won't get done."

No negotiating sessions are scheduled although Upshaw said he is willing to talk. He told agents the issues are so far apart that there is virtually no way a deal could be set before next Thursday, the eve of the start of free agency. Under no circumstance, Upshaw said, will the union agree to delay the start of free agency to accommodate a deal.

Three major issues were cited by Upshaw for an extension not getting done:

• Neither side can agree on the percentage of total revenues that will go to the players. Upshaw wouldn't elaborate on where the numbers were in the negotiations, but he has publicly said he wants a percentage number in the 60s. Reportedly, the sides are four percent apart but that number wasn't discussed by Upshaw.

"We want to have a higher percentage," Upshaw said. "We want more dollars to come into the system."

How significant is the percentage differential?

Upshaw said each percentage point is worth $2 million of cap room per team early in any CBA agreement, $2.5 million in the middle and $2.9 million in the end.

• The NFLPA won't agree to any type of CBA extension that doesn't have a new revenue sharing plan in the future. The differences between the teams with the highest and lowest revenue-sharing totals have grown as much as $100 million dollars. The league's owners aren't close on any revenue-sharing deal among themselves, and Upshaw considers that something the union would never accept in a new deal without revised revenue sharing.

• Upshaw's third difference is the league's "G-3" program in which money is loaned to teams by the league to finance new stadium construction. The union has to sign off on any "G-3" plan because it comes out of the gross revenue pool. Upshaw is asking for a "flip tax" in which the union gets a return on the investment. The NFLPA hasn't signed off on new stadium "G-3" deals for the Cowboys, Colts and Giants.

With nothing on the horizon that gives him optimism of any breakthroughs, Upshaw set a soft deadline of Friday for getting a CBA extension. According to him, the sides are so far apart that a six-year extension would be hard to settle before the hard deadline of March 3.

To give agents guidance, Upshaw told the room that the 2006 cap should be between $92 million and $95 million but he thinks the realistic number will be $96 million. That number should be settled within in the next day or so. He said the benefits package paid by teams is $13.8 million.

Though he will be available by phone, Upshaw planned to leave Indianapolis on Friday afternoon and return to Washington.

"I'm leaving," Upshaw said. "We're running out of time. You might as well prepare as if we are heading for an upcapped year."


John Clayton is a senior NFL writer for ESPN.com.
 
The owners will lock out rather than let that happen.
 
Collin said:
The owners will lock out rather than let that happen.
I'm not really sure that they can. Because they're still under a CBA, and the last year is technically this coming year. It was left as a final uncapped year. While it was always assumed that the new deal would be in place and override this deal, at this point it won't be. So in such a case if the NFL owners lock out the players during a year in which a Collective Bargaining Agreement is in place, they are in turn violating that agreement and would lose a suit in court to allow them to do that.
 
The Brain said:
Well at least this would make some sense in the whole Foster deal, and if I'm Hurney I restructuring EVERY damned player I've got so the biggest cap hit would be for THIS season, but that would prevent any Free Agent signings outside of the team's current free agents.
I think the CBA prevents that by (from memory) limiting UFA hiring, limits restructing of contracts to 120% of previous, and other stuff to prevent the team from loading this year with guaranteed dollars. If I find the sections I'll post a summary.
 
Gen Scope said:
Wait, does this count as the 2006 season or the 2007 season?
what year is it?


To be fair, the fiscal year technically starts, well, now. 2006 started at the beginning of free agency. But there's no way this would be fiscal year 2007 when we haven't played 2006.
 
Gen Scope said:
I think the CBA prevents that by (from memory) limiting UFA hiring, limits restructing of contracts to 120% of previous, and other stuff to prevent the team from loading this year with guaranteed dollars. If I find the sections I'll post a summary.
That's what I thought with the UFA hiring. As I said, I think you can only resign UFA from your own team. Sorta making them a weird RFA. And if they'll allow up to 120% then I'll take 120%. Whatever I can change it to I will to help free up future space.
 
This is what I refered to when I complained about the NFL ending up like Major League Baseball. A handfull of teams that make the lions share of the pot whant to keep it or keep a much larger % while the tweener teams like Carolina or Jacksonville or whatever suffer from lack of endormsent deals, or general merchandise sales. This really irks me and I swear if the NFL ends up like MLB then they can kiss my fat a$$ just as much. Greed. Thats what this boils down to. They have been talking about this for at least the past 18 months and here we are on the threashold and yet we are miles apart.:banginghe
 
Okay, by the CBA this is called the "Final Capped Year" (the 2006-2007 season). Next year is called the "Uncapped Year" (the 2007-2008 season). Now, the CBA will still be "the law" for the next two seasons thus no lockout is allowed. It also means that this year the Panthers will have to live within the $94-$96M cap figure we keep hearing about so no restructuring contracts to load this year. Next year is another matter. The one thing in particular I see that is bad for us (and every other team) is that bonus dollars for this year can only be prorated over a 4 year period. So when you see a signing bonus this year think 25% is straight to cap.
 
Last edited:

Members online

Latest posts

Trending content

Forum statistics

Threads
158,340
Posts
2,824,039
Members
11,199
Latest member
garyfrank231
Back
Top