|
|
Sheriff Gonna Getcha 03-03-2006, 03:04 PM Apparently, revenue sharing among the owners and with the players aren't the only issues on the table in the CBA negotiations. According to ESPN.com, a major issue in the CBA negotiations is how the league counts player bonuses over the life of a contract. It's a term that both sides commonly refer to as "cash over cap."
The Redskins employ a cap strategy whereby they sign players to big-contracts with high bonuses and low salaries. This strategy, made possible by the team's high revenue stream, allows the team to annually entice multiple free agents with big bonuses. Moreover, the strategy allows the Redskins to be particularly creative when restructuring players' deals; it pays players big money immediately, but allows the cap hit to be spread out over several seasons.
This cap strategy arguably gives the Redskins a competitive advantage over lower-revenue teams that cannot afford to pay such large bonuses. Accordingly, lower-revenue clubs may begin to do battle with the Dan Snyders and Jerry Joneses over more than just revenue sharing proposals.
Mort believes that if this issue can be resolved between the owners, an extension to the CBA will be reached.
Things get more and more complicated every day. :frusty:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2351271
SmootSmack 03-03-2006, 03:19 PM Slightly off-topic for a second. Ramseyfan, as a sports fan and an aspiring lawyer you must find all this doubly exciting. Any thoughts on getting involved with the NFL or NFLPA as an attorney?
Sheriff Gonna Getcha 03-03-2006, 03:23 PM Slightly off-topic for a second. Ramseyfan, as a sports fan and an aspiring lawyer you must find all this doubly exciting. Any thoughts on getting involved with the NFL or NFLPA as an attorney?
Yes and no. Yes, I would love to work for the NFLPA or NFL, or become an agent. But unfortunately, there are so many people who want to do the same thing. Unless I run across $5,000,000 and can buy myself access, I don't think there's a realistic way into the process. But, trust me, I'm investigating it.
For now, it looks like I'll be working in either the commercial real estate or litigation division of the firm I will be working for. The firm is massive (1,200+ attorneys), but unfortunately it's reach doesn't extend into the NFL. I'd have to work there for multiple years, gain experience as a litigator (the NFLPA and NFL aren't willing to train newbies like big firms are), and then try to finagle my way in. At least, that's the way Tagliabue did it.
Defensewins 03-03-2006, 08:32 PM Back to original topic:
I feel like there are several teams that are looking to stick it to the Skins and the other wealthy teams that are currently way over the cap. I wonder if a CBA might get voted down just in order to see some of the rich teams get completely screwed.
If I were one of the teams that is currently under the cap, what incentive would I have to vote in favor of any agreement? I could vote against any deal until the deadline passes, then the Redskins roster and other teams over the cap would get their rosters torn apart and I would be there waiting to pick up all of the talent that gets dumped.
Skinsfanmania 03-04-2006, 01:14 AM Yes and no. Yes, I would love to work for the NFLPA or NFL, or become an agent. But unfortunately, there are so many people who want to do the same thing. Unless I run across $5,000,000 and can buy myself access, I don't think there's a realistic way into the process. But, trust me, I'm investigating it.
For now, it looks like I'll be working in either the commercial real estate or litigation division of the firm I will be working for. The firm is massive (1,200+ attorneys), but unfortunately it's reach doesn't extend into the NFL. I'd have to work there for multiple years, gain experience as a litigator (the NFLPA and NFL aren't willing to train newbies like big firms are), and then try to finagle my way in. At least, that's the way Tagliabue did it.
Tagliabue was close friends with Pete Rozell and that is how he got in.
Huddle 03-04-2006, 07:57 AM As Redskin fans, we love the idea of Dan Snyder finding a way to use the team's higher revenue stream to try to gain a competitive advantage but the league wants parity on the field. Using cash bonuses to create a higher actual cap for our team amounts to a loophole that the league wants to close. I don't fault them for that.
Despite our bigger payroll, we haven't been able to put more talent on the field. I think the next step for Dan should be to find a way to buy a more intelligent personnel system, one more accurate in grading draft prospects and free agents.
GoSkins! 03-04-2006, 10:16 AM Back to original topic:
I feel like there are several teams that are looking to stick it to the Skins and the other wealthy teams that are currently way over the cap. I wonder if a CBA might get voted down just in order to see some of the rich teams get completely screwed.
If I were one of the teams that is currently under the cap, what incentive would I have to vote in favor of any agreement? I could vote against any deal until the deadline passes, then the Redskins roster and other teams over the cap would get their rosters torn apart and I would be there waiting to pick up all of the talent that gets dumped.
Yeah, that would be great... for exactly one year.
That strategy would destroy the "not rich" teams in the long run.
Pocket$ $traight 03-04-2006, 10:50 AM From what I have heard there is no way any of the owners want to go without a CBA. I have heard that no CBA could lead to anti-trust suits. That is a road that no one wants to travel.
That Guy 03-04-2006, 10:57 AM From what I have heard there is no way any of the owners want to go without a CBA. I have heard that no CBA could lead to anti-trust suits. That is a road that no one wants to travel.
upshaw keeps saying the players have the advantage if the salary cap goes away... the truth is the top 3-5 players at most positions may have an advantage, but everyone else is going to suffer from lower pay. It's a bad bluff.
but yeah, the bigger worry moving forward would be legal situations, not a lack of profitability.
70Chip 03-04-2006, 12:50 PM It seems to me that the demands of the low revenue teams (which must be a malapropism since I read yesterday that the Bengals consistently report the highest profit margin in the league) have become unreasonable. They are behaving like antagonists from an Ayn Rand novel. They not only want to destroy innovation and competition--they also seem to have set as their goal a world in which they don't even have to think.
The cash over cap thing is another example of these guys trying to drag the rest of the league down to their sorry level. Bruce Allen was on NFL Net just now and pointed out that the league did fine for 75 years in an uncapped environment. I'm with him. If you can't run with the big dogs, then stay on the porch.
|