[70Chip]

A few thoughts on the Sportsline article about the cap.

First, it seems to me to be shoddy reportage to rely on other teams' cap people to comment, without giving the Redskins a chance to reply. As usual, these sources are anonymous. Que Cosell's rant about the de plor a bull state of sports jour na lism.

Second, if there is no new CBA, my understanding is that a number of teams will have to make radical cutbacks in 2006-not just the Skins. After 2006 it's Katey bar the door (as Ken Beatrice used to say) and we can spend as much as we like.

Third, if there is a new CBA and I realize the clock is ticking, the overall revenue pool will go up because of the demand from smaller teams to include more revenue streams. In addition, the players share of that overall pie will be higher because this is Upshaw's central demand and he cannot face his members without some victory on this front. Therefore isn't it likely that a renewed CBA means that the cap will spike way up and save the Redskins from the article's hellish scenario? Would this increase the 2006 cap or would the affect/effect be delayed?

I would like to hear from our resident experts, Schneed and Canuck. Their projections are a little more crowd pleasing. Am I right in my basic asessment? No CBA = bad news for us and all other teams over the cap in 2006 and, Renewed CBA = much higher caps bail us out. I know we've been over this but the article makes it seem that we are screwed regardless and I don't see it that way.