BREAKING NEWS... Tags: "CBA talks are OFF"...

[DBoys]

Get ready guys this is what the teams were waiting for now let the dumpage begin!!!!!

:chop: :chop: :chop: :chop: :chop:

 

[DBoys]

Do I understand that basically as soon as somebody was cut we could sign them? Lets say, hypothetically, Washington cuts Arrington at noon could the Cowboys sign him at 1:00? This is just an example off the top of my head.

Yep we could sign him 1 minute after. Everyone was waiting for the final answer on the CBA stuff now that it is over you will see lots of movement.

 

[mbanx]

Yep we could sign him 1 minute after. Everyone was waiting for the final answer on the CBA stuff now that it is over you will see lots of movement.

Do you think Jerry has a plan? Honestly I wonder how quick we will strike of if we will sit on our hands because now there are going to be a whole lot more options than originally thought.

 

[MrPhil]

So do the skins get the screws turned on em or not?

thats the one question I want answered.

I know we are gunna be ok either way this thing unfolds. But I also heard the skins could be screwed or let off a hook depending on how it went down.

So how does this go down?

While I am by no means an expert, the way I understand it is if there is no CBA extension (appears to be likely given this announcement) then all 32 teams must be under the $94.5 million salary cap by 10 pm tonight (I think I got that time right).

So, usuing the skins as an example, they were about $20 million over the $94.5 figure before the Brunell renegotation. I think that freed up another $1.8 M. So, that would leave them about $18 Million in salaries that they would have to trim by the deadline tonight. Again, I am no expert but this is my understanding.

 

[DBoys]

Do you think Jerry has a plan? Honestly I wonder how quick we will strike of if we will sit on our hands because now there are going to be a whole lot more options than originally thought.

It's a god question the only thing I am worried about is we have 4 players TNew, James, Roy, Witten who will need contracts next year.

 

[Bach]

There's still a cap this year, so the foreskins are going to have to dump a lot of players. Next year, if I'm remembering correctly, there won't be a cap. Next year is the year of the greenbacks.

Next year, players will have to be in the league for 6 years to become eligible as opposed to the current 4 years. Plus, with no cap, teams will have more resources to try and keep many of their own FA's.
Now alot of players will still want to test the waters but I don't think it will be a total free for all.
You will also see many teams have a core of high priced plays and then alot of young and old player making small money since there won't be a league minimum.
It should be interesting.

 

[Pokes28]

It's a god question the only thing I am worried about is we have 4 players TNew, James, Roy, Witten who will need contracts next year.

Do not forget that part of the existing CBA is that in 2007, in order to become unrestricted free agents, players must have 6 years NFL experience. So these guys will all be Cowboys regardless. This was part of the poison pill for the players to try and force them to sign a new deal. It seems trivial, but really it isn't.

edit: Bleh. I guess I should finish reading to make sure that others haven't stated the same thing.



David Harrell - Pokes
dwh

 

[DBoys]

Do not forget that part of the existing CBA is that in 2007, in order to become unrestricted free agents, players must have 6 years NFL experience. So these guys will all be Cowboys regardless.

David Harrell - Pokes
dwh

Good point it's going to take awhile to get my brain away from salary cap thinking

 

[DBoys]

Owners break off talks with players union

NFL.com wire reports NEW YORK (March 2, 2006) -- NFL owners voted unanimously Thursday to break off talks with the players' union on a contract extension, leaving the current salary cap in place with the start of free agency looming -- and possibly forcing the mass dumping of veterans.

The owners, who met for 57 minutes Thursday morning, endorsed a recommendation by their management council executive committee to reject the union's latest proposal.

NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue was expected to have a news conference later Thursday morning.

Broncos owner Pat Bowlen (left) and NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue were part of Thursday's meeting.

The breakdown of talks left intact, for now, a salary cap of $94.5 million. The two sides had hoped to add $10 million to $15 million to the 2006 salary cap. Without the additional room, some teams could be forced into wholesale cuts to get beneath the cap by midnight. Free agency starts Friday.

"Without an agreement with the union on an extension, the league year will begin as scheduled at midnight Thursday under the current terms of the CBA," the league said Wednesday in a statement.

Owners did not seem inclined to cut into the difference of 4 percentage points between the sides. New England owner Robert Kraft had suggested that Thursday morning's meeting might be short, just enough time to rubber stamp the executive committee's decision.

One reason was that revenue sharing, a point of contention among the owners, was not on the agenda -- at least not at the start. The union insists that is needed for agreement and some owners agree.

Asked if there could be a deal without it, Buffalo's Ralph Wilson simply said no.

Three days of talks between the league and the NFL Players Association to extend the agreement that runs out in 2008 ended Tuesday with the sides far apart on the percentage of league revenues earmarked for players.

Gene Upshaw, the union's executive director, said the league is offering 56.2 percent of its total revenue for the players, almost four points lower than the union's idea.

"Our number has to start with a six," Upshaw said.

But beyond the numbers is an issue that has divided the owners for two years -- revenue sharing among the teams.

Under the current system, some teams make far more than others in ancillary income, ranging from local radio rights to stadium naming rights and advertising. The lower-revenue teams say that forces them to commit as much as 70 percent of that money to the players while teams with more outside money contribute far less, giving the high-revenue teams more available cash for upfront bonuses to free agents.

Under the current agreement, 2006 is scheduled to be the last year with a salary cap. An uncapped year in 2007 means new rules that will force teams and agents to change their plans this year and could keep a lot of teams out of the free-agent market entirely.

"It might mean that no rookies get signed because no one is sure of the long-term ramifications," said Tom Condon, the agent for a number of the game's top players.

Even more urgent are salary-cap ramifications for many teams, which anticipated a labor agreement and planned for a much bigger ceiling. Washington, for example, could be as much as $25 million over the salary cap after signings over the past few years that anticipated a salary cap figure well over $100 million.

The ramifications of a lower than anticipated cap were evident Wednesday, when some high-priced veterans were cut. Among them were defensive end Trevor Pryce and running back Mike Anderson of Denver, the team's leading rusher last season. Denver also cut tight end Jeb Putzier.

Buffalo, meanwhile, released defensive tackle Sam Adams and Carolina released three veterans: running back Stephen Davis, defensive tackle Brentson Buckner and kick returner Rod Smart, "He Hate Me" of old XFL days.

Miami cut left tackle Damion McIntosh, saving $3.8 million against the cap, and former Pro Bowl cornerback Sam Madison. The Dolphins are a prime example of a team that needs a new labor agreement: They are estimated to be about $9 million over a $95 million cap.

 

[mbanx]

What happens to the players coming out in 2008? I read if this happens there would not be a draft in 08.

 

[DBoys]

What happens to the players coming out in 2008? I read if this happens there would not be a draft in 08.

At some point I think the NFL would try and implement a Draft even though no CBA is present.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

OH my...

THIS is going to be an interesting next few days.

Historic in a lot of ways.

Some good/some bad.

 

[Bach]

Do I understand that basically as soon as somebody was cut we could sign them? Lets say, hypothetically, Washington cuts Arrington at noon could the Cowboys sign him at 1:00? This is just an example off the top of my head.

Teams can't sign players until after midnight tonight.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

While I am by no means an expert, the way I understand it is if there is no CBA extension (appears to be likely given this announcement) then all 32 teams must be under the $94.5 million salary cap by 10 pm tonight (I think I got that time right).

So, usuing the skins as an example, they were about $20 million over the $94.5 figure before the Brunell renegotation. I think that freed up another $1.8 M. So, that would leave them about $18 Million in salaries that they would have to trim by the deadline tonight. Again, I am no expert but this is my understanding.

your understanding is dead-on

 

[CaptainAmerica]

In case anyone is paying attention, the Yankees haven't won a World Series since 2000 and that Yankee dynasty was with a team built of mostly it's own farm hands.

"Buying" a championship is not as easy as some make it sound. They still have to play the game on the field.

 

[CooterBrown]

If the union decertifies, the NFL could not hold a draft because that would violate anti-trust laws by creating collusion among competitors.

I don't see any way that things ever reach that point though. Upshaw would be unemployed if the union decertified. I can't see him working himself out of a job. He is just sabre rattling. The union needs the NFL a lot more than the NFL needs the union.

 

[Bach]

In case anyone is paying attention, the Yankees haven't won a World Series since 2000 and that Yankee dynasty was with a team built of mostly it's own farm hands.

"Buying" a championship is not as easy as some make it sound. They still have to play the game on the field.

That is true. But they in the World Series or ALCS just about every year.
I agree it doesn't guarantee anyone a championship, especially not every year. But it does keep those teams, like the Yankee and Red Sox, in the hunt every year.

 

[Cowboy4ever]

I understand the ramifications of no cba agreement this year, the cap figure stays at 94.5 million. But all this talk of no cap next year and beyond, is alittle premature, i think. I am sure they will continuing talking and the union will come to terms with the owners. Afterall its in their benefit to do so. After all, 56 % is better than 0% and i am sure someone will bring that up to Upshaw. I hope they reach an agreement soon. I would hate to see the free for all in 2008 with no draft. that being said, this will be a good time to get involved in the FA market quick,, going to be lots of talent out there this year.

 

[ZenItRam]

Teams can't sign players until after midnight tonight.

I thought teams could sign player that are cut at anytime ... it's just players that are UFA or RFA that teams have to wait on ...

Am I wrong again?

 

[jazzcat22]

Could this end up in another "Scab" season? Or will they just play without a CBA?

The current CBA runs through the 2007 season, so no work stoppage will happen until 2008.