CBA Term Sheet

gimmesix;3999811 said:
Reading back over it, it looks to me like he was just providing answers. I see no evidence that he "took issue."

Just offering an objective opinion, for what it's worth.

Agreed.
 
Pash may be saying "no opt out", but my understanding is the players still want one, one of the reasons they haven't pulled the trigger yet.

Hopefully the pressure forces their hand.
 
peplaw06;3999825 said:
It's an insult to women to compare you to them?? :laugh2:

I didn't say that, you did.
No, the insult is to lay claim to women acting a certain why at given times of the month. Misogyny at it's finest.

If you doubt this I could PM several of our female posters and ask them how palatable your comment is and send you the responses. Betcha a nickel they aren't too flattered.

You asked a question about the opt outs. Adam stated that based on the outline of the offer he didn't see an opt out term in there. I saw the press conference where Pash and Goodell both indicated that there was no opt out clause. I provided the information. How you get that I took issue with it is beyond me.

Apparently when I provided the information, you took issue to it when you said there's no way you would know that because you hadn't seen an article. I merely informed you that he said it in his press conference, and you got all in a huff again saying you "clearly hadn't watched the presser." Then you claimed I was taking issue with everything you said on the topic, which is bull.

I actually thought you were being obtuse, but I suppose you were just being hyper-sensitive, as usual.
No, I was trying to tell you I was unaware of what Pash had said. I read this thread because Adam is good information. If all you were doing was letitng me know it was from him that is fine, but when I explained I had not read his comments you seemed a little terse in telling me he gave a press conference. I wasn't watching TV. I was reading this forum and asking Adam a question about that point. If I was asking that it seems obvious to me that I did not see the press conference. I have now.

I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. It was unintentional on my part to not know Pash had been on TV mentioning that very question.
 
Hostile;3999870 said:
I'm sorry for the misunderstanding.
No problem, and thanks.

Hopefully, one of these days, you'll realize I'm not out to get you.
 
peplaw06;3999985 said:
No problem, and thanks.

Hopefully, one of these days, you'll realize I'm not out to get you.
We just seem to butt heads a lot lately and I couldn't understand why you were so adamant about something I had not seen or heard. That's all.
 
AdamJT13;3999513 said:
I just wanted to point out this new aspect. Under the old system, teams had no incentive to create new revenue streams that didn't have a profit margin of more than 50 percent, because they would have lost money. They still need a 40 percent profit margin now, which still seems high, but it is a lot better than 50 percent. And the players will actually get a HIGHER percentage of the TV money than before.
This isn't exactly right. If Jerry is deciding to make an investment that might bring in an additional $10 million in revenue, he has to calculate in the cost of distributing whatever portion to the other owners pursuant to their revenue sharing agreement, plus 1/32 of 40% of that extra $10 million, which amount will eventually be added to his player costs. He doesn't necessarily need to get a a 40% profit margin on his investment to make it economical to him. I would assume the revenue sharing cost is a bigger drain than the players' take.

Edit: whoops, I see this has been addressed already. Guess I should read the entire thread first.
 
fiveandcounting;4000339 said:
is that new math?

They're different things. OTAs are days, not weeks.

They used a comma to represent "and," so it's actually saying "Reducing the off-season program by five weeks and reducing OTAs from 14 to 10."
 
fiveandcounting;4000339 said:
is that new math?
No, the off season program is the date players report to start their training regiments. OTAs happen well after the report date.
 
Broad outline per PFT

Length of agreement: We’ve got ten years of labor peace on the way. There is no opt out clause in the deal.

Revenue split: This is what it was all about. The players were on defense the whole time, knowing that owners would get a larger share of the overall pie.

The two sides agreed on a new “all revenue” model. It’s a little complicated, but overall the players must average at least 47 percent of all revenue for the 10-year term of the agreement.

The money was counted differently in the past, but the split was essentially closer to 50-50 before.

Drafted Rookies: A new rookie wage scale will dramatically curb spending on rookies. High first-round draft picks are taking a huge hit. No. 1 overall pick Cam Newton, for instance, is expected to see less than half the guaranteed money of 2010 No. 1 pick Sam Bradford. Those top-shelf contracts will be four years, with a pricey fifth year option.

Measures to prevent rookie holdouts were also put into the deal, in part by making the rookie contracts simpler. Players taken rounds two-through-seven aren’t overly impacted.


Undrafted rookies: They will be among the first players to sign with teams. A new signing bonus cap for undrafted players is expected to be put in place.
18-game season: The possibility of an 18-game season died a lot sooner than anyone expected. The players wanted no part of it and the issue was put off until 2013. Owners can try to negotiate more games in 2013, but the players would have to agree to it. A stare down could ensue over the fate of the preseason.

Revenue sharing: The owners separately agreed to a new ten-year plan for revenue sharing. This negotiation didn’t directly involve the players, yet it remains as vital to the sport as anything accomplished over the last few weeks. The plan will tax the highest-earning teams.

Salary cap: The salary cap is set for $120.375 million in 2011. That’s actually about $6 million less than the salary cap was back in 2009, the last year the cap was in place. It’s important to note the cap will rise with revenues. (Future television deals.)

2011 salary cap flexibility: Even though the salary cap was ostensibly scaled back, teams were given two avenues to make it easier to retain high priced veterans this year. Teams can “borrow” $3 million against future salary caps to pay for veterans. They can also use another $3.5 million in what would otherwise be performance-based pay to use for veterans.

So the cap really isn’t $120.375 million. It’s basically $126.88 if teams want it to be. An extra $6.5 million won’t save guys that truly deserve to get cut, but it will make life easier for teams near the cap limit.

Salary floors: Players accepted a relatively low salary cap in exchange for the raising the minimum teams have to spend. This can’t be underestimated. 99% of the salary cap must be spent in cash in aggregate between 2011-2012. The league-wide number falls to 95% after that. Teams must spend at least 89% of the cap from 2013-2016 and 2017-2020.

This helps ensure teams that were way under the cap in recent years like the Bengals and Bucs spend more.

Player safety: The amount of padded practices in the regular season is now heavily regulated by the league. Two padded practices per day in training camp (two-a-days) has also been banned. (This doesn’t sit well with all players.) Teams can do a padded practice and a non-padded practice in the same day in training camp.

Teams will also reportedly have more days off during their bye week.

Offseason work: Offseason Organized Team Activities (OTAs) have been reduced from 14 days to 10. The offseason program was reduced five weeks overall.

Retired players: The new deal reportedly adds $1 billion in new funds for retired players. $620 will be used for a new “Legacy Fund,” which will be devoted to increasing pensions for pre-1993 retirees.

Tampering: There will be no need for teams to illegally contact free agents in the coming week. Almost as soon as teams are back Tuesday, they can begin speaking to all unrestricted free agents. Check out the timeline of the next week right here .

And just in case we missed anything: Seven more odds and ends you may have missed.

Link: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/25/the-cba-in-a-nutshell/#more-141226
 
And, after months of pointless debate the winner is!................Oh,....it's a tie.

FOOTBALL IS BACK!
 
Back
Top