Pabst
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,440
- Reaction score
- 1,060
I was reading this article by Len Pasquarelli, http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=2348970 , when a certain passage came up that sparked my curiosity.
The lack of an extension, indeed, means a lot for both sides. And not just the composition of rosters. For instance, players will now need six accrued seasons, not four, to qualify for unrestricted free agent status. So a standout young player such as Chicago Bears three-year veteran linebacker Lance Briggs, who is coming off a Pro Bowl season and whose contract expires after the 2006 season, would have to wait two additional seasons before being unrestricted. The league would also, in an uncapped year, quit funding 401(k) plans (it currently matches player investments on a 2-1 basis) and most other fringe benefits, meaning players would be responsible for those things.
After I finished reading the article, I immediately remembered how Jason Witten and Bradie James had each voided their contracts for the coming year, which the Cowboys consequently "bought back" for a measly $10. A link explaining a bit more about it can be found here: http://www.dallascowboys.com/news.cfm?id=4C02BDFA-B3CD-8C24-D50C139B035CFF3F . The relavent passage, as it pertains to Witten, follows.
Witten, a third-round pick in 2003, originally signed a four-year contract which could be voided to three based on playing time and reaching certain incentives. However, the Cowboys also put a buyback option clause in the contract which would allow them to replace that fourth year for only a trivial $10 fee. But to do so, the Cowboys would be required to give Witten a first-round restricted free agency tender, which in 2006 is worth $1.57 million.
Witten did void the final year of his contract. The Cowboys did pay for their option year, and will protect the rights of the two-time Pro Bowler who will not turn 24 years old until May by issuing him the $1.57 million deal, which must be considered somewhat of a bargain.
Now, my question would be, heading into the 2007 season, Witten and James, under current CBA rules, would have been a UFA. However, as noted in the first italicized quotation, it seems you now need 6 accrued NFL seasons to attain UFA status. We all know that WItten and James do not.
Now, I'm not the most well-versed person in the art of the CBA and Cap, but I can put one and one together. Would Witten and James remain our property, aka Restricted Free Agents, in 2007, should no CBA be reached tomorrow?
The lack of an extension, indeed, means a lot for both sides. And not just the composition of rosters. For instance, players will now need six accrued seasons, not four, to qualify for unrestricted free agent status. So a standout young player such as Chicago Bears three-year veteran linebacker Lance Briggs, who is coming off a Pro Bowl season and whose contract expires after the 2006 season, would have to wait two additional seasons before being unrestricted. The league would also, in an uncapped year, quit funding 401(k) plans (it currently matches player investments on a 2-1 basis) and most other fringe benefits, meaning players would be responsible for those things.
After I finished reading the article, I immediately remembered how Jason Witten and Bradie James had each voided their contracts for the coming year, which the Cowboys consequently "bought back" for a measly $10. A link explaining a bit more about it can be found here: http://www.dallascowboys.com/news.cfm?id=4C02BDFA-B3CD-8C24-D50C139B035CFF3F . The relavent passage, as it pertains to Witten, follows.
Witten, a third-round pick in 2003, originally signed a four-year contract which could be voided to three based on playing time and reaching certain incentives. However, the Cowboys also put a buyback option clause in the contract which would allow them to replace that fourth year for only a trivial $10 fee. But to do so, the Cowboys would be required to give Witten a first-round restricted free agency tender, which in 2006 is worth $1.57 million.
Witten did void the final year of his contract. The Cowboys did pay for their option year, and will protect the rights of the two-time Pro Bowler who will not turn 24 years old until May by issuing him the $1.57 million deal, which must be considered somewhat of a bargain.
Now, my question would be, heading into the 2007 season, Witten and James, under current CBA rules, would have been a UFA. However, as noted in the first italicized quotation, it seems you now need 6 accrued NFL seasons to attain UFA status. We all know that WItten and James do not.
Now, I'm not the most well-versed person in the art of the CBA and Cap, but I can put one and one together. Would Witten and James remain our property, aka Restricted Free Agents, in 2007, should no CBA be reached tomorrow?
