The NFL and Players association broke off labor talks. They're saying that there could be some major MAJOR cuts in the next 24-48 hours. The cap is gonna be ~$95 mil this year and most teams are up against it. Will Shields and Warrick Dunn are some names mentioned.

The difference is over ~$320 million in revenue sharing for the size of the cap. The players want 60%, the owners are offering just over 56%.

Other things I've heard without a deal today (Thanks, Mike&Mike):
- 07 is an uncapped year, so its a spending spree for Jerry Jones, etc. Upshaw says if they go uncapped, they will never play capped again
- 08 Lockout
-This year the Redskins may have to play with 20 rookies because they're so far over the cap now

Links:
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5369020
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2348417
http://cbs.sportsline.com/nfl/story/9273774

3/1/2006 6:29:28 AM

Another issue driving the impasse is that the owners cannot agree on revenue sharing. The owners say that is a non-issue when it comes to negotiating with the union, but it's a part of it. If there is no revenue sharing, you're going to see some teams self-impose a lower cap on themselves probably, which concerns the union.

The owners are idiots if they let go of their cap. Although, I think some teams would rather there be no cap (Cowboys, Patriots, Giants, Jets, Redskins, Texans, any future L.A. team).



"But there are also disputes among groups of owners on that issue, too. Tagliabue has called a league meeting in New York for Thursday to explain to NFL clubs why the sides have been unable to come to an agreement.

.Teams with lower revenues -- mostly small-market clubs -- say that if the contributions to the players' fund are equally apportioned among 32 franchises, they will have to pay a substantially larger proportion of their nontelevision and ticket money because they have less. Owners of high-revenue teams, like Dallas' Jerry Jones, claim spreading the load equally would force some teams to work harder to generate new sources of money.

Another high-revenue owner, New England's Robert Kraft, says the formula does not take stadium debt into account, as he has on Gillette Stadium in Foxborough, Mass."

It's easy to see both sides of the argument. The rich owners are being capitalist and the less rich owners are being socialist.



"Redskins may have to sign 20 rookies due to their cap situation."

Poor Redskins...



[Edited on March 1, 2006 at 7:19 AM. Reason : .]

3/1/2006 7:08:17 AM

I think we can see a lot of 2 year deals for big names like this:

2006: League Min
2007: $20 Million

3/1/2006 7:14:22 AM

FYI, no way 2008 is a lockout. There are too many TV networks paying too much money and basing programming around NFL telecasts that they will allow the NFL to lockout the players.

3/1/2006 7:21:17 AM

I'm not arguing with that, just saying what they've been talking about all morning on ESPN.

Programming and such is nice, but the CBA expires after 2007 and they won't play without one. Or they'll bring back scabs.

3/1/2006 7:34:36 AM

sweet, a sick pass from shane falco to brian murphy would be hot

3/1/2006 9:15:43 AM

if the skins have to play 20 rookies we're screwed because we traded all our picks already i kind of doubt that though, because IIRC len pasquarelli is the one who came up with that, and he's a complete idiot

but once we go uncapped, the skins and cowboys will be in an arms race, cause they both have tons of money

also the texans will suddenly be really good

3/1/2006 10:00:38 AM

^^^^ i dont think that can happen... there are rules for how much a deal can escalate from year to year.... thats why they have signing bonus appropriation rules in the first place

3/1/2006 10:01:12 AM

^I think the rule is 30% from year to year

3/1/2006 10:11:46 AM

^,^^That rule doesn't count for the first year in a deal. That rule is only for 2nd & additional years. (Think about Steve McNair's rediculous 50Mil bonus clause)

There certainly could be deals of that fashion, but there would be a significant signing bonus. So that basically you could get a guy for 1 year at a good cap price by just giving him a nice signing bonus & minimum 1st year salary. And since it's a 2yr. deal, you would only take a cap hit of half that, & you can cut him next year with no salary cap hit. You may see many deals like this.

For example:
Player X is worth about 4Mil a year.

Give him a 2 yr. deal with a 4Mil signing bonus, with a minimum first year salary. Your cap hit would only be say 2.5 Mil & you can cut him next year. The player is happy still because he got the up front money. Not to mention, you can spend that other 1.5 Mil elsewhere now.


[Edited on March 1, 2006 at 11:02 AM. Reason : ]

3/1/2006 10:56:25 AM

Bring in the Replacements



^ Starting at QB for the Detroit Lions

3/1/2006 11:03:49 AM

I heard that even if they can't get a deal done there probably won't be a lockout in '08. Not because of tv deals, but because the players might vote to decertify the union.

The owners can't lock out the players if there isn't a union. This would most likely result in no salary cap, among other things, until the union re-certifies and there is a new labor agreement.

3/1/2006 1:38:38 PM

from espn:

"While some owners still contend they could push through an accord with the union, and then worry about resolving their own intramural bickering over revenue sharing after hammering out an extension to the collective bargaining agreement, NFLPA executive director Gene Upshaw continues to insist he will not strike a deal without the owners reaching internal accord on how they will split local revenues.


And, in a strange twist, Upshaw has allies among many of the owners in that regard.


The irony is that it is now a group of steadfast owners from lower-revenue franchises who would block any attempt to extend the CBA without a revenue sharing plan that accommodates their needs. There has actually been more softening by the alliance of eight to nine high-revenue teams, several league sources allowed Wednesday night, than by the lower-revenue clubs.


According to several sources, nine to 10 owners from some of the league's lowest revenue-producing franchises are adamant that any CBA extension must be accompanied by an amenable revenue-sharing plan, one that addresses their concerns about the ever-increasing disparity between the NFL "haves" and "have nots." It takes only nine votes to veto most important league proposals, and the contingent of low-revenue teams has sufficient votes to shoot down a CBA extension."

Haha, as payback, the rich owners should just let it continue and threaten the less rich owners with no cap at all.

3/2/2006 7:33:07 AM

^ but they know that the rich owners dont want to go for that because they dont really want to pay everyone $Texas$, but at the same time having no cap would kill the small market teams. So its not a good bargaining chip to say no cap. I dont think either side of the owners really wants that

3/2/2006 9:42:31 AM

man they really need to keep the salary cap.

Look at what its done for the NFL over the past ~13 years. THe level of growth the NFL has had has been outstanding.

Do we really want to go back to the days of 49ers-Cowboys in the NFC championship EVERY year?


Look at why baseball sucks and why hockey was sucking.

3/2/2006 9:50:11 AM

They have said Dan Snyder would make the Skins the Yankees of the NFL if the cap is lifted...

3/2/2006 9:54:55 AM

Quote :

"man they really need to keep the salary cap. Look at what its done for the NFL over the past ~13 years. THe level of growth the NFL has had has been outstanding. Do we really want to go back to the days of 49ers-Cowboys in the NFC championship EVERY year? Look at why baseball sucks and why hockey was sucking."

I love how the baseball haters always try to act like there is so much more parity in the NFL than the in MLB. Yeah the Yankees, Red Sox, and Braves are pretty much always in the playoffs, but the Braves are no longer a big spending team so the fact that there is not a salary cap has no impact on their success. As for parity, MLB only has 4 playoff spots and look at the number of teams that were still in the hunt for the wild card last year in the NL. The whole NL East was in the hunt for most of the season. Plus it's not like the NFL has that much parity to begin with. The Patriots are like the Yankees (always win their division and sometimes championships), Colts are like the Braves (always in the playoffs and flame out), the Eagles are usually in (like the Red Sox), Steelers usually make it to the playoffs, etc. Granted the NFL has had some teams jump up and win the Super Bowl like the Ravens and Bucs, but so has MLB with the Marlins, D-backs and White Sox. Both sports have their hopeless teams too like the Arizona Cardinas, Houston Texans, KC Royals, and TB Devil Rays so it's not like the salary cap is preventing a big divide between the haves and have nots IMO.

3/2/2006 10:08:15 AM

Quote :

"Do we really want to go back to the days of 49ers-Cowboys in the NFC championship EVERY year"

I wouldn't complain.

But the commish is supposed to speak here in a few minutes. The opwners rejected the last offers, and are going home. The cuts should flood in this afternoon.

Mike & Mike talked about the baseball/football comparison thing this morning. They kept going back to the fact that baseball has had 6 different WS winners the last 6 year, but that you could predict what teams would suck this year, as the same who sucked 5 years ago and would 5 years from now, saying such thing wouldn't happen in football as it's set up, using the Bears this year as an example (They seemed to ignore the performance of teams like the Cardinals and Lions).

The question that looms to me is, is it fair for a team to lose players because of financial reasons only. if you draft successfully, like Dallas did in the early 90s, why should they lose players because of a hard cap number only. If the players want to stay, why not use something like the NBA does?

3/2/2006 10:10:55 AM

No Agreement reached

3/2/2006 10:30:00 AM

lol

>>>>>>>>>

3/2/2006 11:06:38 AM

my point exactly

3/2/2006 11:10:56 AM

Quote :

"I love how the baseball haters always try to act like there is so much more parity in the NFL than the in MLB."

Wrong.

Quote :

" Yeah the Yankees, Red Sox, and Braves are pretty much always in the playoffs"

Proving my point nicely.

Quote :

"but the Braves are no longer a big spending team "

WHAT???

Quote :

"MLB only has 4 playoff spots "

Wrong again, sensing a pattern.

Quote :

" [quote]The whole NL East was in the hunt for most of the season."

All big spending teams except Florida who has been dissolved and Washington which won ~10 more games than it should have based on their runs scored/allowed Where was the NL West?

Quote :

"The Patriots are like the Yankees (always win their division and sometimes championships)"

WHAT??? How long have you been watching football, 5 years? They always do what???

Quote :

"Both sports have their hopeless teams too like the Arizona Cardinals, Houston Texans, KC Royals, and TB Devil Rays so it's not like the salary cap is preventing a big divide between the haves and have nots IMO."

Okay so you are comparing a team on the verge of making the playoffs (Cardinals) and an expansion team that hired an awful coach (Texans) with a team that nearly broke the record for losses (Royals) and a team that has never reached .500 in their existence (Devil Rays).

You also forgot to mention the Pirates, Tigers, Rockies, etc

You also forgot to mention that Oakland has GIVEN AWAY two MVPS (Giambi & Tejada) and two Cy Young level pitchers (Hudson, Mulder).

That would be like if the Colts decided to give away Peyton, Edgerrin, Marvin, & Dwight Freeney.

3/2/2006 11:24:59 AM

Free Agency has beeen delayed now by 3 days

3/2/2006 5:32:16 PM

^^don't forget the brewers

3/2/2006 5:41:04 PM

^^^ The Braves are not a big spending team. Look at the numbers. They are a middle of the pack team in terms of revenue.

By 4 playoff spots, I meant by league (national and american). Sorry I messed up. The point is that it is more difficult to make the playoffs in baseball so it always seem like less teams are doing better (i.e. improving teams like the Blue Jays, Indians, and Brewers get overlooked because they don't make the playoffs) and thus there is perceived less parity.

Florida and Washington were in the race for most of the season. Exactly what I said. They both faded late, but were competitive. The NL West sucked much like the NFC West.

My point is with the Patriots-Yankee comparison is that NE is now considered the favorite each year much like the Yankees are always the odds-on favorites in MLB. Actually the Pats success in the last 5 years has made the NFL seem like it has less parity IMO.

The Arizona Cardinals might make the playoffs next year, but people were hyping them last year and they sucked. Texans suck, Browns suck, Saints suck, Lions suck. Each sport has its losers that annually are horrible regardless of the salary cap.

Oakland is a small market team and can't generate revenue because of their ballpark. The Colts have a strong fanbase and can afford to re-sign their players



[Edited on March 2, 2006 at 5:56 PM. Reason : ^]

3/2/2006 5:55:20 PM

Comparing NFL parity to MLB parity last six years. Only using the teams in the final 8 (so cutting out the NFL teams that lose wild card playoff games) so that the number of teams match for each.

National Champions

2000/01 - Baltimore Ravens...New York Yankees
2001/02 - New England Patriots...Arizona Diamondbacks
2002/03 - Tampa Bay Buccaneers...Anaheim (Los Angeles) Angels
2003/04 - New England Patriots...Florida Marlins
2004/05 - New England Patriots...Boston Red Sox
2005/06 - Pittsburgh Steelers...Chicago White Sox

National Runners-Up

2000/01 - New York Giants...New York Mets
2001/02 - St. Louis Rams...New York Yankees
2002/03 - Oakland Raiders...San Francisco Giants
2003/04 - Carolina Panthers...New York Yankees
2004/05 - Philadelphia Eagles...St. Louis Cardinals
2005/06 - Seattle Seahawks...Houston Astros

National Semifinalists

2000/01 - Oakland Raiders, Minnesota Vikings...St. Louis Cardinals, Boston Red Sox
2001/02 - Pittsburgh Steelers, Philadelphia Eagles...Atlanta Braves, Seattle Mariners
2002/03 - Tennessee Titans, Philadelphia Eagles...St. Louis Cardinals, Minnesota Twins
2003/04 - Indianapolis Colts, Philadelphia Eagles...Chicago Cubs, Boston Red Sox
2004/05 - Pittsburgh Steelers, Atlanta Falcons...New York Yankees, Houston Astros
2005/06 - Denver Broncos, Carolina Panthers...St. Louis Cardinals, Los Angeles Angels

National Quarterfinalists

2000/01 - New Orleans Saints, Miami Dolphins, Tennesee Titans, Philadelphia Eagles...Atlanta Braves, San Francisco Giants, Chicago White Sox, Oakland Athletics
2001/02 - Chicago Bears, Oakland Raiders, Baltimore Ravens, Green Bay Packers...Houston Astros, St. Louis Cardinals, Oakland Athletics, Cleveland Indians
2002/03 - Pittsburgh Steelers, Atlanta Falcons, San Francisco 49ers, New York Jets...Arizona Diamondbacks, Atlanta Braves, Oakland Athletics, New York Yankees
2003/04 - St. Louis Rams, Tennessee Titans, Kansas City Chiefs, Green Bay Packers...Atlanta Braves, San Francisco Giants, Minnesota Twins, Oakland Athletics
2004/05 - New York Jets, St. Louis Rams, Minnesota Vikings, Indianapolis Colts...Los Angeles Dodgers, Atlanta Braves, Minnesota Twins, Anaheim (Los Angeles) Angels
2005/06 - Indianapolis Colts, New England Patriots, Washington Redskins, Chicago Bears...San Diego Padres, Atlanta Braves, Boston Red Sox, New York Yankees


NFL - 32 teams, MLB - 30 teams

Number of teams that were national champions:
NFL - 4
MLB - 6

Number of teams that were in national finals (champions plus runners-up):
NFL - 10
MLB - 10

Number of teams that reached "final four":
NFL - 15
MLB - 15

Number of teams that reached "final eight":
NFL - 24
MLB - 20

3/2/2006 6:17:52 PM

Talks just blew up again

More cuts to come, here's the list now:


ATLANTA FALCONS
---------------
Brady Smith, de


BUFFALO BILLS
-------------
Sam Adams, dt
Mark Campbell, te
Lawyer Milloy, s


CAROLINA PANTHERS
-----------------
Brentson Buckner, dt
Stephen Davis, rb
Brandon Short, lb
Rod Smart, kr


DALLAS COWBOYS
--------------
La'Roi Glover, dt


DENVER BRONCOS
--------------
Mike Anderson, rb
Trevor Pryce, de
Jeb Putzier, te


GREEN BAY PACKERS
-----------------
Na'il Diggs, lb
Ryan Dutton, p


HOUSTON TEXANS
--------------
Tony Banks, qb
Marcus Coleman, s
Tony Hollings, rb


KANSAS CITY CHIEFS
------------------
Shawn Barber, lb
Dexter McCleon, cb
Gary Stills, lb
Eric Warfield, cb


MIAMI DOLPHINS
--------------
Damion McIntosh, t
Tebucky Jones, s
Reggie Howard, cb
Sam Madison, cb


OAKLAND RAIDERS
---------------
Ron Stone, g
Denard Walker, cb
Ted Washington, dt


PITTSBURGH STEELERS
-------------------
Tommy Maddox, qb
Willie Williams, cb


ST. LOUIS RAMS
--------------
Chris Claiborne, lb


SEATTLE SEAHAWKS
----------------
Andre Dyson, cb
Michael Harden, cb
Jamie Sharper, lb


TENNESSEE TITANS
----------------
Brad Hopkins, t

3/4/2006 3:52:05 PM

I am seriously wondering if some teams are purposefully poisoning the deal, thinking that they can take advantage of the situation this coming year, and then get a salary cap later on. Look at these over/under salary cap numbers. If you were someone like the Browns or Cardinals, teams that haven't had a good season in forever, why not? It's not like they're going to feel sorry for the Raiders or Redskins.

Under the salary cap
Team Cap status (under)
Minnesota Vikings $26.5 million
Arizona Cardinals $24.3 million
Cleveland Browns $24 million
Green Bay Packers $23.5 million
San Francisco 49ers $19.9 million
San Diego Chargers $19.6 million
Jacksonville Jaguars $16.7 million
Philadelphia Eagles $16.7 million
Baltimore Ravens $14.4 million
Detroit Lions $13.1 million
St. Louis Rams $13.1 million
Seattle Seahawks $12 million
Cincinnati Bengals $11.5 million
Buffalo Bills $11.05 million
New Orleans Saints $10.7 million
Chicago Bears $10.3 million
Houston Texans $8.3 million
New York Giants $5.8 million
New England Patriots $4 million
Dallas Cowboys $1.3 million
Denver Broncos $1 million


Over the salary cap
Team Cap status (over)
Oakland Raiders $23.5 million
Kansas City Chiefs $18.2 million
Tennessee Titans $11.6 million
Washington Redskins $14.5 million
Atlanta Falcons $9.2 million
New York Jets $8.6 million
Indianapolis Colts $6.9 million
Tampa Bay Buccaneers $6.2 million
Miami Dolphins $5.7 million
Carolina Panthers $5.6 million
Pittsburgh Steelers $4.5 million

3/5/2006 3:43:11 PM

How up to date is this list?

3/5/2006 3:43:59 PM

^I think the list is up-to-date for the Panthers. I'm not sure about other teams though.

3/5/2006 3:50:52 PM

I think it's up-to-date. The Broncos at one point were like $10 million over the cap. Now they're under (although their cuts were made Wednesday I think).

[Edited on March 5, 2006 at 4:31 PM. Reason : .]

3/5/2006 4:14:22 PM

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2355190

They extended the waiver deadline by four hours, to 10 PM.

3/5/2006 6:32:27 PM

Posted this in the Offseason 2006 thread, but it's too good not to spread as much as possible.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2355736

3/5/2006 9:04:32 PM

3/5/2006 9:06:46 PM

,

[Edited on March 5, 2006 at 9:43 PM. Reason : wrong thread]

3/5/2006 9:43:16 PM

how can the raiders be THAT far over and suck THAT bad

3/5/2006 9:44:15 PM

You don't think it's possible they may be overpaying anyone?

3/5/2006 10:04:37 PM

^ That's what I was thinking.

Then again, when you're giving Kerry Collins 9.2 million dollars...

3/5/2006 10:05:30 PM

Like I said, overpaid

3/5/2006 10:07:05 PM

Ronald Curry is also making more than he is worth.

3/5/2006 10:09:01 PM

hahahaha

the jets released mawae and restructured pennington

that's not going to improve their team very much

3/5/2006 10:11:28 PM

^^Don't forget Randy Moss playing once every couple downs on offense makes like 13Mil.

3/5/2006 10:23:02 PM

^I expect better things from him with a new QB and a better coach, though. Unlike the other guys I listed, Randy has performed well enough in the past to warrant such a salary.

3/5/2006 10:24:13 PM

^Of course he has, but still, if he's going to be one of the top paid guys in the leauge, shouldn't he at least act like he's interested?

3/5/2006 10:27:59 PM

Despite all the talk about Randy being a cancer, he was a good teammate this year. Not once did he bash his team or quarterback this season.

ESPN made more of that press conference where a reporter asked Moss to give his opinion about Turner because, just like with TO, they stir the fire to create controversy.

I never saw him take plays off, but I can understand if he gets discouraged. Collins missed him wide open for six more times than I can remember this year, and Norv Turner on at least several occasions took Moss off the field in red zone situations.

I agree with Moss. If he's getting paid like a top receiver, use him like a top receiver.

3/5/2006 10:35:19 PM

another 72-hour flinch, I'm starting to think this is just the NFL wanting to keep themselves in the news...

3/5/2006 11:24:35 PM

it would be funny if they went on strike for all of next season, and PRIV had to sit for another year!

3/5/2006 11:40:28 PM

Clearly someone hates me and demands that I suffer.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2355736

3/6/2006 1:34:11 AM

ok here it comes

^ lololololol

[Edited on March 6, 2006 at 2:38 AM. Reason : happy yet lol funny haha lmao rofl dead]

3/6/2006 2:38:13 AM

there's obviously no real need for a deal, just keep fucking postponing deadlines

3/6/2006 2:41:33 AM