DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum CBA changes

For the lower class of player the CBA is definitely better. It expands the practice squad (which means more players are employed) and raises the minimum salary. That's huge. The retired players (which the current players will be at some point) it is a huge gain. It should pass.

I agree that the players should pass this based on what's good for the whole of the union. Any contract has pros and cons for some people, but this one seems as good as it's going to get for this CBA. Hopefully those at the top aren't able to "bully" the rest into rejecting it. My guess is, it will get ugly and the owners will come back with much less if this one doesn't pass.

But do they, really?

I think that 48% is based on the salary cap. As we see all around the league, many teams are well under the salary cap. There is also a floor to the cap that teams must spend, but that's well below the stated salary cap.

The only place the players actually receive 48% of revenue is on paper.

I believe that it means that the cap will be based on 48%.
The cap goes up, so does the floor. When you're working with billions, a 1% increase is really significant.

And you hit on exactly what I meant. The stated amount in the contract it claims players will receive is 48%. But that is based on a salary cap that a lot of teams never actually spend all of. So that 48% figure is only on paper.

Right.... but, it is an increase on the previous number on paper.
It is still a real net increase.

I could live just fine on 1 percent of Russell Wilson's paycheck

Sando: Falcons, Vikings and Steelers could be ‘handcuffed’ without CBA agreement


By Mike Sando Mar 13, 2020 28
As this week began, the NFL informed its 32 teams that free agency would begin March 18 whether or not players approved a 10-year collective bargaining agreement in voting that closes Saturday. As the week neared its end and COVID-19 concerns disrupted daily life throughout the country, the league canceled its annual spring meetings while indicating free agency would still begin on time, at least until further notice.

Purely from a football business standpoint, two very different worlds await teams and players in the short term depending upon how the CBA vote turns out. The system was set up to punish owners and players if the existing deal enters its final season. That punishment goes into effect soon if there’s no labor agreement, with major ramifications for both teams and players.

“It is almost like a poison pill that both sides have to swallow,” a longtime exec said. “That is the way they do it and it makes sense. This way, people will want to redo it.”

If the 2020 league year begins without a new labor agreement, some teams and players stand to lose more than others — in some cases, much more. Here’s a look at some of the teams and big-name players with the most at stake.

The New Orleans Saints, Atlanta Falcons, Minnesota Vikings and Pittsburgh Steelers could be among the teams “handcuffed” if there’s no new agreement.

All four teams have ranked among the biggest cash spenders over the past three seasons. All have little or no salary-cap space and relatively large cash commitments for 2020, assuming the Saints pursue a new contract with quarterback Drew Brees. If there’s a new labor agreement in place, these teams can gain short-term cap flexibility through the ability to structure contracts with large bonuses, small first-year cap numbers and deferred cap consequences. Without a new labor deal, the so-called “30 percent rule” will take effect, capping year-over-year salary increases at 30 percent. This will reduce the ability to create cap space in 2020.

“Until that changes, these teams are not just tight,” an exec said, “they are handcuffed.”

That is one reason the Falcons will be letting tight end Austin Hooper reach free agency.

Cap space is typically an overrated subject in NFL coverage, but the 30 percent rule would create real challenges for teams that have fought to keep open championship windows.

Saints running back Alvin Kamara, Steelers receiver JuJu Smith-Schuster, Buccaneers receiver Chris Godwin, Lions receiver Kenny Golladay and other very good players from the 2017 draft could have a harder time getting the deals they have earned.

Players on rookie contracts become eligible to sign new deals after three years in the league. Because players selected after the first round sign four-year deals with no fifth-year club options, their contract situations can become more pressing after their third seasons. The players listed above fall into that category as 2017 draft choices selected after the first round. Re-signing them might normally become a priority beginning this offseason, but in the absence of a new labor agreement, the 30 percent rule and fears of a potential work stoppage could complicate the process.

Consider an imaginary extension for Kamara, the Saints’ dynamic all-purpose back. With a labor agreement in place, the cap-strapped Saints could manipulate the structure to keep his cap number in the $2.5 million range for 2020, same as it is now. That would not be realistic in the absence of a labor agreement. The 30 percent rule would force the base salaries to be more uniform throughout the deal, probably at the expense of signing bonus. That could triple or quadruple the 2020 cap number, bringing that figure closer in line with the entire deal’s annual average while cutting into the bonus money that could give Kamara financial protection against a lockout in 2021. Both team and player could be in a tough spot.

“Let’s say the market for Kenny Golladay is $16 million a year,” an exec said. “Under the 30 percent rule, Detroit could need to have, say, $10 million in room to do his deal, whereas otherwise they might need $3 million. So, guess who is not going to get a contract this year in all likelihood? You will see extensions go down significantly.”

Players fearing a lockout could consider taking deals with more up-front money but less value over the long term. An exec said some players did this heading into the 2011 lockout to make sure they had enough cash on hand to live without paychecks.

The 30 percent rule also could affect negotiations involving 2017 first-round picks such as Kansas City Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes, particularly if short-term cap structure were a significant consideration for the team.

Teams will be able to use both the franchise and transition tags simultaneously if the new labor agreement does not gain player approval. Otherwise, teams could use only one tag at a time to keep a player from entering unrestricted free agency.

Most teams would not consider using both tags if available, but the Dallas Cowboys and Tennessee Titans could at least threaten to use them to help them guard against losing multiple key players. Dak Prescott, Amari Cooper and Byron Jones are key considerations for Dallas. Ryan Tannehill and Derrick Henry could be considerations for Tennessee. Having two tags available is one upside for teams in the absence of a new agreement.

“If players approve the CBA, it puts a ton of pressure on Dallas and Tennessee,” a general manager said. “That is a big deal. Then those players had smart agents who held out, were willing to wait. I don’t know if it was smart or dangerous because if the players got hurt, then what? But they did not get hurt, and now here they are.”

Players ratify new CBA, per Jason LaCanfora on Twitter.

https://twitter.com/JasonLaCanfora/status/1239192944990662657

This is very good news for the sport.

Now waiting for Goodell to announce that they are pushing back the league year 3-4 weeks, although, selfishly, I hope he doesn't. One can only binge-watch so many TV shows, and I could use a diversion from the grim news of the day, while watching my IRA shrink.

j/c...



Adam Schefter
@AdamSchefter
One source said the final player vote on the NFL's new CBA was 1019-959. It was that close.

Adam Schefter
@AdamSchefter
Now that a CBA has been agreed to, teams cannot use both the franchise tag and transition tag in this offseason (i.e. the Cowboys and Dak Prescott/Amari Cooper). Teams would have been permitted to do that if the 2020 league year had been conducted under the terms of the 2011 CBA.

Try this (if you haven't watched already)...

Thanks!

Looks like expanded playoffs for this season ... 17 game season starting in 2021

By a vote of 1,019 to 959, the players voted to ratify the NFL’s Collective Bargaining Agreement through the 2030 season. The votes were tallied Sunday morning, and now we will see a whirlwind of news today. It is also believed that the coronavirus situation is what allowed the ratification to happen, because it pushed a lot of “no” votes to the “yes” side, given the economic uncertainty of the country right now.

Start of the New League Year?
According to multiple reports, the league and the NFLPA are now discussing whether the new league year, including the start of free agency, will start on Wednesday as scheduled. A decision is expected to be made swiftly.


Dan Graziano
✔
@DanGrazianoESPN
The NFL and NFLPA are currently in discussions about issues related to the 2020 league year, including the salary cap and whether the league year will start Wednesday as planned. More news to come as the day progresses.

171
10:55 AM - Mar 15, 2020

2020 NFL Salary Cap
The 2020 salary cap was officially announced today, and it will be $198.2 million, which is lower than the projected $200 million.


Tom Pelissero
✔
@TomPelissero
The NFL Management Council just informed team officials the salary cap will be $198.2 million per club in 2020, per sources.

676
11:10 AM - Mar 15, 2020

Biggest Changes of the New CBA
The number of playoff teams will increase from 12 to 14, as early as this season.
The regular season schedule can be increased from 16 to 17 games, as early as the 2021 season. Additionally, there would only be 3 preseason games, with that “fourth preseason game” being converted to a bye week before the regular season.
Rosters will increase from 53 to 55 players, and the gameday active roster will increase from 46 to 48 players.
Players making the minimum salary will get a $100,000 annual bump in salary.
There will be plenty of more nuances to work through, once we see the full CBA. In the coming days, we will thoroughly review all of the major changes.

https://www.dawgsbynature.com/2020/3/15/...t-198-2-million

Roughly $10M increase each year. The new CBA didn't seem to create a dramatic increase in the cap. I think that is a good thing.

A flurry of decision-making will ensue with current players, I'd expect.

Going live to the Josh Gordon camp:

At the very least, it could be shortened.

We now have with the new CBA $65,879,940 OTC before any other cuts

Man, that vote was pretty close. I am a little surprised. I thought it was a good deal for most of the players.

Hopefully, the Browns will sign Joe Scho w/the rise in the salary cap.

We definitely have some spending room now .. it’ll be interesting to see who we extend or who we go after

Yeah, I was surprised too. Any vote that close isn't really a ringing endorsement. How long is this CBA in effect for?

I believe it's 10 years. I'm not positive, though. Just going by Schefter's tweet.

I think an additional 10 years after this one

At what cost bro? ... it seems your willing to pay whatever but I know u don’t wanna do that ...

I think whoever signs him will way way way overpay ... he’s a situational LBer in my book ... great against the pass and a liability against the run ... he hardly if ever makes tackles at or behind the LOS and he’’s not a good tackler nor does he shed blocks well ...

I understand we need LBers in a big way ... but I don’t think overpaying for Sho is a good long term move ... it would help immensely over the next year or two on the field but at what cost for those two yers and then it will hopefully become a bad deal cause we have bettor LBers for a lower or the same cost as Sho ...

This FO is in a really bad position when it comes to Sho ... there in a no win situation IMO ... an amazingly glaring hole is all ready there and losing Sho makes it even more of a nightmare but re-signing Sho is gonna cost way more than he’s worth IMO ... it’s gonna be interesting to see how much some teams willing to pay for him and this FO is gonna look bad no matter witch way they go ... and before the menZas start I do not blame KJ for this ... nor do i blame the current FO ... its just one of those things ...

I'm with you concerning the cost. But under the new CBA, is 10 mil per year really too much to pay him over the course of the next 4 years? I don't have an actual answer to that question but my guess is maybe not.

I've read it will go up about $40 million next off-season.

The cap was always projected to go up $10 million this off-season.

LOLetc.!!

Which one is doing the best JG impression? Hard to choose.

"It's OK officer, like, I play in the NFL, know what I mean?"

Smoke 'em when you get 'em. That is all.

Brady’s suitors are down to whom? NE, CHI, TB, INDY, LAC, LV ... ?

I think we disagree on just how valuable Joe is. That's fine. I think letting him leave would be a mistake. He's a 3-down LBer and that basically saves you a roster spot. He is not as bad against the run as you think. If our DTs did a better job [especially Ogunjobi] of eating blocks, our LBers would look better against the run.

I am not playing the same regime game as others. I am not going to be angry if Joe leaves, but I would have been disappointed in either Dorsey or Berry not getting a deal done.

My bottom line is this a hole we do not want to create. And if a deal isn't done, I will place responsibility on both Dorsey and Berry. I won't choose a side like some folks are.

I won’t be happy if we can’t re-sign him. He’s not elite, but above average. He’s also the QB of our defence, very smart. Joe’s a leader and a good player at a position that for us is not strong.

pay him.

In terms of holes, how many do we have? How many do the Steelers have? How many do the Ravens have?

And we want to create more?

Unbelievable.