Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Ryder Hesjedal Wins Giro d'Italia

Exploring the Implications of the Uncapped NFL Season

First off let me say that this is going to be a long one with a lot of information to digest. Get your coffee brewed and put your thinking cap on. If you are looking for a quick 2 paragraph summation, this isn’t it. All of this information, and a whole lot more, can be looked up by running a search for the NFL collective bargaining agreement. You can download the whole thing (all 302 pages) like I did and read through it if you would care to refute any information that I lay out here. Don’t be shy if you think I got something wrong. Research it and show everyone the evidence to prove me wrong. I’ve put quite a lot of time and effort into research and reading and I just want to present the highlights here for APers to review and discuss.

We’ve all been reading some basic information about and uncapped year, and we even know a few things as they relate to UFA and RFA and how it may impact the coming 2010 season. In this post I will attempt to do a few things:

1) Define some basic terminology that we need to intelligently discuss the issues beyond the simplistic definitions we already know.

2) Pass on some other bits of knowledge that have always been part of the CBA that you may not have known about.

3) Highlight the major changes that come about in what is referred to as the "Final League Year"

4) Review how those changes affect some specific players drafted in ’06 and ’07.

We’ll get started with the basic definitions that apply after the jump.

Star-divide

PART I:

Final League Year (FLY): The Final league Year is defined as the final NFL season before the expiration of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Because the team owners elected not to extend the CBA in 2009 the CBA will expire on the opening NFL day of 2011. Meaning 2010 is the Final League Year (FLY). The opening day of the 2010 season is March 5th, 2010. If no new CBA is in place before that date then the 2010 season will be the (FLY).

Salary Cap: The maximum amount of money a team will be allowed to spend on its players during any one NFL defined season. In 2009 it was $123,000,000 give or take a few bucks. In the (FLY) there will be NO salary cap.

Salary Floor: The minimum amount of money a team must spend on its players during any one NFL defined season. In 2009 it was $107,748,000 give or take a few bucks. In the (FLY) there will be NO salary floor.

Unrestricted Free Agent (UFA): A player was considered to be an (UFA) if their contract has expired AND they have at least 4 years of NFL experience. Beginning in the (FLY) a player will be considered an (UFA) if their contract has expired and they have at least 6 years of NFL experience. An (UFA) is free to sign with any NFL club with no compensation owed to the old team.

Restricted Free Agent (RFA): A player was considered to be a (RFA) if their contract had expired AND they had at least 3 years of NFL experience. Beginning in the (FLY) a player will be considered a (RFA) if their contract has expired AND they have between 4 and 5 years of NFL experience. (I don’t want to get into what factors determine 4 or 5 years in this post). A (RFA) is free to take offer sheets from any NFL club, but their current team holds first right of refusal and/or compensation rights. Meaning if their current team wants to keep them, they can match a contract. If they don’t want to match the contract they are afforded compensation in draft picks in return for the player.

Tags: Each NFL club is awarded 2 tags (Franchise and Transition) that they can place on a FA who they want to keep. A club may only USE 1 of these tags. Beginning in the (FLY) each NFL club will receive 3 tags instead of 2 (1 Franchise and 2 Transition), and will be allowed to use 2 tags instead of 1.

Franchise Tag (FT): Any player that has the (FT) placed on them will remain on their current team with no new multiyear contract, and no extension to the current contract. They will receive EITHER 120% of their salary from the previous season OR the average of the top 5 league salaries from players of their position; whichever is MORE.

Transition Tag (TT): Any player that has the (TT) placed on them will receive EITHER 120% of their previous year’s salary OR the average of the top 10 leagues salaries at their position; whichever is MORE. Another club MAY offer them a contract, at which time their current club has 7 days to match the offer made if it is more than the (TT) salary.

PART II: (now we get to some things you may not be familiar with)

Top 8 Plan: Beginning in the (FLY) the top 8 teams that make it to divisional playoff round will be further restricted in acquiring (UFA)’s. The top 8 plan is broken down into 2 parts. I’m calling them Top 4 (T4) and Bottom 4 (B4) for lack of better terms.

(T4): The top 4 finishing teams from the previous NFL season will ONLY be allowed to sign 1 (UFA) for each (UFA) they lose. If they do not lose any (UFA’s) from their team they may NOT sign any (UFA) to their roster.

(B4): The 4 teams that LOSE in the divisional round of the playoffs will to be allowed to sign 1 (UFA) for each 1 (UFA) they LOSE with no additional conditions. In ADDITION to those (UFA’s) they may ALSO sign more (UFA’s) given that a set of guidelines is met. They may sign ONLY 1 (UFA) with a first year salary of ($5.5 million or more). This number is estimated for the 2010 season and based off salary levels around the league. They may sign any (UFA’s) with a first year salary of ($3.7 million or less). (This is also an estimated figure for the 2010 season). There are also restrictions in place that limit how much the salary of those players are allowed to escalate each year during their contract. Meaning, teams will not be able to ‘low ball’ the first year to get under the limit and then ‘balloon’ the salaries on the back end.

The 30% Rule: This rule will remain in effect for the (FLY). Salary increases to players may NOT exceed 30% of the previous year’s salary. Signing bonuses are not affected by this run, just base yearly salary.

PART III:

Besides the changes that have been defined above in parts I & II there are quite a few additional changes that take place in the (FLY). I will NOT try to list them all here in this post (Upmann breathes a sigh of relief) but I will highlight a couple of things I found particularly interesting.

No player’s salary may increase more than 30% over the previous year salary. This rule was carried over DESPITE the uncapped year. This restricts a clubs ability to just make an insane salary offer to steal all the best players, even if that club did NOT finish top 8.

In the (FLY) NFL clubs are NO LONGER obligated to fund some player programs. There are quite a few programs but the short list would be:

Career Savings (401k), Severance pay, Player annuity, and Performance based pay (such as additional pay for playoff, super bowl, and pro bowl appearances)

In 2009 the total contributions to these other player programs were in excess of $10,000,000 PER team, or $325,000,000 league wide. I’m not saying the owners would all vote to stop paying into these programs, but they would no longer be required to set aside a single dime for them.

Side note: The owners and league offices have already agreed that there will be no reduction in pension or disability for retired players during the (FLY).

The league, in the (FLY), has the "unilateral right" to keep or eliminate the rookie pool. Meaning they could decide that NO DEDICATED level of salary would be required to spend on rookie contracts. If they want to sign all their draft picks for as low as they can possibly negotiate then they can do that. While this will most likely not effect first round draft picks, owners would be free to lowball everyone else (including undrafted players and later round picks) because they are not restricted to spend at least X amount of dollars on rookies. This could lead to a ‘prince and the pauper’ draft where high round picks cash in while everyone else plays for the league minimum without any signing bonuses.

Part IV:

Let me start by pointing out that the players most immediately affected by the (FLY) and the uncapped year are going to be players drafted in 2nd-7th rounds of the 2006 and 2007 NFL drafts, and those that were not drafted at all. Most teams strive to lock up their first round picks with 6 year deals. Sometimes a few players may get a 5 year contract, but most of the clubs insisted on 6ers.

Players taken in the 1st round get an immediate ‘money contract’ in their first year, and then after the first deal as expired they are entering their 7th NFL season and get a chance at a second ‘money contract’. Players taken in later rounds typically have to settle for a much lower contract straight out of school, but it’s usually shorter in duration (3-5 years depending on the round they were chosen). This, in the past gave them the opportunity to negotiate a ‘money contract’ when those first contracts expired. With the (UFA) and (RFA) rule changes extending the number of years those players have to play until they become a FA a LOT of these players are going to have to sign another contract after 3-5 years in the league without the chance to become a FA. Even when they DO become a FA each ball club now has the option to tag TWO players instead of just 1. That means that every team will be able to lock up their best 2 guys whose contracts have expired at will. With the additional restrictions on of the Top 8 Plan, these players will most likely be headed to an underperforming team once they manage to get to FAcy because the top 8 will be forced to give up (UFA’s) in order to get (UFA’s) OR be restricted to how many (UFA) they are allowed to sign based on salary levels. In short, 2006-2007 draft picks are about to get bent over and violated by the uncapped year.

While I won’t endeavor to list everyone let me just highlight some 2006 2nd round picks that are about to get screwed because they will no longer be (UFA’s) in 2010:

Thomas Howard, Duece Lutui, Cedric Griffin, Greg Jennings, Tavaris Jackson, D’Qwell Jackson, Marcus McNeill, Ricky McIntosh, DeMarco Ryans, LenDale White

How about 2007 2nd and 3rd round picks that will not become (UFA’s) in 2011:

Justin Blalock, David Harris, Trent Edwards, Zach Miller, LaMarr Woodley, Steve Smith, Sidney Rice, Tony Ugoh

There are at bare minimum 40 other quality players taken in later rounds of the 2006/2007 drafts that will not see FAcy in 2010/2011. Again, I make no attempt to provide a complete list but a few names you may recognize are:

Antoine Bethea, Kevin Boss, Michael Bush, Willie Colon, Elvis Dumervil, Dawan Landry, Cliff Ryan

These are all players that will most likely not have the chance to negotiate a better deal with some other team because of all the new restrictions. Without the threat of losing these players to some other team, their current teams will not be under any pressure to pay them their ‘money contracts’ for at least 1 or 2 more years. In a league where the average career lasts only 3 years that becomes a big deal to the players. They never know how long they will be able to play before an injury ends their career, and with the (FLY) looming they face the real possibility of never getting to a position where they have the upper hand in negotiations for big dollars.

Just look over the 2006 and 2007 drafts. I’m sure you can find even more names of guys that are currently making a real name for themselves in the NFL that are going to end up sucking on a turd of a second contract because of all the rule changes in the (FLY). From where I sit I’d say the owners have the major upper hand in CBA bargaining. The only threat the players can bring to bear is a walk out/strike, and that threat shortens their career’s and takes away their money the same as it does for the owners.

In fact, because the owners opted out of the CBA in 2009, they have had a full year already to prepare and reorganize their finances to help them survive in the case that there is a work stoppage in the NFL. Some have even added clauses into business contracts that free them from liability in the face of extraordinary event or circumstance that prevent them from fulfilling obligations. For instance, a company that has agreed to sponsor a team stadium in return for X amount of TV time, or X number of mentions, or X amount of market placement may continue to pay the owners even though the owners are unable to fulfill their end of the contract due to a work stoppage. The same holds true for other sponsor deals, including shoe companies, sports drinks, ‘official sponsor of the …..’ local market deals, and similar income streams that team owners generate. The NFL has been a cash cow for so many companies for so long now that sponsors are willing to take a risk of work stoppage in order to attach their name to the teams.

This could all get really ugly, but the players are not holding the cards like they were in the last player’s union strike. This time the upper hand resides with the league.

Part V: (This is just a list of KC Chiefs 2006 and 2007 draft picks in order of round taken)

2006: Tamba Hali, Bernard Pollard, Brodie Croyle, Marcus Maxey, Tre Stallings, Jeff Webb, Jarrard Page

2007: Dwayne Bowe, Turk McBride, Demarcus Tyler, Kolby Smith, Justin Medlock, Herbert Taylor, Michael Allen

Sources:

  • http://www.nflplayers.com/images/fck/NFL%20COLLECTIVE%20BARGAINING%20AGREEMENT%202006%20-%202012.pdf
  • http://blog.redskins.com/2010/01/20/nfl-offers-faq-on-the-uncapped-year/
  • http://www.bleedinggreennation.com/2010/1/22/1265158/nfl-releases-q-a-on-uncapped-year
  • http://www.examiner.com/x-778-Houston-Texans-Examiner~y2009m1d30-NFL-uncapped-year-will-bring-major-changes-hopefully-not-chaos
  • http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/teams/chiefs.html
  • http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2008-05-20-owners-labor-deal_N.htm

I think that should be enough to get the discussion going. Have at it AP'ers.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Arrowhead Pride's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Arrowhead Pride writers or editors.

Comment 71 comments  |  27 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Very long but very good!

Thanks for making this so most of us can understand it.

Hey Texas, I want to know what you think will happen. You did the research…I wanna know your take on how you think this whole thing unfolds.

"Its going to be a challenge, its going to feel like forever, and there will be difficulties. But we will emerge on the other side of it stronger than we were when we entered." ~ Sudden

by Matt_Grbac on Jan 22, 2010 3:30 PM CST via mobile reply actions  

My best guess...

The owners are going to push for a rookie salary cap and either a major reduction in the overall % of any newly negotiated salary cap OR to have a “stadium and facilities” clause that makes money spent on building/maintaining the stadium untoucheable when calculating the salary cap.

Stadium costs have blasted past the one BILLION dollar mark to build. The owners are all very aware that with the cost of tickets and PSL’s in the stadium a lot of fans need some extra reasons to go to the game live. Especially when they can get a beter view of the game on their TV’s. That is why Jerry Jones wanted HUGE tv screens, standing party areas, expansive food/drink areas, as many seats as he could get, and luxary boxes that redefine the term luxary. He was trying to make going to the game an experience that fans would be willing to pay the ticket prices for.

You have to ask yourself, if the money spent on a new stadium could be ‘discounted’ from the capital alloted to the players would fans have to pay for things like personal seat lisences? Those PSL’s are in place for one main reason; to pay for the stadiums. What would happen to season ticket costs. For these same reasons the league is in favor of adding games to the season.

What do I think? I think it’s gonna get ugly. I think there will be a work stoppage before it’s all said and done, but I’m no expert. The players aren’t going to want to settle for a lower %, and the owners flat out WON’T agree to keep things as they were. I’d say that in the end there will be more games added to the schedule to generate more income, and at least a portion of stadium costs will be deducted from the income numbers used to set the cap.

I can’t imagine the players wanting to keep things how the current CBA has them set up for uncapped years. They stand to lose a lot. No salary floor means that we could see the ‘baseball’ effect in the NFL. A small minority of teams could increase players salaries while everyone else cuts back and actually LOWERS the amount of money they spend on player salaries. There will be a new agreement, but I don’t think it will happen until the players and owners are staring right into the face of empty stadiums with no games being played.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 4:25 PM CST up reply actions   2 recs

All I can say is

Wow.

Thanks TC. Rec’d.

Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!

by Buck'O on Jan 22, 2010 3:33 PM CST reply actions  

Great piece!

This football fan appreciates the time and effort you put into this!

by justinmayhugh on Jan 22, 2010 3:51 PM CST reply actions  

Suprised that the 30% rule is in effect even though there is no cap

But I guess it is in there for the reason you said, so one owner can not come in with a insane offer to get all the best teams. Even so couldn’t they get around it by just offering a huge signing bonus. That would seem to get around the problem.

by TXroyal on Jan 22, 2010 3:53 PM CST reply actions  

Yes, kind of...

When the salary cap first got put in place teams quickly found out that you could push everything into bonuses and defer the cap hits to later years. But if you examine that philosophy you will soon see that it ended with a LOT of teams having a crap load of dead money in the cap in later years.

Teams were strapped with dead money against the cap even after a player was cut, waved, traded etc. Because they accelerated payments in the form of bonues to put off the cap hits so that they could sign more players they ended up screwing their teams 3 or 5 years down the road. It happened a lot in the begining.

Another reason that wasn’t working out so well is just flat out greed. A player sign a contract for 6 years 60 million with 30 million guarenteed and takes 10 million of that as a bonues in year one of their deal. They take another 7 million in bonus in year 2 and another 5 in year 3. By year 4 of their contract they are asking for a ‘new deal’ based on the fact that their actual salary is less than other players. They seem to forget all about the millions they took in up front bonues because that money has already been paid. They make big news in the media about how little they are getting paid in salary comparison to some other players and start demanding a new contract. This happens precisely because not enough of the dollars of their contract are actually loaded into salary.

If you examine the way NFL contracts on a whole have been structured in the last 5 to 7 years you will see a pattern begin to emerge. Teams are avoiding those back end cap hits by instead paying out more of the money in actual salary, and less in front loaded defered bonuses. The salary is usually structured with the lions share of the guarenteed money comming in the first 2 or 3 years and an esclating non guarenteed salary on the back end. This allows the club to get the dollars off the books EARLY rather than have to eat it as dead money in the later years when the player may be traded and gone. It also afforded the club a better negotiating position in years 3, 4, 5 when players are fussing about their salary numbers while forgetting to mention bonus cash paid up front.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 4:51 PM CST up reply actions  

Thanks, very easy to read

and understand the ramifications – rec’d

by KCFanatic on Jan 22, 2010 4:03 PM CST reply actions  

If I were a player I'd tell the union to get something done... Quick!

Good post.

"Leave the gun. Take the cannoli."

"Mr. Pioli is a man who insists on hearing bad news immediately."

by Don Piolie's Consigliere on Jan 22, 2010 4:04 PM CST reply actions  

And if you were an owner

you might just sit back and twiddle your thumbs, or better yet collude with the other owners.

by BCRavenJHawkfan on Jan 22, 2010 4:24 PM CST up reply actions  

Confused...

I read elsewhere that as a franchise player, the average is figured using the top 10 salaries at the position? I actually read that in Looney’s post over at the Mothership…

Things to get the Chiefs back on the winning side of football:

1. Haley resign as offensive coordinator or do the following;
a. Feed JC more
b. Take the cuffs off of Cassel and let him air it out
2. Fire Clancy "Calls" Playslikeass

by kcchiefsfan72 on Jan 22, 2010 4:07 PM CST reply actions  

That if is for a player tagged with the...

Trasnsitional Tag.
There are 2 different kinds of tags, Franchise and Transitional. Currently teams can only USE one of them. The choise is theres to make.
Under the (FLY) rules teams will receice 1 Franchise and 2 Transitional tags and may use any TWO of them a given NFL season.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 4:11 PM CST up reply actions  

Thanks for the clarification...

Things to get the Chiefs back on the winning side of football:

1. Haley resign as offensive coordinator or do the following;
a. Feed JC more
b. Take the cuffs off of Cassel and let him air it out
2. Fire Clancy "Calls" Playslikeass

by kcchiefsfan72 on Jan 22, 2010 4:20 PM CST up reply actions  

The Union should be a supporter of employee benefits with owners that for the most part

have been good owners and mostly, very supportive and friendly to their players. Most owners treat their players almost like family (I’m not aware of any that don’t) but once the Unions get started, the greed creeps in and the Unions want to dictate and try to control the owners. (See US/National politics) There should not be a problem at all if the players would negociate on fair, non-greedy terms in good faith.

by jcox31mc on Jan 22, 2010 4:12 PM CST reply actions  

Okay, did the person that dreamt this stuff up for the NFL

also write the healthcare reform bill? I mean holy crap, thank goodness Texas Chief has provided the Cliff Notes version!

TXroyal nailed it upthread, signing bonuses and deferred compensation. It’s what Jerry Jones has been doing his entire ownership career.

by BCRavenJHawkfan on Jan 22, 2010 4:34 PM CST reply actions  

I applaud your hard work and excellent job on this post for sure. Next time, it could stand to be a little more user friendly.

Which means shorter. Great job and thank you for doing all that for us. I think this plays right into my theory to take Lindell White from the Titans. GOOOO LINDELL!! I want that bad ass here.

by krayfish on Jan 22, 2010 4:41 PM CST reply actions  

he wont be a FA. Good luck with that.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 4:52 PM CST up reply actions  

You mean LenDale?

No thanks. We can do just as well with a late draft pick who will be happy to be on the team and not whine.

Air Cassel - approved for takeoff

Always in motion is the future.
-- Yoda

by kabrink on Jan 25, 2010 11:35 PM CST up reply actions  

rec Tex

is this a true statement

“The time frame for RFAs to complete their contract negotiations is April 17, 2010. The original club has until April 24,2010 to exercise the right of first refusal. From these deadlines you can understand why any draft choices given up to aquire a player will come from the NEXT YEARS DRAFT. So just to be clear. If a Team would give up a first round draft choice for Brandon Marshall that draft choice is from the 2011 draft.” lifelongvike article from mockingthedraft

"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli

by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 22, 2010 4:52 PM CST reply actions  

that one I would have to some more research on.

I can tell you that March 5th is the begining of the new year for the NFL.
That and that when a player that is tagged by the club and revieces and offer sheet from a different club, they have 7 days of first right of refusal (match time).

There appears to be 7 days between the 17th and the 24th.. so that jives with the structure, but I’m not sure what the April 17th date coinsides with. Is that 1 week before the draft? If it is than this would make sense and I’d probably give it the nod as fact.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 4:59 PM CST up reply actions  

I can now confirm...

The 2010 NFL draft is on April 22 to the 24th.

Therefore those dates are correct. You can’t complete the negotiations and the 7 day right of refusals for the 2010 draft compensation if the 2010 draft is already done =P.

So yes those dates are correct.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 5:15 PM CST up reply actions  

So if we wanted to Sign say Wilfork and paid the Max price it would be the 2011 and 2012 1sts

"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli

by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 22, 2010 5:19 PM CST up reply actions  

Funny to have a draft and then lockout/strike the players.

"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli

by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 22, 2010 5:19 PM CST up reply actions  

I would have to check Wilforks contract...

…but i believe that I read somewhere that he is an UFA in 2010.
Which would mean there is no compensation due. He’s free to go where he wants to go, unless he is tagged with the Franchise tag or the Transition tag. In which case, those rules would apply.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 5:22 PM CST up reply actions  

He was drafted in 2004

So he has played six seasons. Unless he signed a contract longer than six years, or an extension since being drafted, he’s going to be UFA. But of course the tags are still there.

by burntorangehorn on Jan 27, 2010 11:37 AM CST up reply actions  

Within the read refered to above

It was stated that a RFA that is offered a contract by another team, goes unmatched by the owning team would recieve no draft pick compensation. is that correct?
Are compensatory picks going to be phased out in 2011?

"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli

by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 22, 2010 4:54 PM CST reply actions  

That's not how I read it

The owning team gets 1st right of refusal on a RFA. They can choose to match and keep the player, or not match and therefore recieve compensation for losing the player

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 5:01 PM CST up reply actions  

however

an UFA is a completely different ball of wax. Which is why it’s so valuable for players to reach UFA status.
There is no back end compensation. They can go wherever they went to go with no compensation owed to their old team, provided they have not been tagged.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 5:02 PM CST up reply actions  

Are RFA's assigned a value of compensation

1st or 2nd round tags our is that the transition tag(s) implication.
I remember reading something about that a few months ago on AP refering to placing a value on DJ of round taken versus desired compensation.

"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli

by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 22, 2010 5:14 PM CST up reply actions  

We won't know the assigned compensation until just before the FA period starts

But for reference here is 2007-2008

For 2007-08, the compensation due for signing a RFA to an Offer Sheet were:

Amount Compensation Due
$773,442 or less None
$773,442 – $1,171,882 3rd round pick
$1,171,882 – $2,343,764 2nd round pick
$2,343,764 – $3,515,645 1st and 3rd round pick
$3,515,645 – $4,687,527 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round pick
$4,687,527 – $5,859,412 Two 1sts, one 2nd, one 3rd round pick
$5,859,412 or more Four 1st round picks

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 5:20 PM CST up reply actions  

but I thought the owning team decides the level of compensation required

We put a second round tender on RFA Page last year I thought.

"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli

by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 22, 2010 5:24 PM CST up reply actions  

we did decide... we paid him =P

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 5:26 PM CST up reply actions  

Where did the four 1st's come from

I haven’t ever seen that mentioned I though max was 2 1st’s

"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli

by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 22, 2010 5:27 PM CST up reply actions  

it's based on the salary numbers a play was paid the previous year

Other than that I havent found any other information.
Keep in mind that list is old. It doesn’t apply to 2009/2010

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 5:30 PM CST up reply actions  

Are you positive about that?

I thought it was only a four-tiered structure, with the very top being a 1st and 3rd.

by burntorangehorn on Jan 27, 2010 11:38 AM CST up reply actions  

no, im not positive about 2010

This is just the chart that I happened to find for 07-08.
Let me poke around a bit and see if i can find a difinitive answer to that question

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 27, 2010 1:05 PM CST up reply actions  

http://askthecommish.com/freeagency/

As per the URL above in a longer article by Al Lackner: This is the grunt of the RFA portion of the article. But It was a good read in totality.

The player’s original team maintains the First Refusal Right if the team tenders a contract offer of one year at $1.01 M.

The player’s original team maintains the Right of First Refusal and Draft Selection at the Player’s Original Draft Round (from the team with which he signs) if the team tenders an offer of one year at the same amount(s) listed above OR at least 110% of the player’s prior year’s salary — whichever is greater.

The player’s original team maintains the Right of First Refusal and Second Round Draft Selection (from the team with which he signs) if the team tenders an offer of one year at $$1.545 million OR at least 110% of the player’s prior year’s salary — whichever is greater.

The player’s original team maintains the Right of First Refusal and First Round Draft Selection (from the team with which he signs) if the team tenders an offer of one year at $2.198 million OR at least 110% of the player’s prior year’s salary — whichever is greater.

The player’s original team maintains the Right of First Refusal and First Round Draft Selection and Third Round Draft Selection (both from the team with which he signs) if the team tenders an offer of one year at $2.792 million OR at least 110% of the player’s prior year’s salary — whichever is greater.

In the event a Prior Club withdraws its Qualifying Offer, the RFA immediately becomes an UFA.

There is one other kind of free agent, which isn’t really very “free” at all. That is the Exclusive Rights Free Agent (ERFA). Such a player has no more than two accrued seasons in the NFL and may only sign with his prior team, provided, of course, that the team extends a minimum qualifying offer to the player.

NFL teams have two other tools at their disposal that provide for greater leverage in securing Free Agents: the Franchise Tag and the Transition Tag.

Each Club can designate one of its players who would otherwise be an UFA or RFA as a Franchise Player each season. Something that even some of the most knowledgeable sports fans do not realize is that a team has the option of designating a Franchise player with one of two tags: “Exclusive” or “Non-Exclusive”.

Any Club that designates a Franchise Player as “Exclusive” shall be the only Club with which that Franchise Player may negotiate or sign a contract. In order to designate an UFA or RFA as an Exclusive Franchise Player, the team must tender the player a one year contract that is the minimum of the average of the five largest salaries (as calculated at the end of the free agency signing period) for players at the position at which he played the most games during the prior year, or 120% of his prior year salary, whichever is greater.

If the team elects to name the player “non-exclusive” then the player shall be permitted to negotiate a contract with any Club as if he were an UFA; however, Draft Choice Compensation of TWO first round draft selections shall be awarded to the prior club in the event that he signs with the new club. For Non-Exlusive Franchise Players, the team must tender the player a one year contract that is the minimum of the average of the five largest PRIOR-YEAR salaries for players at the position at which he played the most games in the prior year, or 120% of his prior year salary, whichever is greater.

If the player elects to play with the prior club (the team that designated him with the Franchise tag) and does not negotiate another contract with that team, then the one year salary is guaranteed. Also, if the prior club elects to withdraw the qualifying offer, the player becomes an UFA.

Each Club can also designate one UFA or RFA as a Transition Player. Additionally, (in the final year of the CBA) each club may, in lieu of designating a Franchise Player, designate an additional Transition Player during the same designation period as the Franchise Player designation period. Whew! What that means is that a team may elect to tag two players with the Transition tag or one Transition Player and one Franchise Player in the final capped year. Any Club that designates a Transition Player shall receive the Rights of First Refusal. In order to designate an UFA or RFA as a Transition Player, the team must tender the player a one year contract for the average of the ten largest prior year salaries for players at the position at which he played the most games during the prior year, or 120% of his prior year salary, whichever is greater.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 27, 2010 1:11 PM CST up reply actions  

I could see a team in the 8 trying to force some talent out the door

just to allow some new talent infusion. Those UFA’s might be cheap on the market as you portray it. great post :)
if a “8” team just cuts a player does it allow them to sign a player another?

"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli

by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 22, 2010 5:17 PM CST reply actions  

Everything I've read says

They have to lose an UFA from the roster in order to sign one.
Cutting an UFA would technically be loseing them from the roster, so I don’t see why that would not be valid.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 5:32 PM CST up reply actions  

if they could do that

I could see a guy like the Minnesota NT getting cut loose. Might be able to make a Pioli type trade offer :) Arizona is also in that mix as a bottom 4 team. What about a rent a Warner for a third rounder

"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli

by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 22, 2010 5:38 PM CST up reply actions  

Might make sense to make a lowball trade offer if you think...

…the player has very little value and wont command any trades.
But then again, how many guys that have no trade value do you want to add to your team?

Prolly better to just let them cut the player and take your chances that no one else wants to sign them.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 5:55 PM CST up reply actions  

No I meant that some of the 8 would need to make room for someone else

You and I know if you are not moving forward you are falling behind.
Seems that is the whole idea of the 8 rule.
Now another thought who is going to be the Florida Marlins of the NFL?
Do you see a team spending 75 Million next year in total player contracts?
My guess would be Jax.

"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli

by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 22, 2010 6:12 PM CST up reply actions  

Yeah, I do

I definitely see some the distinct possibility that there will be teams that prepare for a possible comming strike by reducing their payroll below what would have been the salary floor in years past.

Smaller market teams, or teams that do not draw a lot of fans to the stadiums could very well decide to just ride it out with the players they have plus their draft picks instead of earmarking a lot of cash into the FA market. In fact, I bet those same teams would try to ‘cover their tracks’ by pointing out how few quality players actually become RFA’s and UFA’s and DONT get tagged by their current teams.

If you think about it, it’s the perfect excuse. We didn’t go out and sign any bit names because there were hardly any big names to go sign and the ones that were there we didn’t have an interest in. Further, we didn’t feel the need to renegotiate any of our current players contracts to pay them more because they aren’t FA’s anymore under the new rules and we didn’t have to spend the money.

Look at teams that at the begining of the 2009 season were on the bottom of the salary charts near the floor. I’d say those are the same teams that would most likely just keep the status quo and not bother trying to make any expensive moves to get them above a floor that no longer exists.

Yes, I know the Chiefs are in that group.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 6:21 PM CST up reply actions  

caught me

Romeo and Weis would seem to be the arguement that the Chiefs don’t plan on that strategy :) Could we maybe be one of the front runners for the top “available” talent. Signing good talent now would help when the contract situation is resolved. The top teams come back some to the pack and we have a new set of bottom-feeders maybe.
Oakland, Detroit, Jax, and Buffalo. Maybe SD and Arizona who might end up on the wrong side of big contracts with smaller fan bases.

"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli

by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 22, 2010 6:29 PM CST up reply actions  

we can hope =P

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 6:34 PM CST up reply actions  

TX you are going to hate me :)

The implications on player contracts. Does the years of service acrue in a FLY year?
or does the player continue to be a year 5 player thru a lockout/strike season?

"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli

by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 22, 2010 5:21 PM CST reply actions  

yes the year acrues in the FLY

but the FLY doesn’t have anything to do with a lock out. It’s just the final year before the CBA expires.

does the player continue to be a year 5 player thru a lockout/strike season?

Damn, you got me. I don’t know the answer to that heh. I would guess that as long as a player was under contract it would count, but maybe strikeing voids their contract and it won’t. — DAMMIT! you finally got me with all the peppered questions! meanie-head

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 5:29 PM CST up reply actions  

I knew you weren't a Lawyer.

How bout if you had a singer in your club on a 2-year deal and the Union she was part of struck. Would the deal be voided and everyone becomes a FA? That might be an interesting angle the Union could use. All contracts are null and void if the players strike. Sorta seems like what the owners are doing with there other contracts.
Question 6078694? Can a Player negotiate a strike provision into their deal signed this FLY year?

"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli

by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 22, 2010 5:43 PM CST up reply actions  

Free Agency rules are covered

but the CBA.
So, no I don’t think an individual player would be allowed to sign a special exemption into their contract by which they are no longer bound to the rules of the CBA.

That would defeat the whole purpose of having a CBA to begin with.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 5:59 PM CST up reply actions  

by not but

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 5:59 PM CST up reply actions  

now that i just think about it

A work stopage is just that, a work stopage.
If you havent completed 6 years of work in the NFL then you would not be an UFA.

So, just as an educated GUESS, I’d say that if you strike then the time you spend striking doesn’t count IF the strike lasts for the entire season. BUT if the strike only ‘shortens’ the season but it ends in time to play some games THEN you would have technically completed that seasons work.

Again, thats just a GUESS. I wouldn’t swear that to be right. It just makes sense to me based on what Iv’e read

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 5:37 PM CST up reply actions  

Bravo Texas Chief, that is some great stuff and I applaude you....

….on your ability lessen the monotony of the information by throwing in some “real person” insite throughout the artical.

Everyone believes black or white. It's the gray area we argue about.

by BigRedChief on Jan 22, 2010 5:23 PM CST reply actions  

My thought

In the entire history of Mankind. Man has always been able to totally screw up a good thing. As Kray might say:) Human Nature at work. I hope that it gets worked out before March of 2011, but I doubt it. Again Kray might say:) heretic, stone him. I can do that by myself. Natty lite! Thanks for all the info Texas Chief!!! We will see. Maybe someone other than me and Tex wants to deep think on the subject I had a headstart obviously.
Still working the Chiefs angles which to me seem many and beneficial at that.

"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli

by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 22, 2010 6:20 PM CST reply actions  

Someone edited my post?

they put spaces after the numbers and made the sources bullt points instead of paragraphs.

Who Done it? I don’t care, just askin

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 8:32 PM CST reply actions  

bullet , not built

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 22, 2010 8:32 PM CST up reply actions  

Tex I think you may have tended one too many tonite.

The post is perfect, head on back to the open thread. Okay

"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli

by Steve_Chiefs on Jan 22, 2010 8:45 PM CST up reply actions  

I am apparently late to the "TC IS AWESOME" party.

But, TC is awesome!

REC’D.

Very nice, man. If I ever get back to Texas, I am crashing your mancave, buying all the scotch in Texas for us to consume in 2 days, and hiring prostitutes dressed as Chiefs cheerleaders for the entire weekend.

Note 1: I will probably end up urinating on your couch at some point…drunk or not.

Note 2: I will probably leave a used condom someplace inexplicable that you will have to answer to your wife about 5 years from now…just keep that “get out of jail” note in your back pocket.

-Erykah Badu, I have accepted your proposal. So, Mrs. DTR, let's get to consummating...you are on notice.

-"All praise Chiefus."

by DThomasReigns on Jan 22, 2010 9:59 PM CST reply actions  

sounds good, but...
I will probably end up urinating on your couch at some point…drunk or not.

Who are you trying to fool here? You’ll be drunk. There is a 0% probability that you will remain sober 10 min after arival.
Luckily, The little woman bought that couch that I HATE and put my old one out in the garage. Maybe if you piss all over it I can bring the one that doesn’t have flowers and greenery all over it back in the house.

I will probably leave a used condom someplace inexplicable that you will have to answer to your wife about 5 years from now

What wife? I have no wife. Been with the same lady for going on 5 years, but neither of us have any intention of getting ‘officially married’. – She was married before and it didn’t work out, and I’m not a believer of signing 1/2 my worldy income and posesions away to a woman just so that I can get regular sexual favors, a ‘specialist’ at nagging, and human company.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 24, 2010 12:34 PM CST up reply actions  

Is Texas not a common law state?

Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!

by Buck'O on Jan 24, 2010 10:46 PM CST up reply actions  

You have to mix finances to be considered common law

I have my bank account. She has hers. We don’t have ANYTHING in joint named accounts, loans or ownership.
The house is mine, and was before I met her. It’s in my name. The bills are in my name because I had electricity, water, car payment, Directv etc etc before we ever started dating. Also, she has her own house from her first marrage; which she rents out to someone now that she lives here. She has her own car etc..

I file my taxes seperate from hers. We don’t ‘share’ car insurance policies or health insurance or life insurance. It’s all seperate.

In order to be common law married you have to mix finances, live together for a period of time ( I bleieve its 18 months in Texas), and ‘present yourself as a partnerhip’ (whatever that means).

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 24, 2010 11:13 PM CST up reply actions  

Very good post

I found a couple of things you can correct however…

Performance based pay (such as additional pay for playoff, super bowl, and pro bowl appearances)

Performance based pay is a bonus at the end of the year for players that are not equatable paid. This has nothing to do with playoff, super bowl, or pro bowl checks. It was mostly given out to minimum contract players that were on the field for a long period of time or a certain amount of snaps. Those guys receive the biggest checks while higher paid starters may receive a much smaller check.

Playoff and Superbowl checks will still be paid. Pro Bowl bonuses are negotiated with each players contract although making a pro bowl certainly effected the Performance based pay.

by bonesjackson on Jan 22, 2010 10:21 PM CST reply actions  

sweet, thanks for the correction

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 23, 2010 11:33 AM CST up reply actions  

Quick question about the salary cap and salary floor

You said that the salary cap for the 2009 season per team was roughly 123 million and the floor was roughly 107 million. That’s a differences of 17 million, but I’ve read several times that in 2009 the Chiefs were 30 million under the cap. Are the reports of the Chiefs under 30 million just inaccurate, or how did that happen?

by aasukisuki on Jan 22, 2010 11:29 PM CST reply actions  

Pioli said that those reports were inaccurate

and that the Chiefs were within the salary cap.

"Leave the gun. Take the cannoli."

"Mr. Pioli is a man who insists on hearing bad news immediately."

by Don Piolie's Consigliere on Jan 23, 2010 2:46 AM CST up reply actions  

I'm sure it's all in how the contracts are structured.

but who knows?

"Leave the gun. Take the cannoli."

"Mr. Pioli is a man who insists on hearing bad news immediately."

by Don Piolie's Consigliere on Jan 23, 2010 2:50 AM CST up reply actions  

kinda depends on the date when you read that

Id assume that either peoples reports of what the Chiefs actually spent was incorrect OR there was still some dead money against the cap that was not being counted.
If you pay a big bonus up front, but structure the cap hit for that cash over the terms of the contract you can eaisly end up with a situation where players who are no longer on the team STILL have money counting against the cap.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Jan 23, 2010 11:35 AM CST up reply actions  

great job on the post...i put this thread up on the pats site

Non Sibi Sed Patriae.
i love my ZX-6r Kawasaki.
I bleed Scarlet and Grey...A Buckeye for Life

by NinjaZX6R on Jan 31, 2010 8:14 AM CST reply actions  

Hey Tex

A question

What are the implications on the teams “After” a new CBA is signed. 24 teams in the league really do not have there hands tied as far as amassing players and spending money except for the limitations on Salary increases under the Final Year plan. Do any of the FA’s such as Wilfork have PIE in the SKY thoughts that teams can’t pay due to the Salary restrictions. Having Deja-VU as I type this? Wierd

"For what we are about to see next, we must enter quietly into the realm of genius." Scott "Young Frankenstein" Pioli

by Steve_Chiefs on Feb 1, 2010 5:25 PM CST reply actions  

wow, um...

I really have no way to answer that. It would depend ENTIRELY on the terms of a new CBA.
FOr all I know they could pass a CBA that says players will be paid in Strawberry Pez and Pot Brownies =P

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Feb 2, 2010 4:21 PM CST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to SB Nation's Kansas City Chiefs blog! Follow us on Facebook and on Twitter.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Chiefs OTA's: Some Real Football News
Dscn3246_3_small
Worst Case Scenario
Lips-rhps_small
Translating Coachspeak (Humor & Satire)

Recent FanPosts

Supernova1007_small
What Does it Take?
Ford-mustang-gt-2011-wallpaper-02_small
Hope
New_kc_helm_small
Scott Pioli: Genuine Mastermind Part 1 - Quarterbacks
Dirtyhippy_small
The Epic Battle of Pittsburgh(Game 9 preview)
Spit_small
A Unique Look At Elite QB's and Ricky Stanzi
309look_small
Cassel, can the chiefs get a ring on his back?
Small
Trade McCluster...
Supernova1007_small
A New 3-4 team in the NFL
Supernova1007_small
Fashionistas

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Ct_fb_small Chris Thorman

Headshot_small Joel Thorman

Editors

288-chiefstexans0944_sp_8-15-09_jfs woodman212

Matt_ssv_pic_small_small Matt Conner

Stag_20silhouette_small stagdsp

Lips-rhps_small upamtn

Contributors

Kc_ny_small NJ Chiefs Fan

Phoenix_by_melen_small KaloPhoenix

N1358340181_30185582_5800_small Flowers24

Small Jon Yoon

Dirkness_small HisDirkness

Dscn3246_3_small MNchiefsfan

Cassel_small Steve_in_RI