Why a loss on Sunday could positively impact the Ravens long-term

[TL24x7]

Salary Cap News, Notes and the impact of an uncapped season... (http://www.profootball24x7.com/column_view.php?cid=46&id=4193&view=archive)

[4G63]

Interesting way to look at it. We did make the playoffs too! Its not like it would be a big surprise to lose to the Pats in the playoffs (at their home)as they've got a pretty good history there....but I'd still love to knock those A-holes out for once!!

[Jeremiah W]

Huh? What!

You play to win the game, but we could still be much better off next year if we lose?

The Ravens may still take some sort of future cap hit even if they cut Willis in an "uncapped" season?

What happens in March if there is no new deal by then?

[psuasskicker]

Man, I just think the players are fooling themselves if they think there's going to be MORE money for them to distribute amongst themselves if this goes uncapped than if they stay in the current system. The top guys will unquestionably be paid more. But I see almost no way that if you add up the full year's wages paid in an uncapped year that it'll come to more than under the current system.

Why the players want that is obvious...they think they'll individually benefit. But as a whole they're going to suffer for it, and they're being stupid if they don't use that logic going forward.

- C -

[Jeremiah W]

Man, I just think the players are fooling themselves if they think there's going to be MORE money for them to distribute amongst themselves if this goes uncapped than if they stay in the current system. The top guys will unquestionably be paid more. But I see almost no way that if you add up the full year's wages paid in an uncapped year that it'll come to more than under the current system.

Why the players want that is obvious...they think they'll individually benefit. But as a whole they're going to suffer for it, and they're being stupid if they don't use that logic going forward.

- C -

It was not the players that opted out of the current system.

[jonboy79]

It was not the players that opted out of the current system.

Exactly, the current system is bad for the owners, the next one will be better for them, ro there won't be football. That's a MUCH harder pill for the players(as a whole) to swallow, then the owners.
The players would be lucky to make $40k per year if there were no NFL. The owners would likely make MORE money if there was no NFL. As far as return on investment, the NFL isn't a great investment, but it's undoubtedly fun to own a sports franchise.

The owners will win, and will have a much better CBA in place by 2011 or so... even if they play scabs for a game or two to push the issue.

[psuasskicker]

BS, the players opted out as much as the owners did. Although admittedly the owners were the ones that actively prompted it, both sides wanted this.

The difference is that the owners wanted it cause they knew they held all the cards. The players simply thought they did, and now are left holding a giant bag of f*ck you from the owners.

Funny how thirty-something multi-billionaire entrepreneurs turned out to be smarter than sixteen hudred-something meat-heads who on average attended around 3.5 years of college.

- C -

[B-more Ravor]

It was not the players that opted out of the current system.

I think - but I could be wrong - that PSU was really commenting on how the "uncapped" year rules are really going to screw the players and much moreso than they are letting on.

The owners really have them over a barrel because there are a lot of guys - Vincent Jackson and Miles Austin, for example - who could be looking at $20M+ bonus/$50M total contracts, that are going to now have to settle for RFA tenders of $3M or so.

The NFLPA is showing a brave face, but the odds are against them, so they'd better become more realistic because they are going to have a lot of unhappy constituents come March.

Yes, it's the owners that opted out of the deal - which both sides had a right to do - but it's the players that have the most to lose. Even if they give back much of what they gained in the 2006 CBA extension, they will still be better off than having to deal with the uncapped year in 2010 and then a possible lock out in 2011. After all, it's not like the players weren't getting rich under the old CBA terms prior to 2006.

[jonboy79]

BS, the players opted out as much as the owners did. Although admittedly the owners were the ones that actively prompted it, both sides wanted this.

The difference is that the owners wanted it cause they knew they held all the cards. The players simply thought they did, and now are left holding a giant bag of f*ck you from the owners.

Funny how thirty-something multi-billionaire entrepreneurs turned out to be smarter than sixteen hudred-something meat-heads who on average attended around 3.5 years of college.

- C -

3.5 years of college they liekly wouldn't have made it into and certainly not through without the immense help that DI athletes are given.

You'd think all of the agensts would have known.... but they did.
Uncapped year means a LOT of overpriced Vets are cut. Many of them will require new deals. the agents could care less abou thte 33% of them that are jobless next year, and are more concerned with the 66% that get new deals...

I can virtually guarantee that total player salary DROPS from 09 - 10.... I'm guessing on the order of 10%.

[psuasskicker]

3.5 years of college they liekly wouldn't have made it into and certainly not through without the immense help that DI athletes are given.

You'd think all of the agensts would have known.... but they did.
Uncapped year means a LOT of overpriced Vets are cut. Many of them will require new deals. the agents could care less abou thte 33% of them that are jobless next year, and are more concerned with the 66% that get new deals...

I can virtually guarantee that total player salary DROPS from 09 - 10.... I'm guessing on the order of 10%.

Anyone here know how agents get paid? It could be either way on positive or negative for them. If they get a lump payment for a new contract signed, then obviously it's better for them if a bunch are cut and they have to sign new deals. But if they get paid a portion of the contract for the life of the deal, then it's probably better for them to keep their guys signed.

I have no idea which was is more common/standard.

- C -

[effo5231]

Anyone here know how agents get paid?

According to Player X, the anonymous NFLer writing a column for ESPN the Mag, most agents get paid 3% of a player's total contract.

[Jeremiah W]

Exactly, the current system is bad for the owners, the next one will be better for them, ro there won't be football. That's a MUCH harder pill for the players(as a whole) to swallow, then the owners.
The players would be lucky to make $40k per year if there were no NFL. The owners would likely make MORE money if there was no NFL. As far as return on investment, the NFL isn't a great investment, but it's undoubtedly fun to own a sports franchise.

The owners will win, and will have a much better CBA in place by 2011 or so... even if they play scabs for a game or two to push the issue.

I don't know about all that.


The owners always have the upper hand in PR matters, but that could change very fast if they are to blame for taking away football games or trying to play scabs because they are not making enough money under the current system and billion dollar TV deals.

[jonboy79]

According to Player X, the anonymous NFLer writing a column for ESPN the Mag, most agents get paid 3% of a player's total contract.

upfront?

[effo5231]

upfront?

Not sure, I believe not. I think its 3% of any bonus plus 3% of each game check.

[jonboy79]

Not sure, I believe not. I think its 3% of any bonus plus 3% of each game check.

I'm curious, as if they receive it throughout a player's contract, I'm nto sure how the agents of the world would not have warned the player's association how screwed they would be right now....

[NC Raven]

That article made my head hurt. If you have to be a CPA to be an NFL fan these days, I might have to go back to NASCAR. Oh wait, now you have to be an engineer to watch NASCAR. Screw it. I'm just gonna sit in my backyard and watch the cats chase the possum.

[psuasskicker]

Not sure, I believe not. I think its 3% of any bonus plus 3% of each game check.

Yeah, but that's the question I was asking. I know agents typically get 2% - 4% of the contract. I just don't know if they get that as an up-front fee or if they collect as the contract goes. If it's the latter, the agents should have preferred the CBA get extended.

- C -

[Rayvens52]

Yeah, but that's the question I was asking. I know agents typically get 2% - 4% of the contract. I just don't know if they get that as an up-front fee or if they collect as the contract goes. If it's the latter, the agents should have preferred the CBA get extended.

- C -

They get it all upfront, that is why so many agents try to rework deals before their current ones expire.