Buffalo Bills Talk

In an anticipated move NFL owners unanimously brought an early end to
the CBA agreement with the NFL players union in a vote at the owners
meetings today. The 32 member clubs will continue to play football
uninterrupted for at least three more seasons as negotiations will ensue
to reach a new agreement for 2011 and beyond.

If over the next two years a new agreement is not reached then the 2010
season will be played without a salary cap according to the language of
the opt out clause in the current CBA.

Our objective is to fix these problems in a new CBA, one that will
provide adequate incentives to grow the game, ensure the unparalleled
competitive balance that has sustained our fans' interest, and afford
the players fair and increasing compensation and benefits.

FULL ARTICLE:

http://buffalobills.com/news/news.jsp?news_id=6088

<The idiot owners should've listened to Ralph in the first place>

On Wed, 21 May 2008 09:38:46 -0400, Bender wrote:

>In an anticipated move NFL owners unanimously brought an early end to
>the CBA agreement with the NFL players union in a vote at the owners
>meetings today. The 32 member clubs will continue to play football
>uninterrupted for at least three more seasons as negotiations will ensue
>to reach a new agreement for 2011 and beyond.
>
>If over the next two years a new agreement is not reached then the 2010
>season will be played without a salary cap according to the language of
>the opt out clause in the current CBA.
>
>Our objective is to fix these problems in a new CBA, one that will
>provide adequate incentives to grow the game, ensure the unparalleled
>competitive balance that has sustained our fans' interest, and afford
>the players fair and increasing compensation and benefits.

I dunno about that third paragraph, Jack. That's how the Bills' PR
department spun it on the team's web site, but from what I've read in
between watching the baseball season progress, the last straw for the
owners here was the courts deciding Michael Vick didn't have to repay
the Falcons the millions of dollars the team felt it was entitled to
recoup after he breached his contract with the team.

When a player fails to live up to the terms of his contract and the
courts decide that said player can do so with impunity under the terms
of the current CBA, it becomes obvious that the CBA is seriously
hosed. Thus the owners exercising the "opt out" option should be no
great surprise to anyone.

>

Heh...yes, there is that, isn't there? :D

Incidentally, there's a nice article on milehighreport.com (a Denver
Broncos blog) concerning the effects this will have during the
"uncapped" seasons in 2010 and 2011, should the owners and the NFLPA
fail to hammer out a new CBA before then:

http://www.milehighreport.com/2008/5/20/523809/nfl-owners-opt-out-of-cba

Basically, players would need six years of service to become free
agents, instead of the current four; each team would have one
franchise tag and two transition tags instead of the current setup
with only one tag (either "franchise" or "transition"); and the top
eight teams in the league in terms of W/L record would be restricted
in their options for jumping into the free agent market (although it's
not exactly clear how this would work).

So, the players aren't going to be happy about the first two effects
and the owners, or at least the owners of the top eight teams, aren't
going be happy with the third. There's ample incentive for both sides
to agree to a new CBA before all this stuff kicks in. Only time will
tell if they can get it done.

We'll be watching.

JK