Man, I am a Bills and Panthers fan. Both have had to glut there roster over these rich cfy baby bitchs. Come on. In the NFL what is 10 million a year to the owners. If they want to save money but a rookie salary cap out there so there is more for the Vets. Everyone wins, game on, and The Panthers can get back Dan Morgan and He Hate Me. Either way Go Bills, Go Panthers.
-
Come and join our gamer community by registering for free here
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
CBA has its cock in both my teams butts
- Thread starter Darkwing
- Start date
Werbung:
Well fuck
NEW YORK (AP) -- The NFL and its players union broke off talks again Sunday, leaving dozens of veterans in danger of becoming salary cap casualties before free agency begins a minute after midnight Monday.
The breakdown was typical of the topsy-turvy negotiations -- just when things seemed darkest, they got brighter. And when it looked optimistic a deal could be struck, as it seemed early Sunday, talks broke down.
"They're off," NFL vice president Joe Browne said after a day of bargaining that seemed to provide hope of an agreement. Earlier, the league had pushed back the deadline for teams to get under the salary cap from 6 p.m. EST to 10 p.m.
NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said the union broke off the talks and had no further explanation. Union officials could not immediately be reached for comment.
One of the endangered veterans went immediately -- center Kevin Mawae was cut by the New York Jets, although he probably would have been gone anyway because he is 35 and missed the final 10 games of last season with a triceps injury.
Other potential big names to go with a cap at $94.5 million instead of one as much as $10 million higher could be guard Will Shields of Kansas City and linebacker Derrick Brooks of Tampa Bay. Yet another in that category, Jets quarterback Chad Pennington, restructured his contract just before the midnight deadline, to ensure that he would stay with the team.
Most teams had contingency plans for the smaller cap and the larger one. Several, including Washington, the Jets and Tampa Bay were far over the cap.
These negotiations were by far the most difficult since the NFL and the NFL Players Association first agreed to free agency and a salary cap in 1992, ending years of labor unrest that included player strikes in 1982 and 1987. The contract has been extended several times since then, most of the time with ease.
But this time, the players asked for a change in the system.
Until now, they received their money primarily from television and ticket revenues. This time, they requested their share from all team revenues, including outside money generated by everything from parking to stadium naming rights.
That led to difficult negotiations, in part because the teams themselves are having their own dispute over that money because of the disparity in outside income made by low-revenue and high-revenue teams. Union leaders had suggested that it would be hard to reach agreement on a labor contract until the owners settled their own differences.
Both sides had seemed ready to compromise, largely because of the pressure of impending free agency.
It was supposed to begin last Friday but was put off for three days so the sides could continue talking. The talks appeared to be at a standstill last Thursday, when the owners took just 57 minutes to reject the union's last offer.
But seven hours later, the sides reversed course, agreeing to delay the start of free agency for three days so they could continue bargaining. That came as teams who had planned for a larger salary cap were preparing to cut large numbers of veterans.
"Many of those players would have been cut anyway," executive director of the union Gene Upshaw said Saturday, noting that veterans are cut every year but find jobs with other teams. This year, however, the extra cuts could glut the market, causing players to get less money even if they find jobs.
Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
NEW YORK (AP) -- The NFL and its players union broke off talks again Sunday, leaving dozens of veterans in danger of becoming salary cap casualties before free agency begins a minute after midnight Monday.
The breakdown was typical of the topsy-turvy negotiations -- just when things seemed darkest, they got brighter. And when it looked optimistic a deal could be struck, as it seemed early Sunday, talks broke down.
"They're off," NFL vice president Joe Browne said after a day of bargaining that seemed to provide hope of an agreement. Earlier, the league had pushed back the deadline for teams to get under the salary cap from 6 p.m. EST to 10 p.m.
NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said the union broke off the talks and had no further explanation. Union officials could not immediately be reached for comment.
One of the endangered veterans went immediately -- center Kevin Mawae was cut by the New York Jets, although he probably would have been gone anyway because he is 35 and missed the final 10 games of last season with a triceps injury.
Other potential big names to go with a cap at $94.5 million instead of one as much as $10 million higher could be guard Will Shields of Kansas City and linebacker Derrick Brooks of Tampa Bay. Yet another in that category, Jets quarterback Chad Pennington, restructured his contract just before the midnight deadline, to ensure that he would stay with the team.
Most teams had contingency plans for the smaller cap and the larger one. Several, including Washington, the Jets and Tampa Bay were far over the cap.
These negotiations were by far the most difficult since the NFL and the NFL Players Association first agreed to free agency and a salary cap in 1992, ending years of labor unrest that included player strikes in 1982 and 1987. The contract has been extended several times since then, most of the time with ease.
But this time, the players asked for a change in the system.
Until now, they received their money primarily from television and ticket revenues. This time, they requested their share from all team revenues, including outside money generated by everything from parking to stadium naming rights.
That led to difficult negotiations, in part because the teams themselves are having their own dispute over that money because of the disparity in outside income made by low-revenue and high-revenue teams. Union leaders had suggested that it would be hard to reach agreement on a labor contract until the owners settled their own differences.
Both sides had seemed ready to compromise, largely because of the pressure of impending free agency.
It was supposed to begin last Friday but was put off for three days so the sides could continue talking. The talks appeared to be at a standstill last Thursday, when the owners took just 57 minutes to reject the union's last offer.
But seven hours later, the sides reversed course, agreeing to delay the start of free agency for three days so they could continue bargaining. That came as teams who had planned for a larger salary cap were preparing to cut large numbers of veterans.
"Many of those players would have been cut anyway," executive director of the union Gene Upshaw said Saturday, noting that veterans are cut every year but find jobs with other teams. This year, however, the extra cuts could glut the market, causing players to get less money even if they find jobs.
Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
well i agree, but really it is the owners that are fucking this up. are the players being hard headed, probaly, is it because they want more money, yeah. The big thing is the owners make more then enough to go around. I dont know, it seems to me i understand the players more. If there was more guareneted Then I would agree, but right now you could get your spine snapped and have your contract cut the next day. I would be going for all I could get as well.
man, its a big deal. i mean dammit. we are losing role players and shit. no salary cap? baseball? oh please, say it aint so! then dallas we be the yankees of the NFL and that is just not an option.
i havent done enough research to really contribute, but that is my basic understanding of whats going on.
i havent done enough research to really contribute, but that is my basic understanding of whats going on.
yes next year will be a uncapped year, but the 4 year free agency rule is done, it will be 6 years, so the market will not be nearly as flooded, so the football like the yankees thing is possible, but it would only be for a year, then we go into no CBA and probaly a strike. Really this sceanrio dosent scare me much. I am much more worried about how fucked our teams get this year. Its sucks we had to let Davis go. Plus i head heard about the possiblty of going after a big name replacment, but that isnt going to happen. Have we even signed foster to a offer sheet ?
NEW YORK (AP) -- NFL labor negotiations took yet another surprising turn late Sunday when the league and union agreed to postpone free agency another 72 hours, giving the sides more time to try to reach agreement on a contract extension.
NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said the delay would give owners a chance to consider the union's latest proposal during a meeting Tuesday in Dallas.
Talks broke off earlier in the day, leaving dozens of veterans in danger of becoming salary-cap casualties before free agency was supposed to begin Monday at a minute after midnight.
The breakdown in talks was typical of the topsy-turvy negotiations, so far: Just when things seemed darkest, they got back on track; and when it appeared a deal could be struck, talks fell apart.
The union broke off Sunday's session.
"The talks ended after the NFL gave us a proposal which provided a percentage of revenues for the players which would be less than they received over the last 12 years," said Gene Upshaw, executive director of the NFL Players Association. "After suggesting we extend the waiver deadline from six o'clock to 10 this evening, they gave us a new proposal which was worse than their prior offer. Quite naturally, we rejected that proposal and saw no need to continue meeting."
But Harold Henderson, the NFL's executive vice president for labor relations, said the union rejected a proposal that would have added $577 million for players in 2006 compared to 2005 and $1.5 billion in the six years of the extension. "It's an unfortunate situation for the players, the fans and the league," Henderson said.
A mere four hours later, things were fluid again.
After a conference call between owners and league officials, including commissioner Paul Tagliabue, the league announced yet another extension -- the second 72-hour respite in free agency, which originally was to start Friday.
"The NFL and the NFL Players Association have agreed to extend the start of the 2006 league year for 72 hours -- until 12:01 a.m., EST, Thursday, March 9 -- in order to allow the NFL clubs to meet in Dallas on Tuesday to consider the NFL Players Association's offer," the NFL said.
Shortly afterward, Upshaw said:
"The NFL negotiators called us tonight after our negotiations broke off to indicate that they will take our complete package to the owners for an approval vote on Tuesday. We have therefore agreed to extend the free agency deadline until midnight Wednesday in order to provide time for that vote to be accomplished. It was the NFL's previous rejection of our proposal earlier this evening that caused the talks to break down."
The deadline for teams to be under the salary cap also was pushed back. Though cuts had already started, the cap extension changed things.
The Oakland Raiders thought they would be forced to let quarterback Kerry Collins go, saving $9.2 million in cap space, however, the delay gave them a reprieve. Center Kevin Mawae was cut by the New York Jets, although he probably would have been gone anyway because he is 35 and missed the final 10 games of last season with a triceps injury.
The Washington Redskins, the team believed to be in the most cap trouble, said they had worked out an agreement to make linebacker LaVar Arrington, a three-time Pro Bowl player, a free agent. An official with knowledge of the transaction told The Associated Press that Arrington had agreed to a buyout that would save the team cap space it wouldn't have had if it had cut him.
Other big names also could go if teams try to squeeze under a salary cap of $94.5 million. If a deal is reached, the cap could go as much as 10 million higher -- in other words, allowing teams to keep some of the players.
Amid all the labor back-and-forth came news that running back Shaun Alexander was staying put: The league's MVP agreed to return to the NFC champion Seattle Seahawks for $62 million over eight years, with $15.1 guaranteed, according to his agent, Jim Steiner.
These negotiations were by far the most difficult since the NFL and the union first agreed to free agency and a salary cap in 1992, ending years of labor unrest that included player strikes in 1982 and 1987. The contract has been extended several times since then, most of the time with ease.
Even now, the contract doesn't expire until 2008, but this would be the last year of a salary cap -- 2007 would be uncapped, which could lead to wild spending by some teams and little by others, creating a haves/have not situation similar to the one in baseball.
One reason these talks were more difficult is that the players asked for a change in the system.
Until now, they received their money primarily from television and ticket revenues. This time, they requested their share from all team revenues, including outside money generated by everything from parking fees to stadium naming rights.
That led to difficult negotiations, in part, because the teams themselves are having their own dispute over that money because of the disparity in outside income made by low-revenue teams like Buffalo and Indianapolis and high-revenue teams like Dallas, Washington, New England and Philadelphia. Union leaders had suggested that it would be hard to reach agreement on a labor contract until the owners settled their own differences.
Both sides seemed ready to compromise on Sunday, largely because of the pressure of impending free agency, which was supposed to begin last Friday. However, it was put off for three days so the sides could keep talking.
Negotiations appeared to be at a standstill last Thursday, when the owners took just 57 minutes to reject the union's last offer. But seven hours later, the sides reversed course and started talking again.
Upshaw said he still thinks revenue sharing is the key, although Henderson said it was never discussed. Upshaw also said the players would do as well or better sticking with the current agreement.
"Under our previous cap agreement, we got just less than 60 percent of all of the revenues. The NFL now wants us to cut that percentage to less than 57 percent. Given the enormous revenue growth the NFL is experiencing, I am not about to give back gains which we have made in the past. It is clear to me that we will do much better under our current CBA in 2006 and particularly in 2007, the uncapped year," Upshaw said.
NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said the delay would give owners a chance to consider the union's latest proposal during a meeting Tuesday in Dallas.
Talks broke off earlier in the day, leaving dozens of veterans in danger of becoming salary-cap casualties before free agency was supposed to begin Monday at a minute after midnight.
The breakdown in talks was typical of the topsy-turvy negotiations, so far: Just when things seemed darkest, they got back on track; and when it appeared a deal could be struck, talks fell apart.
The union broke off Sunday's session.
"The talks ended after the NFL gave us a proposal which provided a percentage of revenues for the players which would be less than they received over the last 12 years," said Gene Upshaw, executive director of the NFL Players Association. "After suggesting we extend the waiver deadline from six o'clock to 10 this evening, they gave us a new proposal which was worse than their prior offer. Quite naturally, we rejected that proposal and saw no need to continue meeting."
But Harold Henderson, the NFL's executive vice president for labor relations, said the union rejected a proposal that would have added $577 million for players in 2006 compared to 2005 and $1.5 billion in the six years of the extension. "It's an unfortunate situation for the players, the fans and the league," Henderson said.
A mere four hours later, things were fluid again.
After a conference call between owners and league officials, including commissioner Paul Tagliabue, the league announced yet another extension -- the second 72-hour respite in free agency, which originally was to start Friday.
"The NFL and the NFL Players Association have agreed to extend the start of the 2006 league year for 72 hours -- until 12:01 a.m., EST, Thursday, March 9 -- in order to allow the NFL clubs to meet in Dallas on Tuesday to consider the NFL Players Association's offer," the NFL said.
Shortly afterward, Upshaw said:
"The NFL negotiators called us tonight after our negotiations broke off to indicate that they will take our complete package to the owners for an approval vote on Tuesday. We have therefore agreed to extend the free agency deadline until midnight Wednesday in order to provide time for that vote to be accomplished. It was the NFL's previous rejection of our proposal earlier this evening that caused the talks to break down."
The deadline for teams to be under the salary cap also was pushed back. Though cuts had already started, the cap extension changed things.
The Oakland Raiders thought they would be forced to let quarterback Kerry Collins go, saving $9.2 million in cap space, however, the delay gave them a reprieve. Center Kevin Mawae was cut by the New York Jets, although he probably would have been gone anyway because he is 35 and missed the final 10 games of last season with a triceps injury.
The Washington Redskins, the team believed to be in the most cap trouble, said they had worked out an agreement to make linebacker LaVar Arrington, a three-time Pro Bowl player, a free agent. An official with knowledge of the transaction told The Associated Press that Arrington had agreed to a buyout that would save the team cap space it wouldn't have had if it had cut him.
Other big names also could go if teams try to squeeze under a salary cap of $94.5 million. If a deal is reached, the cap could go as much as 10 million higher -- in other words, allowing teams to keep some of the players.
Amid all the labor back-and-forth came news that running back Shaun Alexander was staying put: The league's MVP agreed to return to the NFC champion Seattle Seahawks for $62 million over eight years, with $15.1 guaranteed, according to his agent, Jim Steiner.
These negotiations were by far the most difficult since the NFL and the union first agreed to free agency and a salary cap in 1992, ending years of labor unrest that included player strikes in 1982 and 1987. The contract has been extended several times since then, most of the time with ease.
Even now, the contract doesn't expire until 2008, but this would be the last year of a salary cap -- 2007 would be uncapped, which could lead to wild spending by some teams and little by others, creating a haves/have not situation similar to the one in baseball.
One reason these talks were more difficult is that the players asked for a change in the system.
Until now, they received their money primarily from television and ticket revenues. This time, they requested their share from all team revenues, including outside money generated by everything from parking fees to stadium naming rights.
That led to difficult negotiations, in part, because the teams themselves are having their own dispute over that money because of the disparity in outside income made by low-revenue teams like Buffalo and Indianapolis and high-revenue teams like Dallas, Washington, New England and Philadelphia. Union leaders had suggested that it would be hard to reach agreement on a labor contract until the owners settled their own differences.
Both sides seemed ready to compromise on Sunday, largely because of the pressure of impending free agency, which was supposed to begin last Friday. However, it was put off for three days so the sides could keep talking.
Negotiations appeared to be at a standstill last Thursday, when the owners took just 57 minutes to reject the union's last offer. But seven hours later, the sides reversed course and started talking again.
Upshaw said he still thinks revenue sharing is the key, although Henderson said it was never discussed. Upshaw also said the players would do as well or better sticking with the current agreement.
"Under our previous cap agreement, we got just less than 60 percent of all of the revenues. The NFL now wants us to cut that percentage to less than 57 percent. Given the enormous revenue growth the NFL is experiencing, I am not about to give back gains which we have made in the past. It is clear to me that we will do much better under our current CBA in 2006 and particularly in 2007, the uncapped year," Upshaw said.
Deviant said:Fuck those bitchy millionaires. I love the NFL, don't get me wrong but god damn I'd fuckin play football for 100,000 grand a year. Fuck them.
Go Steelers.
I'd play WR for $750k, so fuck these bitchy-ass, homolicious players!
$t33\e|2$ pWn!!!!!!
Darkwing said:you should be after the whole sale last year. O and I love Brett Farve, but he has played his last game, well at least in a GB uniform
I'm a GB fan (Cheezhedz Rule!) and I feel he's done. Time to hang it up and retire. He suffered so much here in the last 3 years that I'm surprised he even played on. It's time for the Hall of Fame Farve! 8)
imported_Godfather
New Member
green bay can lick my hairy nuts....i may be from wisconsin...but go cowboys
Godfather said:green bay can lick my hairy nuts....i may be from wisconsin...but go cowboys
Oh shit, another Dallas Crackhead in here? Wuz up!!!!!!!
ROFL! :lol:
mYth said:Deviant said:Fuck those bitchy millionaires. I love the NFL, don't get me wrong but god damn I'd fuckin play football for 100,000 grand a year. Fuck them.
Go Steelers.
I'd play WR for $750k, so fuck these bitchy-ass, homolicious players!
$t33\e|2$ pWn!!!!!!
well i see it like this, if it was guarenteed ok, but its not.
Werbung:
Darkwing said:mYth said:Deviant said:Fuck those bitchy millionaires. I love the NFL, don't get me wrong but god damn I'd fuckin play football for 100,000 grand a year. Fuck them.
Go Steelers.
I'd play WR for $750k, so fuck these bitchy-ass, homolicious players!
$t33\e|2$ pWn!!!!!!
well i see it like this, if it was guarenteed ok, but its not.
Exactly, and it wouldn't hurt the "salary cap"
They should pay all of 'em $500k a game and call it a day. Fuck 'em! 8)