beardown3231 Posted March 15, 2020 Share Posted March 15, 2020 2 hours ago, soulman said: That's the current number but will the new CBA increase that amount this year? Oops. I thought that was the new cap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulman Posted March 15, 2020 Share Posted March 15, 2020 34 minutes ago, beardown3231 said: Oops. I thought that was the new cap. It kinda is based on the current formula but how does the new CBA impact that? That's what I don't know yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAF-N72EX Posted March 15, 2020 Share Posted March 15, 2020 1 hour ago, soulman said: It kinda is based on the current formula but how does the new CBA impact that? That's what I don't know yet. I don't see how much of the new CBA will have an impact on the salary cap this year. The new CBA is only an extension -- the current CBA is still in effect for the remainder of the 2020 season. The players still receive the same 47.5% percent of all revenue this year but that goes up to 48.5% starting next season. Next year will see a huge boost in salary cap though. https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/28901832/nfl-cba-approved-players-get-new-deal-how-expanded-playoffs-schedule-work For starters, more money, in the form of a higher share of league revenue beginning in 2021. This year, players will get 47% of all league revenue, in keeping with their number from the current CBA. The expansion of the postseason by two teams will generate an estimated $150 million, according to the NFLPA memo, and 47% of that is $70.5 million. So that will be additional revenue going to the players that they wouldn't have received without the playoff expansion. Starting in 2021, the players will get at least 48% of all league revenue, and that figure could get higher depending on how the league does in negotiating new TV deals. Once the league moves to a 17-game season, the players' share of revenue includes a "media kicker," which constitutes an additional share of revenue based on the size of the TV contracts. According to the NFLPA memo, if the league's TV revenues increase by 60%, the players' share of revenue increases to 48.5%. That share can climb as high as 48.8% if the league's TV revenues increase by 120% or more, and it cannot be reduced via "stadium credits" -- meaning that any money the owners take off the top of the revenue pile for stadium construction and renovation cannot push the players' share of revenue below 48% (or whatever the media kicker brings it to) during the life of the deal. The new deal also will give the players 70% of incremental revenue from the league's Los Angeles Stadium project, meaning 70% of any revenue that exceeds projections in any given year. And they will get a share of revenues from legal gambling operations conducted in stadiums, whether that gambling is on NFL football or other sports. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAF-N72EX Posted March 15, 2020 Share Posted March 15, 2020 4 hours ago, soulman said: Close vote. Only a 60 vote majority. We still don't know what the $$$ impact will be on the 2020 cap. Articles are estimating anywhere from +$5 mil to +$20 mil. The players got absolutely hosed in this deal and they only have themselves to blame since over 500 players didn't even vote. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 3 hours ago, JustAnotherFan said: The players got absolutely hosed in this deal and they only have themselves to blame since over 500 players didn't even vote. The owners were smart though - they gave it short term significant boosts for the rank and file guys on minimum base salaries who are far less likely to ever see a second contract. An extra $100k a year to a guy who may only make $1.5M in his career before being out of the league at age 26 is a huge difference. If you’re Stephen Denmark or Duke Shelley or Jesper Horsted or Iggy or Josh Woods or Alex Bars or Javon Wims or Isaiah Irving or Ryan Nall this is probably a pretty good deal for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAF-N72EX Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 1 minute ago, AZBearsFan said: The owners were smart though - they gave it short term significant boosts for the rank and file guys on minimum base salaries who are far less likely to ever see a second contract. An extra $100k a year to a guy who may only make $1.5M in his career before being out of the league at age 26 is a huge difference. If you’re Stephen Denmark or Duke Shelley or Jesper Horsted or Iggy or Josh Woods or Alex Bars or Javon Wims or Isaiah Irving or Ryan Nall this is probably a pretty good deal for you. But that little amount doesn't mean much when you are now being forced to play 1 more regular season game AND potentially 1 more in the playoffs every single year. It may look good now, but not in the long run in terms of health after the NFL. One of the main talking points for players (and one that I agree with) is protecting players beyond their NFL careers and this does nothing to help that. More games = more head injuries = more problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 1 minute ago, JustAnotherFan said: But that little amount doesn't mean much when you are now being forced to play 1 more regular season game AND potentially 1 more in the playoffs every single year. It may look good now, but not in the long run in terms of health after the NFL. One of the main talking points for players (and one that I agree with) is protecting players beyond their NFL careers and this does nothing to help that. More games = more head injuries = more problems. Oh, I’m not disagreeing. Taking the first deal is almost never the right move, and it wasn’t the right move here. Just saying I get why some guys might have seen it as being good enough for them. A big chunk of the guys voting on this thing are week to week on their respective rosters and a bunch more are going to be fighting for roster spots every year of their careers. Those guys don’t have the same luxury of looking at the long term as guys taken higher in the draft, guys already on 2nd contracts, etc. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAF-N72EX Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 7 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said: Oh, I’m not disagreeing. Taking the first deal is almost never the right move, and it wasn’t the right move here. Just saying I get why some guys might have seen it as being good enough for them. A big chunk of the guys voting on this thing are week to week on their respective rosters and a bunch more are going to be fighting for roster spots every year of their careers. Those guys don’t have the same luxury of looking at the long term as guys taken higher in the draft, guys already on 2nd contracts, etc. This is a fair point. It's easier to be more affected as a veteran with job security than it is for a guy who is only hoping to make the team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulman Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 Essentially the owners got what they wanted via buying up the votes of the rank and file players who benefit more than the top 10% who'll end up working OT for straight pay or less once the extended season kicks in. Of course it's a little hard to shed too many tears for guys making far more in one year than most rank and file level guys will see in their entire careers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted March 16, 2020 Share Posted March 16, 2020 3 hours ago, soulman said: Essentially the owners got what they wanted via buying up the votes of the rank and file players who benefit more than the top 10% who'll end up working OT for straight pay or less once the extended season kicks in. Of course it's a little hard to shed too many tears for guys making far more in one year than most rank and file level guys will see in their entire careers. This. Guys who will play only 3 years or so and need to be paid now get security of a non delay and a nice raise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.