Jump to content

NFL proposes $40 million dollar cap reduction in 2020.


MikeT14

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, MikeT14 said:

 

Quote

As Profootballtalk's Mike Florio points out, the players have zero obligation to negotiate the 2020 cap. The "mutual duty to bargain" does not kick in until 2021. It is entirely predictable that the league is trying to spread out the unforeseen losses, something it would never do with unforeseen gains. As was the case with Major League Baseball's coronavirus negotiations, this has the potential to get ugly in a hurry. It is mind boggling that the process was not ramped up sooner.  

I'm not sure the bolded is correct... The players receive a fairly fixed percentage of revenue (through the cap and salary floor). When revenues increase, the cap (and floor) increase along with it, as we have seen with the cap growing substantially over the last several years. 

EDIT - to add to this, not smoothing unforeseen gains is actually getting money to the players faster, the opposite of what seems to be implied here

Edited by sp6488
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sp6488 said:

 

I'm not sure the bolded is correct... The players receive a fairly fixed percentage of revenue (through the cap and salary floor). When revenues increase, the cap (and floor) increase along with it, as we have seen with the cap growing substantially over the last several years. 

It amazes me these talking heads and reporters have so little knowledge of how the system works

Ya, the players don't have to bargain, but the Owners do have the right to cancel the season or withhold salaries through escrow

Negotiating the most beneficial path forward is in the players best interests. Although they don't *have* to negotiate, the owners have plenty of levers and mechanisms to mandate the path forward. Some of which the NFLPA wouldn't like but would be powerless to do anything about

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One partial solution would be to have any of the players that Opt out this season not count against the Top 51 for the Cap. They are talking about having those players contracts toll anyway to the next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read last night that JJ Watt was saying over and over again on Twitter "The players want to play" which really felt like him setting up for a fight with the owners. This seems ludicrous to do BEFORE the season starts. I'm not very knowledgeable about the NFL, but isn't the Cap based on last year's revenue? Why not wait until you see what revenue actually does this year before deciding on pay percentages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EaglesPeteC said:

Imagine being a billionaire and being like “Lose some money, give up my 4th house? Lol Let’s just take money from the people who worked their entire life for like a 3-5 year peak employment window” 

Part of the reason they're billionaires I would imagine.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Fidgit said:

Read last night that JJ Watt was saying over and over again on Twitter "The players want to play" which really felt like him setting up for a fight with the owners. This seems ludicrous to do BEFORE the season starts. I'm not very knowledgeable about the NFL, but isn't the Cap based on last year's revenue? Why not wait until you see what revenue actually does this year before deciding on pay percentages.

Cap is based mainly on projections

They have their fixed incomes (TV deals), Mostly fixed incomes (Ticket Sales) Most advertising is locked in, and they have been in a constant growth cycle. There is always an escrow on player contract, but since there has been so much growth, the number is insanely small and is usually paid back in full so it's not really news

Escrow is more an issue in hockey (NHL) where players routinely lose 8-10% of their contract values due to escrow (Owners overspending)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Fidgit said:

Read last night that JJ Watt was saying over and over again on Twitter "The players want to play" which really felt like him setting up for a fight with the owners. This seems ludicrous to do BEFORE the season starts. I'm not very knowledgeable about the NFL, but isn't the Cap based on last year's revenue? Why not wait until you see what revenue actually does this year before deciding on pay percentages.

The owners main bargaining chip is they have the right to cancel the season and NOBODY gets paid. The brewing fight is that the players believe that if they play even 1 game, then COVID cancels the season, they get their salaries in full. Obviously the owners feel differently

JJWatt is saying "we want to play" because the owners are lowkey threatening to not let them as a way to get them to bargain a deal which gives them some protections and prevents a long legal battle (Just like MLB had to go through)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TheGame316 said:

Cap is based mainly on projections

They have their fixed incomes (TV deals), Mostly fixed incomes (Ticket Sales) Most advertising is locked in, and they have been in a constant growth cycle. There is always an escrow on player contract, but since there has been so much growth, the number is insanely small and is usually paid back in full so it's not really news

Escrow is more an issue in hockey (NHL) where players routinely lose 8-10% of their contract values due to escrow (Owners overspending)

That makes more sense. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, TheGame316 said:

The players are only entitled to a percentage of revenue. If it isn't a lower cap it the money will be taken through escrow (garnish) players contract

So, its a 200 million dollar cap with a 35% escrow on existing contracts (players only see 65% of their salary) or its a 160 Million dollar cap in which players receive 100% of their negotiated salaries but FA's will get screwed with lowball offers due to lack of capspace

Pick your poison

Or they negotiate to spread the decreased revenue over the next few years so it's a $10M/year hit over 4 years instead of a $40MM hit now. So the cap would be > 50% of revenue in 2020 and less than 50% of revenue in the next 4 years, but would average out to the agreed upon total percentage in the CBA.

But yeah people who are comparing this to baseball don't get it. The players agreed to a paycut every time revenues dropped when they signed the CBA. I'm as pro-player as anyone on this website, but this set in stone/CBA ink already.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EaglesPeteC said:

Imagine being a billionaire and being like “Lose some money, give up my 4th house? Lol Let’s just take money from the people who worked their entire life for like a 3-5 year peak employment window” 

Why do that when you can just funnel money and beat an FBI Investigation?

khhjfu75nacd02ki9u5o.gif

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

Or they negotiate to spread the decreased revenue over the next few years so it's a $10M/year hit over 4 years instead of a $40MM hit now. So the cap would be > 50% of revenue in 2020 and less than 50% of revenue in the next 4 years, but would average out to the agreed upon total percentage in the CBA.

But yeah people who are comparing this to baseball don't get it. The players agreed to a paycut every time revenues dropped when they signed the CBA. I'm as pro-player as anyone on this website, but this set in stone/CBA ink already.

Which is where it will end up most likely

But the owners have to say "35% escrow this year" or you don't play!

And the players have to say "We want to play and we want 100% of our money"

and after a lot of posturing the reality is it will be somewhere in the middle

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TheGame316 said:

Which is where it will end up most likely

But the owners have to say "35% escrow this year" or you don't play!

And the players have to say "We want to play and we want 100% of our money"

and after a lot of posturing the reality is it will be somewhere in the middle

100% agreed, but both sides should be smart enough here to not involve the media. Financially, the money is already allocated, all they have to do is get the timing of when the loss comes right. Do it in private (tbh it shouldn't take that long) and announce it when it's done.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When faced with what I believe should be a similar problem, the NHL and players agreed to a flat cap with no increase for at least 3 years, and then cap increases based on seasons back dated a couple of years (thus using seasons impacted by Covid to keep a static cap limit even longer). The owners take it on the chin in the immediate present, however will likely recover this in the back end of these years while the players have a certain degree of stability out of the gate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...