NFLPA's DeMaurice Smith tells agents to 'collude'

[candyman93]

His heart is in the right place, but this won’t end well.

 

The game was over when players allowed rookies to be paid cheaply.

[MWil23]

I think you also have to realize a few things:

1. Smith is under serious heat for the owners getting that 17th game "for free" this year, and there are calls for his job after that. This is his way of trying to show some muscle back.

2. This is a posturing move to ensure some semblance of equitable pay for equitable work. It's not the players' faults that the cap went down, so the owners getting a bonus game for less pay is not something that the players should agree to...or at least without:

3. ...using this as an opportunity to get some major things back in the next CBA in 2030. While this is a ways away, this is a posturing move for the future, as well as the present going forward for free agents and contract situations. For example, while most players/others understand that 2021 cap is largely due to the pandemic, he's also sending the message that "this will not be the case beyond 2021/we won't stand for it". While the baseball owners can get away with highway robbery, the NFL owners won't be able to do the same manipulation.

JMHO

[NudeTayne]

53 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

I think you also have to realize a few things:

1. Smith is under serious heat for the owners getting that 17th game "for free" this year, and there are calls for his job after that. This is his way of trying to show some muscle back.

2. This is a posturing move to ensure some semblance of equitable pay for equitable work. It's not the players' faults that the cap went down, so the owners getting a bonus game for less pay is not something that the players should agree to...or at least without:

3. ...using this as an opportunity to get some major things back in the next CBA in 2030. While this is a ways away, this is a posturing move for the future, as well as the present going forward for free agents and contract situations. For example, while most players/others understand that 2021 cap is largely due to the pandemic, he's also sending the message that "this will not be the case beyond 2021/we won't stand for it". While the baseball owners can get away with highway robbery, the NFL owners won't be able to do the same manipulation.

JMHO

These are all great points.

Conversely, the @reelcynicTayne in me says the owners got this one.

Take two, the @reelconspiracytrutherTayne in me says Demaurice is on the take from the owners and this is all a dog & pony show; as you pointed out, he was the captain when all this went down in the first place.

[squire12]

2 hours ago, MWil23 said:

I think you also have to realize a few things:

1. Smith is under serious heat for the owners getting that 17th game "for free" this year, and there are calls for his job after that. This is his way of trying to show some muscle back.

sure, but asking the masses to band together when at some point, all those players are independent contractors and will need to look out for themselves

2 hours ago, MWil23 said:

2. This is a posturing move to ensure some semblance of equitable pay for equitable work. It's not the players' faults that the cap went down, so the owners getting a bonus game for less pay is not something that the players should agree to...or at least without:

not the owners fault the cap went down either.  adding the 17th game is a way to lessen the cap going down

2 hours ago, MWil23 said:

3. ...using this as an opportunity to get some major things back in the next CBA in 2030. While this is a ways away, this is a posturing move for the future, as well as the present going forward for free agents and contract situations. For example, while most players/others understand that 2021 cap is largely due to the pandemic, he's also sending the message that "this will not be the case beyond 2021/we won't stand for it". While the baseball owners can get away with highway robbery, the NFL owners won't be able to do the same manipulation.

JMHO

around 90% of the current players will not see the next CBA, so what good does the "posturing" now do for them in the now vs for those yet to come?

I guess you can sell it as helping those that will come after you.   BUT these players are generally going to be more concerned about their paycheck NOW

[MWil23]

Just now, squire12 said:

sure, but asking the masses to band together when at some point, all those players are independent contractors and will need to look out for themselves

Correct, but that's why he asked agents to collude, not necessarily players. If he can convince x agents to collude and y players, then that would "strengthen" their platform.

Just now, squire12 said:

not the owners fault the cap went down either.  adding the 17th game is a way to lessen the cap going down

Again, purely speaking from the players point of view, and I'm not saying that it's anyone's fault.

Just now, squire12 said:

around 90% of the current players will not see the next CBA, so what good does the "posturing" now do for them in the now vs for those yet to come?

I guess you can sell it as helping those that will come after you.   BUT these players are generally going to be more concerned about their paycheck NOW

Correct. Again, I'm speaking strictly from the POV of the union. Smith was elected back in 2009. How many current players were playing when he was first unanimously elected?

All of this aside, most of this I believe is to salvage his job and ensure that, while the cap is going down in 2021, the players are "fairly compensated" going forward. Conceivably, the owners could get a boatload of cash with a new TV deal, extra game, and then get even more with the cap going down if the players don't at least try to put up the guise of getting more after 2021. 

[Daniel]

5 hours ago, ET80 said:

But lets admit - this less money is still an artificial construct. NFL teams still turned a profit from this season based on TV contracts/revenue. Maybe not as big a profit as previous years, but a profit nonetheless. Creating a shorter ceiling for the cap isn't based on actual dollars lost - just the perception of monies lost. All 32 teams ended in the black, thanks to the Network dollars.

The cap has always been an artificial construct for owners to say "welp, I can't pay you anymore so... good luck!" which is OK, all things considered (nobody wants a Yankees or Dodgers). But to restrict standard growth to said cap because you didn't make as much money as you anticipated? (Not even you operated at a loss, you flat out turned less a profit you anticipated...) I'm not a fan of that.

But, that's just me.

That's kind of what I'm thinking.  Tons of players that are really good will be unsigned if things go normally.  It's hard for me to imagine those players (being the majority) won't push the NFLPA to take actions to get them signed.  And as you point out, since the NFL still made a crap ton of profit, even in 2020 craziness, it's hard for me to imagine everyone holding out and just leaving those difference making players unsigned.

I mean, even a good number of teams would be pushing to just bump up the cap a little if they thought it meant that they'd be competing for a championship.  And teams that win make more money, so they'll choose winning themselves over greater shared profits if it came to that.

Hell, GMs might be for raising the cap just to make their jobs easier.  Half the NFL is in cap hell right now, and no one wants to go through restructuring 40 of their guys to move enough money around.

[SkippyX]

Another way of looking at this is he told agents to not let owners collude by going cheap across the board (see MLB)

[squire12]

34 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

Another way of looking at this is he told agents to not let owners collude by going cheap across the board (see MLB)

Sure.  And eventually agents will want to get a slice of the cap space that in 2021 is smaller than other years for their clients.

Typically the cap goes about ~$10M.  Prior to pandemic, it was projected to be around $210M.

The cap dropping to $185M or even $190M...that is $20-25M per team.  So league wide, $650M to $750M less cap space for teams to use and players to be in competition for.

[drfrey13]

Am I missing something here?  The teams have to pay out a certain percentage of the cap over a specific time period.  The cap is lowered and the so teams have to lower what they offer.  There is still risk in the future for the teams so they would be stupid to risk giving huge back loaded deals.  For those who are FAs or players that have not lived up to their contracts it sucks but you are going to have to do what you have to do.  Telling the players to hold the line is either stupidity or ignorance.  If the players hold out for large deals they are just going to mess with the next player coming after them to have less.  Teams might backload the contracts but with the uncertainty in the world even those will be reduced.  I have seen years were garbage free agents get huge contracts in all sports.  If the owners came out and said hold the line they would face serious backlash.  Smith can give advice but he should keep words such as collude to himself.  He is going to do more harm.

[SkippyX]

What you are missing is that this only applies to this year and they are about to sign a huge new deal.

You can be very creative with multi-year contracts when only 1 year is affected by a lower cap.

 

Dallas and DC actually did this in reverse in bad faith against the other 30 owners in the uncapped year.

• You can like it or hate it but they got punished for a legit reason

 

I think the point is that guys like Dak, KJ Wright, Allen Robinson, Chris Godwin, Shaq Barrett, Joe Thuney, and co don't have to give in to lower deals.

Everyone who wants to join the Saints may have to do this for other reasons, but why would you want to join the Saints?

 

NFL teams carried 260 million forward from last year. They can use that money to offset the lower cap.

Bottom 25 roster guys will still get screwed by QBs and LTs and top tier guys taking more than their share, but that's a Union issue.

[squire12]

2 hours ago, SkippyX said:

What you are missing is that this only applies to this year and they are about to sign a huge new deal.

You can be very creative with multi-year contracts when only 1 year is affected by a lower cap.

Sure you can.  But singing bonus will be low to keep that 2021 cap hit low.  

Will teams be willing to guarantee 2022 or 2023 base salaries?  Probably not.

2 hours ago, SkippyX said:

 

Dallas and DC actually did this in reverse in bad faith against the other 30 owners in the uncapped year.

• You can like it or hate it but they got punished for a legit reason

 

I think the point is that guys like Dak, KJ Wright, Allen Robinson, Chris Godwin, Shaq Barrett, Joe Thuney, and co don't have to give in to lower deals.

Correct.  The big name top tier FA will likely get there's.  But that will take up a bigger % of the overall cap space so the middle tier and depth players might get squeezed on deals.

2 hours ago, SkippyX said:

Everyone who wants to join the Saints may have to do this for other reasons, but why would you want to join the Saints?

 

NFL teams carried 260 million forward from last year. They can use that money to offset the lower cap.

And that $260M is the counter to the $10M x 32 teams ....$320M the league wide cap is being reduced by ( based on a projected $188M cap).  So there is less money available. 

2 hours ago, SkippyX said:

Bottom 25 roster guys will still get screwed by QBs and LTs and top tier guys taking more than their share, but that's a Union issue.

Agreed.  

Big name/ top tier FA get theirs

Depth players GET SQUEEZED

Rookues and UDFA get theirs because they are cheap for multiple years

[CriminalMind]

The practice of agents/ players colluding won't happen. However, teams can certainly work together to try and collude by offering either one deals or lower than expected 2-4 year deals. 

- teams should cut more boarder line players with not great cap hits

- not

Non-top 25% FA will get huge reductions, making players in the middle "25-60" say screw it "I'll join a superteam this year" 

Edited February 28, 2021 by CriminalMind

[Xenos]

Anyone read this ESPN article that takes a long critical look at Smith. Some interesting maneuvering behind the scenes to say the least.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/30930834/inside-dual-legacies-nfl-players-union-boss-demaurice-smith%3fplatform=amp