Originally posted by NYniner85:
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Why not? If they don't, half their union will lose a crap ton of money. They literally don't hold any of the bargaining power here, this is why the NFL was trying to low-ball them, then agreed to a floor. Yes, it's part of negotiations but is also a good-faith movement. Not sure why you seem cynical towards it. The owners couldn't agree to a cap above 47% without approval from the NFLPA. But, the owners have the power right now, more than they've had in decades, because player contracts are what will be hit hardest and the NFLPA's push for % of revenues is what created this problem(not saying they shouldn't have, that's just the reality of a revenue based salary cap). Both parties weren't planning on COVID wrecking revenues. It can't be one sided or even half the players in a "well, we have our contracts and screw the rest of you" stance. If there isn't some sort of move from both players and owners to create more cap space, you're going to end up with at least half the players in the union unemployed come the start of the new league year.
You're telling me that if 500 players of a union are unemployed and staring at minimum contracts for every single one that the NFLPA is going to be ok with that? Like I mentioned earlier today, on 2nd year minimum contracts the league still couldn't fill all the roster spots that will be open in the league - which they can't even do because of the CBA's rookie wage scale.
My point through all of this is, we can't assume we'll be in cap hell because of Jimmy G's contract and it's why we need to move on from him. We're 17th in cap space next season and, like I've pointed out, the league as a whole is in a terrible position with current contracts and the cap. So, we can't sit here and say, "we have to move on from Jimmy G because we don't have x, y and z signed and we won't be able to extend Warner".
You yourself are saying that nearly everyone would have to accept minimum contracts if the cap isn't adjusted, so why are we worried if we could afford guys if everyone's going to have to sign minimum contracts.
We have to have logical harmony.
Either our high value FA's are going to cost a lot of money and the cap is going to adjusted by either % cuts by the players union or the market will crash and contracts will be dirt cheap. Either way, there's no reason why we move on from Jimmy for cap reasons.
Because I don't see it as a good faith gesture, just negations. Not sure why you would make it out to more than that? Meet in the middle.
Most of the players in the NFL are lower end paid players (vet min, yr to yr smaller deals etc) you think they're gonna agree to take a pay cut when in fact they're the ones that WILL be playing (have jobs) because their salaries are already low. Nah dude I can't see that.
There are still teams that have a good amount of cap space even with the covid issues. I don't know how many of them have massive FAs leaving BUT theres money.
Yes guys will take shorter deals (like this past yr) It will work itself out...they need to revisit Jimmy's contract regardless.
1st bolded: Because the owners didn't HAVE to do it. There was nothing contractually obligating them to paying above the CBA's salary cap. The owners had to initiate that, not the players. The negotiations were that the players wanted more but really didn't have any power to demand more. But, the owners have shown good faith in the negotiations that they're willing to pay their share and go above a 47% revenue benchmark and so now they will expect the players to take cuts. That's what has to happen for the league to function.
2nd bolded: Yes, because if they don't, many will be unemployed for even cheaper options in an extremely cash strapped year or facing playing on short-term contracts for minimum with no guarantees against injury and a complete market re-set for their next contract.
3rd bolded: There's only 5 teams with 50+ mil in cap space and the Jaguars top the list with 82 mil in space. Their LT is their biggest FA. If we don't see an adjustment to contracts, a LT of his caliber would bring 14-15 mil per year, leaving them with 67 mil in space. Seems like a lot, but again, if contracts don't adjust, you eat that up with Shaquille Barrett/Aldon Smith, and 3 other top guys at their position and their cap space is all gone. That's 5 of the high profile free agents signed
Considering you'd also see at least 10 teams dump multiple big contracts, you could expect to see 50-60 high profile free agents on the market. There's not enough cap space in the league. That's my point.
Again, there's no way that Jimmy G's contract is the reason we can't keep guys. There are TEN teams in the RED for 2021 right now.....TEN.... There's only 9 teams with 30+ in space. There's no way contracts aren't either dirt cheap or players take a pay cut. No way.
Either the cap is adjusted by player cuts or contracts are dirt cheap - that's my whoooooole point. I believe players are going to take cuts to try and stabilize the market, but if they don't, don't tell me Trent Williams is getting a 15 mil/year contract in a year when you have 6 starting LT's hitting FA and very few teams with money.
Let's just look at this, the league as a whole has 217 mil in cap space for next season if players don't take cuts
The top 25 - just the top 25, FA's, based upon this years APY take up 383 mil in cap space. The players will take across the board cuts or contracts will be dirt cheap. There aren't any other options. So, again, why do we need to move on from Jimmy for cap reasons?
