Comments on: NFL, NFLPA battle could spread to 2012 restricted free agency

By: themage78

themage78 — Fri, 25 May 2012 18:18:18 +0000

SHOCK AND AWE! Owners don’t want to spend $$. Come on. They aren’t going to get anything out of these lawsuits.

By: macwomack

macwomack — Thu, 24 May 2012 23:14:48 +0000

Once Mara discusses this the union will fire up that engine

By: macwomack

macwomack — Thu, 24 May 2012 23:12:08 +0000

Can we get Mara to discuss this … The union wants another three bil….

By: Deb

Deb — Thu, 24 May 2012 22:19:37 +0000

Generally, I support the players in union matters. But if I’d be thrilled to go a lifetime without ever again hearing the names De Smith and Jeffrey Kessler as well as Jeff Pash.

By: macwomack

macwomack — Thu, 24 May 2012 22:18:18 +0000

I have said it before and I will say it again there is no smoking gun cause Mara has not talked to the press yet. Once he does….the union will have their smoking gun.

By: qj1984

qj1984 — Thu, 24 May 2012 21:51:49 +0000

Frankly now that the rookie pay scale has been put in it makes much more sense to gamble on using your first round pick. Sure Lardarius Webb could have been had for a late 1st round pick but he also would have cost 50 million dollars which is 10x more than what those late guys are going for. Mike Wallace also could have been had for a late 1st round pick but he wants Calvin Johnson/ Larry Fitzgerald money. That’s like 20 times more than the guy a team would have chosen with that pick.

By: myopinionmattersandyoursblows

myopinionmattersandyoursblows — Thu, 24 May 2012 21:31:32 +0000

boo

By: majbobby

majbobby — Thu, 24 May 2012 21:26:19 +0000

Ever think with the Rookie wage scale draft picks value are greatly increased in teams eyes.

By: dlionfan

dlionfan — Thu, 24 May 2012 21:18:42 +0000

Why give up a 1st round draft pick & take on a huge salary when you are getting good rookies cheaper with the new wage scale & save yourself a headache. They are just thinking long term & draft picks are valuable again without the huge contracts then pick up ufa’s when a good one is there to fill spots.

By: cuffhimbanano

cuffhimbanano — Thu, 24 May 2012 20:56:06 +0000

This would make sense except there’s just too many dumb teams who prefer to waste a late first rounder on a project and reach like the 49ers instead of just giving the pick up for the guaranteed guy with only 3 years on the tires.

By: tialen

tialen — Thu, 24 May 2012 20:24:26 +0000

Seriously, who is going to sign a guy and have to give up both a 1st round pick and a huge contract, when instead you can draft a guy in the 1st round and have him for 5 years for next to nothing?

The rookie wage scale has effectively squashed any restricted free agent deals for the next 10 years. It makes no sense at all to pay in picks anymore.

By: CKL

CKL — Thu, 24 May 2012 20:01:48 +0000

Isn’t the RFA market usually pretty slow?

By: phillyphever

phillyphever — Thu, 24 May 2012 19:48:27 +0000

I don’t get it. Why would the NFLPA be upset about teams not signing RFAs when 1) there were only two (Wallace and Webb) that were worth a damn, but were asking too much and 2) the rest of the RFAs were either scrubs or backups. The last RFA that was worth-wile was Welker, and that was 6 years ago.

By: coolzog

coolzog — Thu, 24 May 2012 19:28:07 +0000

Or maybe nobody felt like giving up a first round pick to make Mike Wallace the highest paid WR in the league?

By: deerpathdave

deerpathdave — Thu, 24 May 2012 19:25:00 +0000

I understand it probably happened, but I really don’t think any rules were broken.
1. Several teams did spend substantially over the cap and the league approved the contracts. Several teams also spent significant under the floor. So the teams did deviate from the previous rules as the agreement allowed.
2. It may be an inaccurate characterization (at least legally) to say the teams that spent more were “penalized”. Once a new agreement was in place, the league took a look at the competitive landscape and determined that several teams had a competitive advantage due to previous spending. The remedy was to deduct from their current salary cap WITH concurrence from the NFLPA. So the NFLPA and the League both agreed to an adjustment under the current agreement.

By: butthatmakestoomuchsense

butthatmakestoomuchsense — Thu, 24 May 2012 18:18:46 +0000

Why can’t the owners just play by the rules?

By: angrycorgi

angrycorgi — Thu, 24 May 2012 18:10:41 +0000

“and just like it did when teams treated the uncapped year as anything but uncapped.”
—-
Minor correction: “and just like it did when MOST teams treated the uncapped year as anything but uncapped.”

By: cletusvandam

cletusvandam — Thu, 24 May 2012 18:08:46 +0000

Didn’t a few different teams inquire about Mike Wallace? He wasn’t offered a contract because his demands were ridiculous.

By: kodakinvegas

kodakinvegas — Thu, 24 May 2012 18:08:04 +0000

Sh, come on Mike, quit instigating weve got ENOUGH going on already