Joey Bosa...not signed, which side do you fall?

[cdumler7]

Randy McMichael...former player was on the council for the last CBA...now doing local sports talk radio...he said the players didn't want the FA tag in the last deal but they didn't have enough staying power to ride it out...but he thinks the players will probably have enough resolve this time around to miss game checks if necessary, FT and commish power are two high points to them...I can see this going to 18 games because that's a high point for owners.

I think us as fans better be ready for the fact that we might not have football in 2019 or 2020 whenever this CBA runs out. Players seem pretty darn sick of what is happening. Honestly after winning the Brady case I thought the NFL would work on trying to build player relations back but instead they doubled down with the whole Al Jazeera thing. Just a huge disconnect right now between owners and players and I don't think owners quite realize the storm that could be coming their way. Unfortunately that means us as fans are hurt in the middle of that battle.

 

[The Q]

Why?...DAL got those terms and I'm sure others did too.

I'm talking the entire concept of it is stupid.

Not just one negotiation about it.

 

[Thruthefog]

Bosa's skeered.

 

[Cincyfan78]

You can use the Tag I think as many times as you want but the price starts getting way too ridiculous after tagging somebody twice. So at this time realistically if Bosa is an incredible player the Chargers could control his fate for 7 years which would take him out of that nice prime window to get that next big deal. He would have to be top of his position though to get that kind of deal. So most likely he wouldn't have to wait as long but if he does tell them to shove off after his rookie deal is done they can definitely play hard ball with his future.

A quick read, and you are right. There doesn't seem to be a limit, but Bosa would not be tagged more than twice. As the 3rd time he would get to the average the top salaries at ANY position. Meaning, he would get top 5 QB money at DE. That's not going to happen. Heck, even QB's would get a 44% increase in the 3rd year of a tag. In effect, no one would ever be tagged more than 3 times since a 4th time would see an additional 44% increase over the year prior, which was also a 44% increase.

 

[cdumler7]

A quick read, and you are right. There doesn't seem to be a limit, but Bosa would not be tagged more than twice. As the 3rd time he would get to the average the top salaries at ANY position. Meaning, he would get top 5 QB money at DE. That's not going to happen. Heck, even QB's would get a 44% increase in the 3rd year of a tag. In effect, no one would ever be tagged more than 3 times since a 4th time would see an additional 44% increase over the year prior, which was also a 44% increase.

Yup so most likely twice is the limit. Again that is only if he is say top-3 player at his position in the NFL which would be hard to do. I just don't see him becoming that type of player but hey we have all been wrong on guys in the past.

Now the nice thing for Bosa though with the FT is that the new CBA would be up by then. So good chance that could be gone by the time they have to try and re-sign him.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

I think us as fans better be ready for the fact that we might not have football in 2019 or 2020 whenever this CBA runs out. Players seem pretty darn sick of what is happening. Honestly after winning the Brady case I thought the NFL would work on trying to build player relations back but instead they doubled down with the whole Al Jazeera thing. Just a huge disconnect right now between owners and players and I don't think owners quite realize the storm that could be coming their way. Unfortunately that means us as fans are hurt in the middle of that battle.

2020...per him the players knew what they were doing in terms of the power, but didn't expect it to be handled in this manner. Goodell kind of shocked them in his inconsistencies and the length he was willing to go when players broke no laws. They didn't really understand the impact of the FT until it started to hit home...for a lot of players the FT has worked out fine for the player, but they now understand, they're not really free agents.

Yeah the owners may not realize the level of player resolve, but the owners have some "wants" as well...namely the 18 games, and they know how to play the game.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

I'm talking the entire concept of it is stupid.

Not just one negotiation about it.

Okay...fair opinion, but it was put in to protect owners from the JaMarcus Russells and the Ryan Leafs of the draft...grants those were pre-rookie scale contracts, but Trent Richardson was fairly recent...I understand why the owners wanted it.

To me if I'm a 1st round draft pick, I know I've done okay for my future but I can't coast, the real money is the 2nd contract.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Yup so most likely twice is the limit. Again that is only if he is say top-3 player at his position in the NFL which would be hard to do. I just don't see him becoming that type of player but hey we have all been wrong on guys in the past.

Now the nice thing for Bosa though with the FT is that the new CBA would be up by then. So good chance that could be gone by the time they have to try and re-sign him.

I think you'll see a 1-done tag. I think it will also be the average top 5 or top 8 of any position, so teams will get to keep the FT for one year, but they are going to pay through the nose to use it.

It's the best to both sides. Teams will get a chance to hold on to a top tier guy for 1 year, but to do so, they are going to pay a lot of money. A lot of money.

 

[The Q]

Okay...fair opinion, but it was put in to protect owners from the JaMarcus Russells and the Ryan Leafs of the draft...grants those were pre-rookie scale contracts, but Trent Richardson was fairly recent...I understand why the owners wanted it.

To me if I'm a 1st round draft pick, I know I've done okay for my future but I can't coast, the real money is the 2nd contract.

It's ridiculous. Those guys are getting the minimum. At least make it something serious, like a couple mil is the starting point.

 

[Cincyfan78]

2020...per him the players knew what they were doing in terms of the power, but didn't expect it to be handled in this manner. Goodell kind of shocked them in his inconsistencies and the length he was willing to go when players broke no laws. They didn't really understand the impact of the FT until it started to hit home...for a lot of players the FT has worked out fine for the player, but they now understand, they're not really free agents.

Yeah the owners may not realize the level of player resolve, but the owners have some "wants" as well...namely the 18 games, and they know how to play the game.

I would say, with Goddell, more than anything they want a system in place that outlines exactly what happens. Too much of what his problem has been is that he gives out 1 or 2 game suspensions for an offense, and for the same offense for another player it's 4-5-6 games. Not to mention, I think the players will push for an arbitration board with a rep from the NFLPA, a rep from the owners, and then an agreed upon 3rd party judge in case of ties.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

I think you'll see a 1-done tag. I think it will also be the average top 5 or top 8 of any position, so teams will get to keep the FT for one year, but they are going to pay through the nose to use it.

It's the best to both sides. Teams will get a chance to hold on to a top tier guy for 1 year, but to do so, they are going to pay a lot of money. A lot of money.

Yeah, the infinite tag probably goes away, but the players will have to give up something to get that, and the owners really want 18 games I'm hearing...so maybe the owners also give up the judge and jury commish power.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

It's ridiculous. Those guys are getting the minimum. At least make it something serious, like a couple mil is the starting point.

Gimme a little more, not grasping what you're saying.

 

[The Q]

Gimme a little more, not grasping what you're saying.

Like you don't get to clawback if the guy makes the league minimum.

But if another team gives him say $2m or more per year you get to start to claw back.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

I would say, with Goddell, more than anything they want a system in place that outlines exactly what happens. Too much of what his problem has been is that he gives out 1 or 2 game suspensions for an offense, and for the same offense for another player it's 4-5-6 games. Not to mention, I think the players will push for an arbitration board with a rep from the NFLPA, a rep from the owners, and then an agreed upon 3rd party judge in case of ties.

I think reducing the commish's power will be the easiest to resolve...something along those lines in bold is probably what most arbitrators would come up with.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Yeah, the infinite tag probably goes away, but the players will have to give up something to get that, and the owners really want 18 games I'm hearing...so maybe the owners also give up the judge and jury commish power.

Yeah, I think everyone has been hearing that the league wants 18 games. I just don't see how they can justify 18 games without a large increase in salaries and salary caps. Not to mention, every player's salary currently is based on 16 games...How do they factor in this? I'm just not so sure 18 games is feasible, and not just because of 2 extra games, but because of all the red tape, and issues it is bound to cause.

I think you are right, more likely, the Owners give up power through the commish. Maybe make all disciplinary issues go through a panel where you have 3 reps, 1 from each side, and one agreed upon tie-breaker.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

Like you don't get to clawback if the guy makes the league minimum.

But if another team gives him say $2m or more per year you get to start to claw back.

Okay...that makes sense.

To my knowledge only 1st rounders and 2nd + contracts have this offset language. Idt a 3rd or 4th round pick is facing offset language...that would be silly.

 

[cdumler7]

I think reducing the commish's power will be the easiest to resolve...something along those lines in bold is probably what most arbitrators would come up with.

Yeah I agree this seems like the best the NFL owners can hope for if they want to get that 18-game set up. Give up the commish powers or at least allow for equal representation and the players give in to more games.
Also honestly I would think the NFL would want to have it. Then criticism isn't all on them or on Goodell. They can point to the NFLPA and say "hey they were just as much a part of this as us." Throw in then it would stop all lawsuits because the players would be going up against their own people on the decision. To me this is a win/win for the NFL.

 

[cdumler7]

Yeah, I think everyone has been hearing that the league wants 18 games. I just don't see how they can justify 18 games without a large increase in salaries and salary caps. Not to mention, every player's salary currently is based on 16 games...How do they factor in this? I'm just not so sure 18 games is feasible, and not just because of 2 extra games, but because of all the red tape, and issues it is bound to cause.

I think you are right, more likely, the Owners give up power through the commish. Maybe make all disciplinary issues go through a panel where you have 3 reps, 1 from each side, and one agreed upon tie-breaker.

Well they can pay for those extra games though by the money brought in. TV deals would go up because hey they have 2 more weeks if not 3 (might add in a 2nd bye week to appease the players) where games are on their networks. Plus then you throw in stadium revenue and such it adds up to more money for the league. So players would get a bit more money and owners would probably stay close to the same if not a bit more.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

Yeah, I think everyone has been hearing that the league wants 18 games. I just don't see how they can justify 18 games without a large increase in salaries and salary caps. Not to mention, every player's salary currently is based on 16 games...How do they factor in this? I'm just not so sure 18 games is feasible, and not just because of 2 extra games, but because of all the red tape, and issues it is bound to cause.

I think you are right, more likely, the Owners give up power through the commish. Maybe make all disciplinary issues go through a panel where you have 3 reps, 1 from each side, and one agreed upon tie-breaker.

What I've heard is there would still be 20 games, but only 2 preseason games and the 2 that get converted to reg season games the players would get incremental money for the added games....probably the same as their average...so the players would be compensated if what I'm hearing has any credibility.

I'm not for 18 games...I think the roster sizes would need to be expanded or at least drop the non-actives.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Well they can pay for those extra games though by the money brought in. TV deals would go up because hey they have 2 more weeks if not 3 (might add in a 2nd bye week to appease the players) where games are on their networks. Plus then you throw in stadium revenue and such it adds up to more money for the league. So players would get a bit more money and owners would probably stay close to the same if not a bit more.

Oh, agreed on the money front. I meant more, I think those players will want all-new contracts. How do you add money to any contract without just re-doing it? You can't make it an even split, because top tier guys are going to clearly deserve more than the bottom of the barrel guys. It's those top tier guys I see holding out and wanting new contracts.

It can be done, the money will be there, it's all the red tape I would be more concerned with. The execution of the plan is more important, IMO.