2011 and beyond

[Cyberjag]

If you read the John Fox budget comments, then you know that one of the driving forces behind the youth movement is financial. And if you follow the Panthers closely, you know that Richardson is neck-deep in the negotiation process and knows as well as anyone what the likely outcome is.

Among other things, owners want to reduce the cap by 20%. It's very likely they'll grandfather that in, but only to a point. So teams like Chicago have to win soon, or they'll be forced to make do with vet minimums everywhere on the roster because of financial decisions they're making today.

On the flip side, teams like the Panthers should enter 2011 and 2012 with the new cap well in range, and the Panthers should have enough to re-sign their RFAs without worrying about other teams blowing up the negotiations with inflated deals.

Who out there knows more about this? Because I'm really just spit-balling here, and am interested in knowing if my not-very-well-thought-through theory (that I probably read in a bad bleacher report article in the first place) has any merit. What do you all think the financial landscape will look like in 2011 and beyond, and what opportunities will that create for the Panthers?

[Dpantherman]

not use to this kind of scholarly Panther talk. that said, i have no idea.

[Wither]

No one knows more about this, and how exactly does everyone know just how Richardson thinks? I know I've used this attitude many times, but it's seriously annoying how everyone seems to assume they know what someone is like just because they see them on TV and read about them.

With that said, I can see him going for lower costs, but it's not a bad thing if the cap does come down (as you said, it puts the team in a great position), yet everyone acts like he is trying to throw away this season and ruin the team.

[Cyberjag]

No one knows more about this, and how exactly does everyone know just how Richardson thinks? I know I've used this attitude many times, but it's seriously annoying how everyone seems to assume they know what someone is like just because they see them on TV and read about them.

With that said, I can see him going for lower costs, but it's not a bad thing if the cap does come down (as you said, it puts the team in a great position), yet everyone acts like he is trying to throw away this season and ruin the team.

Richardson is part of the committee that's negotiating with the union, right? So I don't see how anyone could know more about what's going on than he does. And he obviously knows his NFL history, and is the only owner who has a player's perspective. So I believe that he knows more than just about anyone, especially those not on the committee, and he has a unique understanding of what both sides are thinking, and is probably in a very good position to predict the likely outcome.

And he won't be sharing it on the huddle.

So if you agree with that postulate, then maybe you can look at his actions and try to figure out what he's doing. We all know he has a history of spending as much as the cap will allow. We all know he loves the League almost as much as he loves his own team. We all know he wants to win. And we all know there's a youth movement going on that is partially fueled by budget concerns.

By the way, if there's a lockout the League still gets paid by DirectTV. And PSLs means tons of sellouts in 2010. Richardson is in no danger of losing money.

So I'm trying to speculate about what it may mean from the perspective of an owner victory. Maybe Richardson IS throwing the season away to make a little extra money. But maybe he's actually positioning the Panthers to be competitive now and in the future, and possibly relaxing his desire to win this year in order to gain position in the next (presumably under different financial rules).

Does that sound far fetched? If not, maybe someone who's better informed than I am can fill in the gaps with facts. That's what I'm hoping for here.

[Wither]

Richardson is part of the committee that's negotiating with the union, right? So I don't see how anyone could know more about what's going on than he does. And he obviously knows his NFL history, and is the only owner who has a player's perspective. So I believe that he knows more than just about anyone, especially those not on the committee, and he has a unique understanding of what both sides are thinking, and is probably in a very good position to predict the likely outcome.

I never agrued that he doesn't know whats going on, merely that people that don't know him do not know how he thinks. Although, I think you understad that; I just want to clarify my point for other readers.

Does that sound far fetched? If not, maybe someone who's better informed than I am can fill in the gaps with facts. That's what I'm hoping for here.

It's not that far fetched, but I doubt you will get any more information besides mere opinion, as I doubt anyone here knows much of how Richardson thinks.

[panther4life]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/talk-of-an-nfl-lockout-is-pure-madness

[outlaw4]

If you read the John Fox budget comments, then you know that one of the driving forces behind the youth movement is financial. And if you follow the Panthers closely, you know that Richardson is neck-deep in the negotiation process and knows as well as anyone what the likely outcome is.

Among other things, owners want to reduce the cap by 20%. It's very likely they'll grandfather that in, but only to a point. So teams like Chicago have to win soon, or they'll be forced to make do with vet minimums everywhere on the roster because of financial decisions they're making today.

On the flip side, teams like the Panthers should enter 2011 and 2012 with the new cap well in range, and the Panthers should have enough to re-sign their RFAs without worrying about other teams blowing up the negotiations with inflated deals.

Who out there knows more about this? Because I'm really just spit-balling here, and am interested in knowing if my not-very-well-thought-through theory (that I probably read in a bad bleacher report article in the first place) has any merit. What do you all think the financial landscape will look like in 2011 and beyond, and what opportunities will that create for the Panthers?

I pretty much stated that in another thread (but you said it more eloquently than I did ). However, my underlying theory was that the whole intention of running lean now is to ride out the lockout while spending as little as possible.

Now, if JR believes that lockout or not, the cap will be lower than before and that vets will be paid more money, then that would make sense as well. Therefore, it makes sense to keep Hurney since he's been good at managing the cap (and, in fact, he's already been offered extension so that piece of the puzzle fits). Now, with Fox, he's always been a guy more comfortable working with vets rather than rookies but the future financial structure may change that. Therefore, it may be that Fox is being tested this season to see whether he himself can adapt to coaching a mostly young team because that may be the new norm.

[Brooklyn Bully]

No one knows more about this, and how exactly does everyone know just how Richardson thinks? I know I've used this attitude many times, but it's seriously annoying how everyone seems to assume they know what someone is like just because they see them on TV and read about them.

With that said, I can see him going for lower costs, but it's not a bad thing if the cap does come down (as you said, it puts the team in a great position), yet everyone acts like he is trying to throw away this season and ruin the team.

I don't think he's trying to ruin the team, but he is trying to prepare for the future financial strains this team may see. That said, he's going younger which allows him to spend less. It's a gamble, however, and there is no proof going younger will get you to the Playoffs. So he's taking a risk with the product on the field to cover the risks he may encounter in his wallet. He's not throwing anything away, but he is rolling the dice.

[cookinbrak]

That would be a more viable option if other teams were doing it, as well. But the salary cap will be no lower next year than it was last year. The NFL is not going to punish 25 other teams ( I'm not counting the teams that were well below the cap last year) because one owner decided that he wants to save money- the league simply couldn't exist with that kind of mentality. All those other teams didn't figure their players salaries to the penny just so one or two owners could decide they didn't want to spend as much next year.

Also, even though a new CBA could be reached rather quickly, it would only be retroactive to a certain point. Renewing contracts that are expiring soon could be done a lot more safely now, with careful manipulations of signing bonuses and incentives, in an uncapped period. Now would be the time to be more creative with contracts, because there's no telling how long it's gonna be available.

[necroplasm]

There's no Jordan, Magic, Bird, Tyson, Tiger, Gretzky or Bonds to steal attention away.

The NFL is going to ride Manning, 33, until the wheels fall off. If it doesn't, Goodell will go down in history as an incompetent leader whose claim to fame was keeping strip clubs safe from Pacman Jones.

Well, that was an interesting read...

[Cyberjag]

That would be a more viable option if other teams were doing it, as well. But the salary cap will be no lower next year than it was last year. The NFL is not going to punish 25 other teams ( I'm not counting the teams that were well below the cap last year) because one owner decided that he wants to save money- the league simply couldn't exist with that kind of mentality. All those other teams didn't figure their players salaries to the penny just so one or two owners could decide they didn't want to spend as much next year.

Also, even though a new CBA could be reached rather quickly, it would only be retroactive to a certain point. Renewing contracts that are expiring soon could be done a lot more safely now, with careful manipulations of signing bonuses and incentives, in an uncapped period. Now would be the time to be more creative with contracts, because there's no telling how long it's gonna be available.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4793411

One of the top demands is a 20% reduction in the amount players get. i.e., a 20% reduction in the salary cap.

Of course the new cap would grandfather in some contracts, but it wouldn't take care of all of them. If you were on the hook to a Julius Peppers for two more years under the new cap, you could pay him but there's no way in hell you could sign anyone new, right? That's kind of the environment I see JR and MH preparing us for. Because when that happens, there are likely to be some real bargains to be had.

[cookinbrak]

Sources also said that the union has calculated that owners spent just 51 percent of revenues on player costs in 2009, in spite of the belief that they are mandated to spend almost 60 percent. One union source said the 60 percent player costs were a "best-case" assumption that teams would spend almost equally under the salary cap.

Consequently, the union believes a management proposal for an 18 percent "give-back" in the first year of a new agreement in the form of almost $2.5 billion credits is unnecessary.

Not a reduction of salary cap, more of a "rebate". But it's countered by pointing out that owners aren't spending as much on players salaries as they're supposed to.