Lockout down to Free Agency, Rookie wages.

[bigdog10]

Deal will be done this week.

[Stumpy]

Kegger at my house on Friday. Catered by Cheese Mo's. All for free!

Awesome! see you then!

[MadHatter]

Now let's hope the owners don't try another bait and switch on the revenue split.

I think the deal will get done this week because this week is the deadline for a full preseason schedule and the owners are not going to leave that preseason game money on the table.

More about the players trying a bait and switch....trying to get Non-football revenue generated at the stadiums included in the pot. Pathetic greed on their part.

[MadHatter]

Every single team has guys that are somewhere in the 4-6 year range that they are afraid of losing for nothing, not just Carolina. Fact of the matter is players don't want right of refusal because they want their big payday, and owners want it to be able to retain their own talented players. It seems like a fairly large issue.

You are way off base on the payday.

The right of first refusal is not a one year franchise tender. It gives the existing team the right to match any contract the player would be offered in FA.

Therefore, the ruling will have zero to do with the big payday.

The only detriment to the player is that it would restrict their ability to go to another team (chance at ring, hometown team, etc). The money and contract would be equal.

I like the right of first refusal, but their should be (and likely will be) a limit to the number of times a team can use it on a player (like 1 or 2 times).

[MadHatter]

The issue with a rookie salary scale is not only guaranteed money but years until they can became a free agent. Right now it costs tons of money for a top pick but at least you can lock them up for 5 years. The rookie cap needs to not only limit the money but at least lock them up for 4 years instead of the three the players want. And this agreement should include some kind of franchise tag so you can keep a franchise QB.

I really don't think that the players will agree to 4 or more years for a rookie contract....if they concede on the rookie payscale. And quite frankly, I am OK with that.

The wage scale protects the owners from the ridiculous salaries for players who have proven nothing....and the 3 years window allows players wo come in and prove themselves to get their payday in their prime.

I think we end up with the rookie scale and 3 year contracts.

[panthers55]

I really don't think that the players will agree to 4 or more years for a rookie contract....if they concede on the rookie payscale. And quite frankly, I am OK with that.

The wage scale protects the owners from the ridiculous salaries for players who have proven nothing....and the 3 years window allows players wo come in and prove themselves to get their payday in their prime.

I think we end up with the rookie scale and 3 year contracts.

That is likely the case if the owners feel compelled to agree to a deal this week to preserve the preseason. As long as they retain the franchise tags they won't lose someone they need to keep and it isn't as if they aren't paying them huge money anyway for a top 10 pick who have proven nothing. At least with a cap GMs can avoid the Jamarcus Russell situations and players will be motivated to play hard to ensure the next payday is huge.

[MadHatter]

That is likely the case if the owners feel compelled to agree to a deal this week to preserve the preseason. As long as they retain the franchise tags they won't lose someone they need to keep and it isn't as if they aren't paying them huge money anyway for a top 10 pick who have proven nothing. At least with a cap GMs can avoid the Jamarcus Russell situations and players will be motivated to play hard to ensure the next payday is huge.

Agreed.

Personally, I really like the Right of First Refusal over a Franchise Tag.

The Franchise Tag protected the team from losing a valued player....but penalized the player by not allowing him to sign a long-term deal.

The Right of First Refusal protects the team....but also allows the player to have that long-term security of a multi-year contract. If the player is that valuable to the team, step up and give the multi-year commitment.

Yes, you can still have teams trying to stucture deals with Poison Pill Clauses in them to make it almsot impossible for the existign team to match. However, it still puts the the existing team in teh driver's seat. Want you guy that bad....pony up with another team is willing to pay.

Seems like a good compromise to the issue.

[pantherclaw]

Is it just me or does anyone else think JR is one of the main guys pushing for the right of refusal bs? With Johnson, Williams, Anderson, and Davis all potentially gone I just think he is the one trying to cover his ass bc of the strategy his has employed the last couple years.

I'm sure many owners and coaches want the first refusal option. It's a good option.

I know, you'd rather find another reason to hate on Richardson, so don't let logic get in the way of hate.

[tarheelfan23]

Deal will be done this week.

good insight :)

cam train will start call aboard!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Leeroy Jenkins PhD]

After reading through a few articles on the new rookie wage scale, it seems to me that the owners are attempting to make agents obsolete! The PA is pushing to have agents responsible for setting up payment for the 5th year of the contract while the Owners are trying to get it incentive based or league comparison.

I love the idea of taking the agents out of the mix. Of course, agents will still have there place. Veterans over 5 years in the league and all promotion deals. But they will have a much smaller impact on the NFL in general! I think that is a great thing.

Now if only we could get rid of the lobbyists on Capitol Hill......

[panthers55]

Agreed.

Personally, I really like the Right of First Refusal over a Franchise Tag.

The Franchise Tag protected the team from losing a valued player....but penalized the player by not allowing him to sign a long-term deal.

The Right of First Refusal protects the team....but also allows the player to have that long-term security of a multi-year contract. If the player is that valuable to the team, step up and give the multi-year commitment.

Yes, you can still have teams trying to stucture deals with Poison Pill Clauses in them to make it almsot impossible for the existign team to match. However, it still puts the the existing team in teh driver's seat. Want you guy that bad....pony up with another team is willing to pay.

Seems like a good compromise to the issue.

The right of first refusal from what I have read is a one year deal based on the lockout and shortened free agent period. But I don't think it is likely to be here in subsequent years. So my lobbying for a franchise tag is for future years not this year.

But I like the idea of teams having some mechanism to retain their top talent if they are willing to pay them top dollars.

[MadHatter]

The right of first refusal from what I have read is a one year deal based on the lockout and shortened free agent period. But I don't think it is likely to be here in subsequent years. So my lobbying for a franchise tag is for future years not this year.

But I like the idea of teams having some mechanism to retain their top talent if they are willing to pay them top dollars.

I understand that.

I was jsut saying that I would rather see the league implement a Right of First Refusal instead of a franchise tag.....and then limit the number of times you could use it on a player.

Would be good for the teams and for the players.