stuckincincy Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 I wasn't aware of the restrictions placed on the '09 playoff clubs... http://www.bengals.com/news/article-1/CBA-...44-dbd41fe1999d Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 Nice post. I have read a lot of this before and people panicked because of an uncapped year. I believe there will be less spending and player movement. Cowboys can not just go out and spend whatever they want on UFA. Going from 4 to 6 years to become an UFA is a big advantage for the owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 One question I have is that with no "salary cap" can we expect to see players who signed bloated contracts cut as there will be no cap penalty? Seeing that there may be no football in 2011, and with the future of the cap unknown, would a team dump these players in this uncapped year, especially if there is no minimum cap amount? This could allow them to clean house and set-themselves up for a fresh start once a new bargaining agreement is in place... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 One question I have is that with no "salary cap" can we expect to see players who signed bloated contracts cut as there will be no cap penalty? Seeing that there may be no football in 2011, and with the future of the cap unknown, would a team dump these players in this uncapped year, especially if there is no minimum cap amount? This could allow them to clean house and set-themselves up for a fresh start once a new bargaining agreement is in place... I think you will see some of that, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 So did the Pats lose in the first round to make sure they weren't restricted by this rule? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 One question I have is that with no "salary cap" can we expect to see players who signed bloated contracts cut as there will be no cap penalty? Seeing that there may be no football in 2011, and with the future of the cap unknown, would a team dump these players in this uncapped year, especially if there is no minimum cap amount? This could allow them to clean house and set-themselves up for a fresh start once a new bargaining agreement is in place... Good Lord, what's Jason Peters gonna do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 Good Lord, what's Jason Peters gonna do? I was thinking more McGahee On a serious note though, that may also increase the pool of FAs who are good, but were grossly overpaid. I think teams that are close may take a plunge on some of these players with a smaller contract for a this 1 year shot and that may leave some quality lesser known FAs out there that we could get to build depth and plug holes with (Drayton Florence type players). As it's been said before don't expect any flashy names. This is one reason why I am glad to see Guy go now. I don't know how good Buddy is in the in the league FA scouting department, but hopefully he knows someone who is good and can get him in here.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted January 21, 2010 Author Share Posted January 21, 2010 So did the Pats lose in the first round to make sure they weren't restricted by this rule? I've always admired your avatar, nobody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 I've always admired your avatar, nobody. Thanks! That article on the Bengals site matches one over at the Bills site. Must be the NFL made each club release it on their sites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 So did the Pats lose in the first round to make sure they weren't restricted by this rule? *shaking fist at heavens" "Belichek, you magnificent bastard!!!!!" By the way, I like you avatar too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 Apparently 221 players who otherwise would have been UFA's this off-season, won't be. Plus teams have 1 franchise and 2 transition tags, meaning 96 more potential UFA's can be restricted from moving, at a premium of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 Apparently 221 players who otherwise would have been UFA's this off-season, won't be. Plus teams have 1 franchise and 2 transition tags, meaning 96 more potential UFA's can be restricted from moving, at a premium of course. Thats the part that hurts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted January 21, 2010 Author Share Posted January 21, 2010 Thats the part that hurts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsfaninFl Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 I wasn't aware of the restrictions placed on the '09 playoff clubs... http://www.bengals.com/news/article-1/CBA-...44-dbd41fe1999d Thanks for the info. Good post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsfaninFl Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 One question I have is that with no "salary cap" can we expect to see players who signed bloated contracts cut as there will be no cap penalty? Seeing that there may be no football in 2011, and with the future of the cap unknown, would a team dump these players in this uncapped year, especially if there is no minimum cap amount? This could allow them to clean house and set-themselves up for a fresh start once a new bargaining agreement is in place... A fresh start, but with the equivalent talent of an expansion team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rackemrack Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 A fresh start, but with the equivalent talent of an expansion team. or the equivalent talent of our 2009 buffalo bills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 One question I have is that with no "salary cap" can we expect to see players who signed bloated contracts cut as there will be no cap penalty? Seeing that there may be no football in 2011, and with the future of the cap unknown, would a team dump these players in this uncapped year, especially if there is no minimum cap amount? This could allow them to clean house and set-themselves up for a fresh start once a new bargaining agreement is in place... Total player salaries are expected to drop $300-600 million...owners are not playing that crap anymore...expect to see teams dropping $20-30 million off their payrolls... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justnzane Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 or the equivalent talent of our 2009 buffalo bills in all fairness they were bad, but I'd compare to the 2008 Detroit Lions imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thoner7 Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 One question I have is that with no "salary cap" can we expect to see players who signed bloated contracts cut as there will be no cap penalty? Seeing that there may be no football in 2011, and with the future of the cap unknown, would a team dump these players in this uncapped year, especially if there is no minimum cap amount? This could allow them to clean house and set-themselves up for a fresh start once a new bargaining agreement is in place... If that is true, we may see Kelsay, Schobel, Whitner, Marshawn, Stroud, and even Evans moved. My list was named most likely to least likely. Everyone of them but Kelsay I would imagine to have some kind of trade value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsWatch Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 Apparently 221 players who otherwise would have been UFA's this off-season, won't be. Plus teams have 1 franchise and 2 transition tags, meaning 96 more potential UFA's can be restricted from moving, at a premium of course. And 96 players can hold out for new contracts in addition to the 221 who will hold out to be given raises as if they were free agents or to be released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts