Tuco

They have already agreed to that big of a drop in cap. Most businesses and employees in America have lost wages of some sort this year because their employer lost wages. The CBA is very specific in how the cap is tabulated, and the players voted to keep their salaries the same this year even though league revenue is way down. The agreement they made was that revenue (and subsequent salary drop) will be made up next year (and possibly beyond). The cap is based every year on the projected revenue for the year, and then there is an adjustment made every year to reflect any difference in the projected revenue to the actual revenue from the previous year. So it's very possible the cap next year may be $200 million. But then there will be a huge adjustment because the players voted, and the NFLPA agreed, that instead of taking any kind of pay cut this year, they would proceed as normal with the cap, with the exception that any adjustment that makes the cap lower than $175 million in 2021 will be pushed even further into the next year(s). So what happens? The NFL has a huge difference in revenue this year compared to what was projected, and subsequently the players are getting a much larger portion of revenue this year than they should according to the CBA. How much revenue difference? Well it's hard to say, but using some rough math we can say conservatively there's about 60,000 tickets not being sold every game. So let's say $100 per ticket average, times 60,000 = $6,000,000 times 8 home games per team = $48,000,000 times 32 teams = $1,536,000,000. Add in loss of parking, concessions, luxury suites, 12 playoff games and the Super Bowl, etc., we can easily see a revenue shortfall of , let's say, $1.8 billion. Anybody who thinks the league is going to ignore that kind of money in the name of keeping their salary cap flat is delusional. So let's take the players' roughly 48% of $1.8 billion, that's $864,000,000 in total reduction that needs to be rectified in the 2021 cap. $864,000,000/32 teams means a reduction adjustment of $27 million in cap for each team. So even if next year's cap does go up to $200 based on next year's revenue projections, it will then have $27 million subtracted (or actually $25 million so it doesn't go below $175 in 2021 and the rest pushed back another year). Now people saying this isn't going to happen because it will create cap hell for a lot of teams don't seem to understand, it's already been bargained and negotiated. It's what they were doing right before training camp while they were hashing out all the other COVID rules. And all teams are expecting it to happen. It's been agreed to by both sides already. And unless there's some changes in the amount of fans allowed into games it's going to be ugly next year. Everybody knows it. The owners aren't stupid when it comes to money, and they were actually pushing for the floor to be $165 million next year. There's a reason for that. They know how much revenue they're losing. People need to stop thinking the league will ignore around $1.5 - $2.0 billion in lost revenue in the name of keeping their salary cap flat. They've already made that decision.

I'm certainly not complaining, but I'm not so sure "he" made the right audible call. Josh starts the audible right around the :15 mark on the play clock, which means it's very possible the OC told him what play to audible to. But yes, I get the gist of your post and it is good to see.

All the good teams defer, and it makes sense for all the reasons above. The bad teams also defer because they want to be like the good teams. Deferring is a great idea, but if you go on to allow a long TD drive to start the game and then start the 2nd half with a quick 3 and out, you're beating yourself over the head trying to act like a good team. Should we defer? Of course we should. But I don't know how many times during our 17 year playoff hiatus we did just exactly what I described above, nor am I going to try to look it up. But it happened a lot, especially the 3 and out in the 2nd. Nothing blows your whole game plan, strategy, momentum and juju-mojo like going 3 and out to start the 2nd half. And deferring to have the wind at your back to start the game doesn't work very well if you give up a nine and a half minute touchdown drive to start the game.

The league sends a noise loop to each team that has to be played at an exact decibel level. Fines to teams and responsible personnel and loss of draft picks are the penalty for not adhering. https://twitter.com/TomPelissero/status/1301653002390994945/photo/1

I should edit this. During the years before they made the rule where you could bring guys back from IR if they made the 53 it didn't happen because there was no reason for it to. But before the salary cap, when that rule saying every IR player was gone for the whole season, it happened a lot. As in, every team would do it with 3-4 players every year. I guess I'm showing my age.

This has been going on for 50 years (probably more). I'm pretty sure both sides are okay with it.

It always happens with every team. It's been happening for about 40 years that I know of. Last year's example was cutting safety Kurt Coleman, putting Croom on IR after he made the 53 and then resigning Coleman.

Has it been mentioned anywhere that if a player misses a game without having an injury or some other CBA accepted excuse he doesn't just lose 1/17 of his salary? He loses 25% of it, including 25% of prorated amounts of signing bonuses and roster bonuses. Dak Prescott would be giving up $7.75 million. Stefon Diggs - $2.95 million. Of course for every high paid player there's a dozen or so who make much less. Is Zack Moss going to give up $209,650 of his $610,000 for a one game protest? One would think if the players were that serious about effecting change they could find a better use for that money besides giving it back to their employer. Now if the NFLPA is talking to the league about somehow doing this without that kind of retribution, then it would no longer be a wildcat strike. It would just be a thing agreed to by both sides.

The cap is not going up next year. It will be $175 million.

He will un-retire on or about September 5th.

I'm reminded of a story I once heard about Joe Montana playing in Kansas City after all his years in San Fran. Occasionally during the game he would belt out an audible to a play he knew would be better, but his teammates would look at him like he was nuts because he would revert to the San Fran verbiage out of habit..

Active PUP is what they get put on in training camp. As soon as the player is cleared to practice he comes off the list and can practice immediately. The inactive list (actually reserve PUP) is what the player has to go on if he can't start the regular season. At that point the player is ineligible to play or practice for 6 weeks. Active PUP counts against the applicable 80/90 man roster etc. Reserve PUP does not count against the 53 man roster.