Tuco

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.

All the wiggle room they need exists. There is no force mejeure clause. But there is a clause that says if there is a significant cap drop because of missed games then both sides are bound to work out an agreement that is fair to both sides. Everything after that is speculation because nobody knows right now exactly what's going to happen yet. When it does happen then they will have solid numbers to work with. And yes it's been discussed and seems most likely that any significant drop in next year's cap would most likely be agreed to spread it out over several years. Now if the season were to be totally cancelled that would certainly be an obstacle. Without a force mejeure clause it will become an ugly battle with most likely protracted court decisions, etc. But again, nobody knows. There are no simple answers to these questions right now. Wait and see is pretty much all we can do at this point. Here's pretty much the only language in the CBA, and it leaves a wide open field of what ultimately may or may not happen. NOTE: The term "AR" refers to "All Revenue" as defined in the CBA as the amount agreed upon each year on which to base the salary cap- (xii) Cancelled Games. If one or more weeks of any NFL season are cancelled or AR for any League Year substantially decreases, in either case due to a terrorist or military action, natural disaster, or similar event, the parties shall engage in good faith negotiations to adjust the provisions of this Agreement with respect to the projection of AR and the Salary Cap for the following League Year so that AR for the following League Year is projected in a fair manner consistent with the changed revenue projection caused by such action.

First of all, before the cap goes up in 2021 it's going to go down. The cap is computed each year on projected revenues, plus or minus any adjustments made to the actual revenue from the previous season's revenues, in relation to how far off that projection was from the real thing. This year's revenue is going to be largely, hugely, bigly over projected. That already means a drop in next year's cap just to make up for that adjustment. Yes it can be renegotiated in the event of a catastrophe, but rest assured any new deal isn't going to wind up with the players getting any larger percentage in the long haul. More likely they will negotiate a prorating of next year's cap loss over the next 5 years or something. But it will go down before it goes up. Now as far as adding 3 games on Saturday, I don't see where that would add anywhere near 50% to the existing TV revenue. I can see some increase, maybe. But there's only 16 games a week now, and the "regular" Sunday game networks already are able to protect a certain amount of games from being flexed out of their time slots because with all the prime time games now their slate of "marketable" games sometimes gets quite thin. Would all Saturday games be considered prime time? So would there be 6/7 out of 16 (at most) games every week played in prime time? And if so will the networks who already lose games to prime time sit idly by while they lose more? Or are they the ones who will be expected to pay more for the games they already pay for, many of which aren't very attractive and only appear in each team's home market? Sorry I'm seeing a lot of unconnected dots that lead to a big jump in the 2021 cap.

FWIW the CBA has always contained special rules to be able to use practice squad players with out all the normal rules (like the 3 week minimums and having to clear waivers before being re-signed to the squad, etc.) in the event of a team is hit by a contagious disease.

The CBA already carries provisions for contagious diseases. All practice squad players (there's what, 14 now?) contracts include a contagious disease addendum which modify the rules regarding bringing practice squad players up to the 53 man roster in the event a team is given roster exemptions in the event of a contagious disease outbreak - including allowing the team to bring them up for a single week instead of the guaranteed 3 weeks. And also allowing the team to place the player back on the PS without having to clear waivers. Basically if a team has an outbreak of a contagious disease and gets roster exemptions from the league for said players, they will be allowed to use the PS players as regular players without the usual restrictions associated with promoting PS players to the 53 man roster and plcing them back on the PS again. This has been a rule in the CBA for years.

Counting playoffs and preseasons, right around 200. But I only live 30 miles away.

First of all the Yahoo article is crap. Schefter never says anything about 50%. Schefter says $3.2 Billion - or $30-$80 million. Then further down Yahoo writes about the salary cap being at least $120 mil since 2012. That's where the $50% figure comes from. In reality, let's say it is $3.2 billion. That's a nice round $100 million per team. And the salary cap is roughly 49% of that. Except it isn't. The 49% figure the players share includes all player costs, including insurance payments, pension contributions etc. Once all that is figured, then the salary cap for the year is figured. Regardless, if the figure is $3.2 billion, the cap would go down a large percentage of roughly 49% of that. So let's say it goes down $40 million. Yes that's a lot, but it's really only around 20%. That's not great for all parties involved, but it's certainly manageable. And no the league doesn't have a force mejeure clause. They do have a clause that states both parties will bargain in good faith to adjust the cap if games are missed. And they also have the ability to go back and redo the agreement any time if needed. So it's entirely possible they could look at the final numbers and then agree to prorate a $30-$40 million reduction over 5 years or whatever. It's not going to be $50 percent and the Yahoo writer is a tool for saying so. My $.02

Clearly it's "Black 20! Black 20! WHASSUP?!"

The changes in the new CBA regarding guarantees and salary amount factoring don't go into effect until next year. All fifth-year options for players drafted in the first round of 2017 are still governed under the same rules as the old CBA.

Time will tell. It's one thing to be unhappy with a CBA that you voted against but were outnumbered. I've been there a number of times. But if what he says is true - and it seems unlikely he would make it up - this is some serious bull cookies on the part of the NFL. Of course they will say it was a clerical error and the wrong copy was sent out or some other nonsense. Then again, they wouldn't really think all 2,000 players and a whole lot of retired players wouldn't notice something like that . . . . would they?

Whatever rules MLB has do not apply to the NFL. On November 13 2019 Vernon Hargreaves was waived by Tampa Bay, claimed by Houston, and played in both playoff games for Houston, being credited with 6 solo tackles and 1 QB hit in the game against Buffalo. That's just one example I found with a quick internet search. And NFL players get claimed after September 1st all the time, and when in the history of the NFL have we ever heard of one not being able to play in the playoffs? Never. Not once.

Wrong. Any player with less than 4 years released this time of year, or any time of year, absolutely goes through waivers.

Gotcha.

They all get paid extra for the extra game. It's part of the agreement.

I wouldn't lose too much sleep worrying about it happening. But if it makes you happy, go for it. Going back 16 years, the record of the extra teams that would have made the playoffs under the 14 team format-11-5 ------ 1 time10-6 ------ 7 times9-6-1 ----- 1 time9-7 -------- 14 times8-7-1 ----- 1 time8-8 -------- 8 timesAlso, FWIW-In the years the 10-6 teams would have made it, there was (1) 10-6 team from the same conference that still would not have made it.In the years the 9-7 teams would have made it, there were also (12) 9-7 teams from the same conference that still would not have made it.In the years the 8-8 teams would have made it, there were (7) 8-8 teams from the same conference that still would not have made it.

All I can add is I read there is a "media kicker" that will increase the players' share of revenue from 48% to 48.8% if the TV contracts increase by a certain amount. And according to what I read, none of that increase can be affected by the stadium credits given through the stadium construction program (G4). So I have to assume it's still there, either the same as before or something similar.

I disagree. I've been a Bills fan for 50 years, and have been playing fantasy football for 30 years. While there are occasional conflicts, it's rarely to the extent you're painting it here. My weekly fantasy lineup has 8 players. One of them is a kicker who's impact is usually minimal. Of the other 7 players playing, usually maybe 4 are must play studs and the other 3 (or maybe it's only 2) are just the best guys you could get at that point of the draft. Either way, those players aren't the Chubbs of the world and they aren't going to make o break your season in the one week they play the Bills. So there's maybe 5 players at the most on your team that would cause such a conflict. Chances are about 60% for each of those players that they won't even face the Bills in the season. Conflicts like you're describing rarely happen. And in fact they happen the opposite way just as often. It's just as likely you'll be playing against Chubbs the week he's playing the Bills as it is you'll be rooting for him. A double whammy for your rooting fandom. Also when these conflicts do happen, it's still just one player out of your whole lineup. And a case where that one player is the last one playing for you in that week and him doing well against the Bills is going to make or break your fantasy season are extremely rare. So having to choose one's loyalty over the Bills or a fantasy player isn't like some every week occurrence that's going to destroy a child's interest in the NFL. If that happens it will likely come from many other reasons like $200 tickets and poor planning by the league as they continue to try to grow the league and it's revenues. What is much more likely to happen is I, and a few million others around the world, will stay up until midnight on a work night just to watch the end of a lousy Monday night blowout just because I have Chubbs and need 8 more points to win that week. These millions of extra watchers like myself help the league because it keeps the TV ratings a little higher for a crap game. Been playing fantasy football for 30 years, and for more money than pretty much any kid out there who might be watching. It has never had an impact on my Bills fanhood. My $.02

Prior to 1999 in the modern era there were 13 stadiums built with an average of around 26% from private funding and 74% public funding. During the NFL's G3 program (in which the league matches team owner money with a "loan" that is repaid through premium seats, PSLs etc) from 1999-2010, there were 12 stadiums built that averaged 59% private funding and 41% public. In 2011 G3 was escalated to G4, allowing more money to be loaned to teams for stadiums while also applying some of that money as a credit from the NFLPA before computing the salary cap each year (meaning the players kick in a little too). Basically, they've been doing what you're suggesting for over 20 years now. https://www.greenberglawoffice.com/nfl-credit-facility-has-made-possible-new-state-of-the-art-stadiums/ PS - this is also the reason a few years ago the league was pressuring the Bills to take "their turn" in building a new stadium. They wanted to take advantage of increasing revenue and value by loaning themselves money instead of giving it to the players. And in the last couple years the league backed off since there wasn't time to put together a new stadium with financing plans before the end of the CBA, so they wouldn't be able to use G4. Now the latest from Roger is the league "needs to know" the Bills plan for a stadium in the near future. Those plans, along with any other teams stadium plans, will help shape whatever incarnation of the G3 or G4 program they will have in place through the next CBA.

And something very few people know, the extra point attempt, be it 1 or 2 points, is still technically called a "try" in the NFL rule book. ARTICLE 1. GENERAL RULES After a touchdown, a Try is an opportunity for either team to score one or two additional points during one scrimmage down. The Try begins when the Referee sounds the whistle for play to start. The team that scored the touchdown shall put the ball in play: anywhere on or between the inbound lines; 15 yards from the defensive team’s goal line for a Try-kick; or two yards from the defensive team’s goal line for a Try by pass or run.

I dunno. But when you guys get it all figured out can somebody then tell me why they call it cricket? Thanks

They could. When they play at home against the west coast teams they sometimes get the 4:05 start. Or if the network its on has double header that weekend they will get the 4:30 start. Chargers, Rams ans Seahawks at home this year could all be late afternooners. And the Jets sometimes are 4:00 start when both they and the Giants have afternoon games. Those teams almost never play at the same time.