Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith
I
So, yes, this assumes a sort of zero sum limited capital scenario, or at least one severely stricken by salary cap limits. While this was a concern before 2009, I'm not certain it is as concerning from here forward. The next CBA will have a lot to say here. Teams have more cap room than they need this year (a few are going to struggle to spend to the floor much less the max), and as it looks right now, there won't even be a cap in 2010.
|
When I was writing that sentence, that popped into my head and I thought about tossing in a qualifier. But, honestly, I would be surprised (not to mention very disappointed) if there was no labor agreement before the start of the off-season. The biggest problem I foresee is that the owners have more leverage (the severe restrictions on player movement and lack of a salary floor in uncapped year) but the NFLPA has a new boss and Demaurice Smith probably doesn't want to start his career being known as the guy who gave up what they got in Gene Upshaw's final negotiations (which turned out to be a windfall as he played big owners against small owners instead of against him). That worries me a little. But there's too much for both sides to lose here. So I'm keeping my fingers crossed hoping for a painless resolution even though a protracted struggle with an uncapped 2010 might benefit my team.
Quote:
|
As I said in the extended article (yay! I have the new software!), Daniels' negotiation is surprisingly complex because of these reasons and more. This will be an interesting situation to keep watching for sure.
|
'twas interesting.