How does Owners opting out of contract affect Bills?

[patmoran2006]

Your opinions? Looks like it's happening, as early as next week.

[Mitchy moo]

RW hated the deal when it was signed.

[OpIv37]

Well, the uncapped season and potential loss of the draft will completely burn us if it actually gets to that point. We have enough trouble competing in an organized format and we sure as hell won't be able to throw enough money around to be competitive in that potential cluster****.

If a new CBA is reached before that happens, then nothing really changes. But Gene Upshaw already said he won't "give anything back" so I don't see that happening. Unions lose sight of the big picture sometimes- the owners want out because the CBA is not good for the league's long term solvency. Upshaw doesn't see the connection that the long term health of the league is in the best interest of players. He thinks putting more money in superstars' pockets now is in the best interest of the players and he's wrong.

[theanswer74]

Well, the uncapped season and potential loss of the draft will completely burn us if it actually gets to that point. We have enough trouble competing in an organized format and we sure as hell won't be able to throw enough money around to be competitive in that potential cluster****.

If a new CBA is reached before that happens, then nothing really changes. But Gene Upshaw already said he won't "give anything back" so I don't see that happening. Unions lose sight of the big picture sometimes- the owners want out because the CBA is not good for the league's long term solvency. Upshaw doesn't see the connection that the long term health of the league is in the best interest of players. He thinks putting more money in superstars' pockets now is in the best interest of the players and he's wrong.

Its not that bad without a cap. Players would actually stay with teams longer because they aren't eligible for free agency as fast as they are with a cap.

So actually, it might actually benefit Buffalo as long as they draft well. You would get to keep a player a year or 2 longer before they hit free agency.

Buffalo wouldn't be able to compete in free agency, but they cant compete now, so there really isn't a difference.

[Stewie]

Well, the uncapped season and potential loss of the draft will completely burn us if it actually gets to that point. We have enough trouble competing in an organized format and we sure as hell won't be able to throw enough money around to be competitive in that potential cluster****.

.

This is 100% wrong.

If 2010 goes uncapped, there are all sorts of restrictions for player movement. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/peter_king/04/06/labor/index.html

"
The 2010 rules for player movement:
FREE AGENCY: Currently, players who are unsigned and have finished at least four NFL seasons are free. In the 2010 market, players will be free if they are unsigned after at least their sixth NFL season. In other words, 2009 would have to be a player's sixth season, and he would have to enter 2010 unsigned. Let's use Cleveland wide receiver Braylon Edwards as an example. In his original rookie contract, signed in 2005, the final year is 2009, which would be his fifth NFL season. Ordinarily, he'd be a free-agent in 2010 -- if the team didn't sign him before then or place a franchise tag on him. But under the 2010 rules, he won't be a free-agent.
MORE RESTRICTIONS VIA FRANCHISE AND TRANSITION TAGS: Each team now can use one franchise-player tag and one transition-player tag -- which pay the tagged player, respectively, the average of the top five and top 10 salaries at his position. In 2010, the revised deal would allow each team the use of a second transition tag. If a team chose to use all its tags, it could stop its best three players from hitting the unrestricted free-agent market.
RESTRICTIONS FOR THE TOP EIGHT TEAMS IN FOOTBALL: If the uncapped year is reached, the teams with the best eight records in football in 2009 will be severely restricted from jumping into the pool. It's still not precisely determined how the system would work, but let's say the Patriots are one of the top eight and want to sign a free-agent to a five-year, $20-million contract. They'd have to lose their own player or players to contracts totaling $20 million before they could sign the free-agent they want. Conceptually, that's how this clause in the deal is going to work, but the exact mechanics of it are not clear yet. The purpose is very clear: The best teams are going to have tight leashes in free agency. And I can tell you from talking to a few traditionally good teams at the league meetings last week, they're not happy about it.
All told, teams would be able to protect more players with tags, and would have fewer free agents because of the six-year rule, and the best eight teams would be playing with one hand tied behind their back. This is a good system for the players?
Five of the eight richest players in free agency this year would not have been unrestricted free-agents in an uncapped system requiring six years of service. Defensive lineman Tommy Kelly (Raiders) had four years of service and would have been restricted, as would five-year vets Jeff Faine (Bucs), Lance Briggs (Bears), Calvin Pace (Jets) and Asante Samuel (Eagles).

[Dr. Lecter]

The national media and countless posters here should publically apoligize to Ralph for calling him senile when he **** all over this deal.

The old man is smarter than all of you put together.

[Stewie]

There is absolutely no way the NFL will let the labor situation go sour. They all have too much to lose.

The bargaining chips guys like Ralph and Mike Brown got into the current CBA, and the termination agreement, are the reason teams like Buffalo have a fighting chance.

People called Ralph senile and dumb last time he postured for negotiations. They'll probably do it again this time, too, but I have confidence Ralph knows what he's doing.

IMO, the NFLPA members need to wake up and realize that Gene Upshaw and his 6 million dollar salary need to drive the hardest bargain but ultimately get the deal done. At any given time, most union members are guys who only play for a few years, and they should be focused on their careers and getting paid while they have the chance.

[OpIv37]

The national media and countless posters here should publically apoligize to Ralph for calling him senile when he **** all over this deal.

The old man is smarter than all of you put together.

the old man said he "didn't understand it" which makes him sound like a senile old man. He should have chosen his words more carefully.

[hydro]

the old man said he "didn't understand it" which makes him sound like a senile old man. He should have chosen his words more carefully.

Was that taken out of context? Who knows...

There are a lot of negative people on this site and i don't understand it.

[Dr. Lecter]

the old man said he "didn't understand it" which makes him sound like a senile old man. He should have chosen his words more carefully.

He said he did not have time to read it and understand, since the other owners and the NFLPA wanted a vote a coupleof hours after it was proposed.

A day or so later, he said it was a ****ty deal. At that time people jumped all over him.

Turns out, the crazy old man was right. Again.

[feelthepain]

I think the answer is obvious, the Bills don't like to spend money. Take away the cap and you'll be paying out the nose for a competitve team, but it's an option many teams will take advantage of. Does anyone here honestly think the Bills will be one based on their history?? The Pats have been the only true dynasty since the creation of FA and we can make a valid argument that cheating was a big part of that dynasty. FA was designed to level the playing field for everyone and for the most part it's done that. Take it away and the teams that spend the most money will once again control the sport. You won't be able to pick teams apart from year to year cause teams are forced to relase good players so they can keep their great players and remain under the cap. The good players are just as important to a teams success as the great ones. You'll also not lose any momentum you'ver gained over 3 or 4 years because of the turnover created by FA. I think the worst thing that can happen to the NFL is to go back to an uncaped format.

[L.A. Playa]

There is too much money at stake, they will use this as a big story for a couple years but will have an agreement in place before any uncapped year comes to play.

Really it is a PR move at this time to get "Spygate" out of the headlines

[Meathead]

ralph is senile

and cheap

[Meathead]

i remember when he was explaining it at first i was like well it cant be as bad as you say ralph because the owners arent ******s they wouldnt go for something like that so easily

well welcome to the RFL

[bflojohn]

One of the things that Ralph Wilson has been preaching about is the debt the league has at the present time. Costs of operation, along with the fact that the ownes "gave away" the farm in the last negotiations (60% threshold) to the players union dictates the absolute need to reel in the genie before it does riggle out of the lamp!!! The worst enemy of this entity called the National Football League are the renigade owners in the big markets, and THAT isn't likely to change! They are staring down the barrel, whereby they kill the goose that laid the golden egg.... we'll see?!?!
Note: No one in this league knows this better than Ralph Wilson, he and Brown ARE the voices of reason.

[Stewie]

the old man said he "didn't understand it" which makes him sound like a senile old man. He should have chosen his words more carefully.

Op, you didn't understand it either, and you've had several months to catch up.

that makes you look like, uhh, a senile young man?

[Mski]

if the owner void the CBA, who;s to say that there wont be an owner lock out, or a player stike... i'm a huge union supporter but upshaw is a big enough idiot to start a strike, which would only knock the nfl back down to MLB and NHL rankings

[LifetimeBillsFan]

How does this impact the Bills?

Pray that R.Wilson keeps living and still has his wits about him.

Given the statements made by Pat Bowlen and even Dan Snyder this off-season about him in regard to the CBA, it would appear that Ralph Wilson has gained a lot of respect from the other owners as a result of his opposition to the CBA and the way that he has approached revenue-sharing (including the way that he brought the governor and, particularly, Sen. Schumer into the discussion).

At this point I would think that this would give Ralph not only more credibility, but more of a say in whatever the owners do and whatever the ultimate outcome of any new negotiations turns out to be.

Now, I know that Ralph has been cheap and hasn't always done the things that we Bills fans--and Buffalonians in general--have wanted. And, yes, he is out for his own good and that of his family and not necessarily the best interests of the fans, the city, the taxpayers, etc.

But, Ralph has kept the team based in Buffalo when he very easily could have moved them and made a lot more money elsewhere--he could've moved them to Toronto already instead of playing just one game a season there and, as we all now know, made a LOT more than he is even getting from the deal that he made. And, I do believe that he has and will continue to try to do whatever he can to keep the team in Buffalo--so long as it doesn't adversely impact what his family will get from selling the team--for as long as he is alive and can afford to do so.

Now, obviously I could be wrong about that. But, if I am right, I think that having Wilson in the room with the other owners when they tackle this issue and try to hammer out a new CBA with the NFLPA will benefit the Bills, Buffalo and Bills fans more than having anyone else in that room representing the franchise.

I think Ralph genuinely is concerned about the survival of the league's small-market franchises and IMHO the only way that Buffalo has a chance to remain as the base for the Bills or any other NFL franchise is if the league ends up with a CBA that will not only allow the small-market franchises to survive and remain competitive, but that will allow those small-market franchises to be sold to local ownership without being saddled with so much debt that the new owners have no choice but to move the franchise elsewhere.

Now, again, I could be very wrong about this. And, even if I'm right, I don't know if the owners, as a group, will care that much what happens to the small-market teams, etc. But, the best chance that see for the Bills to come out of this able to remain based in Buffalo is if Ralph Wilson is alive and well and in the room representing the franchise--because he is the only one that I see right now that the other owners have enough respect for to perhaps be willing to do something to promote the long-term viability of small-market franchises like the Bills.

(I know this all sounds like a press release for Wilson--and, believe me, I hate the fact that it does because I hate having to trust the future survival of the Bills in Buffalo to RW--but I just don't see there being anyone else that can get the other owners to listen to him and maybe take his advice more than Ralph can at this point.)

[Coach Sal]

I think the answer is obvious, the Bills don't like to spend money. Take away the cap and you'll be paying out the nose for a competitve team, but it's an option many teams will take advantage of. Does anyone here honestly think the Bills will be one based on their history?? The Pats have been the only true dynasty since the creation of FA and we can make a valid argument that cheating was a big part of that dynasty. FA was designed to level the playing field for everyone and for the most part it's done that. Take it away and the teams that spend the most money will once again control the sport. You won't be able to pick teams apart from year to year cause teams are forced to relase good players so they can keep their great players and remain under the cap. The good players are just as important to a teams success as the great ones. You'll also not lose any momentum you'ver gained over 3 or 4 years because of the turnover created by FA. I think the worst thing that can happen to the NFL is to go back to an uncaped format.

You obviously didn't read post #5.

[jamze132]

You obviously didn't read post #5.
There's a big shocker...