There could be some surprising elements to the new CBA deal in the NFL

[F.Chowds]

There could be some surprising elements to the new CBA deal in the NFL

Details about the NFL’s CBA have been few and far between over the last month or so as the judge’s gag order has kept things relatively quiet, but I’ve learned from more than once source that fans could end up being very surprised with some of aspects in this deal that should be completed by this weekend.

I’ve been asking myself “why would NFL veterans and their leader, DeMaurice Smith, negotiate a new deal that would get so many veterans cut as a result of teams needing to get under the cap?”

The players are clearly excited about the agreement in the proposed CBA that would force teams to spend as much money as needed to reach the $120 million dollar threshold, but this deal could still hurt veterans on teams who have been aggressive with their spending and who find themselves over the proposed $120 million threshold.

I might have found my answer.

I’ve learned from people close to the negotiations that we may not see the massive cap casualties that we’ve expected. In fact, there may not be any penalties for teams who are over the $120 million dollar threshold. What that would allow teams to do is hang onto veterans, if they so choose, without penalty. What was less clear to me was whether or not we’ll actually even see a salary cap. It is my understanding that for the first few years of this deal, the “cap” on spending could be soft or even non-existant.

Now why would the owners agree to that? Isn’t that the baseball model that has created such a disparity between the haves and the have nots? Yes and no.

Many on the players side believe that this CBA has as much to do with the big market owners trying to find a way to force out the owners of small market teams as it does with finding a way to split up money between players and owners. There is big TV money on the way and both the players and owners know this. I promise you that if Bob Kraft and Jerry Jones were in charge of getting a deal done, they would have made the minimum spending $140 million or more and they would have agreed to a CBA a LONG TIME AGO. According to my sources, many owners view this CBA as their big opportunity to get rid of owners they don’t like.

So in summary, we might all be surprised to find out that there is actually a soft cap or even no cap for the first few years of this deal as the NFL transitions from the old CBA to the new CBA. If that is the case, then could any team in the league become a player in the free agent market this year no matter how much they are currently spending? It could happen. We could see a hard cap in the future, but we might not see that hard cap of $120 million this year like we’ve expected.

http://blog.chron.com/fantasyfootball/2011/07/there-could-be-some-surprising-elements-to-the-new-cba-deal-in-the-nfl/

[T0mShane]

Sweet. A blog telling me there's gonna be no cap? I'm ordering my Peyton Manning Jets jersey AS WE SPEAK.

[F.Chowds]

Sweet. A blog telling me there's gonna be no cap? I'm ordering my Peyton Manning Jets jersey AS WE SPEAK.

I did say IF and if it was true if would be effing sweet woody is not afraid to throw around the $

[T0mShane]

I did say IF and if it was true if would be effing sweet woody is not afraid to throw around the $

I kid. You've been money with the articles this off-season. Good work, dude.

[jason423]

This is a story that was originally broken by Aaron Wilson which was more or less confirming earlier reports of a 120M cap that would feel like 130M, before Clayton and the ESPN gang started going crazy about 120M to start all the stories of the chaos of free agency and the bloodletting that would ensue. Maybe the person in the article does have sources, but I read it more as taking a leap from Wilsons story. I find it hard to believe that enough owners would vote for something with no cap where the big market owners want to dump some of the small market owners. Too many teams that would be hurt by such a deal.