Free Agency to Run Wild in NFL as Uncapped Year Looms
With the flipping of the clock to 12:01 am ET this morning, free agency officially began in the NFL.
The one difference between this year and years past?
There is no salary cap thanks to the owners opting out of the last labor agreement struck with the players association, making this an uncapped year with the strong possibility for a lockout in 2011. That means there is no limit to how much a team can spend, but no one is telling them that they have to spend x amount either. What does this mean in the grand scheme of things? How can the NFL survive with such an unbalanced set up?
Well, for starters, it's the classic "rich get richer, the poor get poorer" mentality. Someone like Jerry Jones, if he were to choose to do so, could go and sign a truckload of free agents at massive dollar amounts to try and get his team to the Super Bowl. On the flip side, the Kansas City Chiefs could keep cutting players down and sign an entire roster of guys making the league minimum. They already have a payroll of just $41 million, or roughly one third of what the cap for 2009 was. Kansas City is the NFL's fiscal version of the best fat burner the way they've shed payroll.
There are also a lot of players who were looking forward to unrestricted free agency that were hosed under this. Instead of it being four years and unrestricted free agency, now with the opt out, for this season, it is six years of service before that comes into play. That means that a lot of good talent can be signed at much lower numbers than they would have commanded on the open market, but teams also would have to pay the compensation involved should they tender a deal to a restricted free agent. Depending on the player and the tender that was given to them by their respective team, the cost could be anything from a first and third round selection in the draft, all the way down to a seventh round pick, to absolutely nothing.
Teams have been scrambling already to make moves. Remember last season, in the first few hours after free agency started, Redskins owner Dan Snyder inked defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth to a $100 million deal. No deal that large has been hit yet, though Julius Peppers may command a hefty price tag. He is being pursued by several clubs, including the Chicago Bears. Nate Burleson has cashed in a deal with the Detroit Lions worth $25 million over five years with 11 million of that guaranteed money to be the #2 receiver opposite Calvin Johnson in Detroit. Gary Brackett has resigned with the Colts to a five year deal worth reportedly in the neighborhood of $33 million, which is a major plus for both sides.
We'll keep you posted on the rest of the transactions as they become relevant. Who will your favorite team sign or lose? It's all a matter of how much money they want to throw around.
The one difference between this year and years past?
There is no salary cap thanks to the owners opting out of the last labor agreement struck with the players association, making this an uncapped year with the strong possibility for a lockout in 2011. That means there is no limit to how much a team can spend, but no one is telling them that they have to spend x amount either. What does this mean in the grand scheme of things? How can the NFL survive with such an unbalanced set up?
Well, for starters, it's the classic "rich get richer, the poor get poorer" mentality. Someone like Jerry Jones, if he were to choose to do so, could go and sign a truckload of free agents at massive dollar amounts to try and get his team to the Super Bowl. On the flip side, the Kansas City Chiefs could keep cutting players down and sign an entire roster of guys making the league minimum. They already have a payroll of just $41 million, or roughly one third of what the cap for 2009 was. Kansas City is the NFL's fiscal version of the best fat burner the way they've shed payroll.
There are also a lot of players who were looking forward to unrestricted free agency that were hosed under this. Instead of it being four years and unrestricted free agency, now with the opt out, for this season, it is six years of service before that comes into play. That means that a lot of good talent can be signed at much lower numbers than they would have commanded on the open market, but teams also would have to pay the compensation involved should they tender a deal to a restricted free agent. Depending on the player and the tender that was given to them by their respective team, the cost could be anything from a first and third round selection in the draft, all the way down to a seventh round pick, to absolutely nothing.
Teams have been scrambling already to make moves. Remember last season, in the first few hours after free agency started, Redskins owner Dan Snyder inked defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth to a $100 million deal. No deal that large has been hit yet, though Julius Peppers may command a hefty price tag. He is being pursued by several clubs, including the Chicago Bears. Nate Burleson has cashed in a deal with the Detroit Lions worth $25 million over five years with 11 million of that guaranteed money to be the #2 receiver opposite Calvin Johnson in Detroit. Gary Brackett has resigned with the Colts to a five year deal worth reportedly in the neighborhood of $33 million, which is a major plus for both sides.
We'll keep you posted on the rest of the transactions as they become relevant. Who will your favorite team sign or lose? It's all a matter of how much money they want to throw around.
Comments