RSS

A precarious state for NFL players

With no CBA, many will lose their status as unrestricted free agents. Andrew Brandt

Bookmark and Share Print This Send This January 04, 2010, 01:20 PM EST
15 Comments

The decision by NFL owners in May 2008 to opt out of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) has left the game in a precarious state. Barring a deal being struck in the coming weeks between the NFL and the NFL Players Association, we are done with salary cap football in the NFL for the near term and possibly the long term.

I will continue to discuss the ramifications of an uncapped system, the Final Eight Rule (limiting free agency options for the eight playoff teams in the divisional round) and the potential for great disparity between player costs without a ceiling and – more important – without a floor for player spending.

DeMaurice SmithNFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith

The reciprocal change without an extension of the CBA is that NFL free agency as we know it would change.

To review, since 1993, four years have been required for an NFL player to be an unrestricted free agent (UFA). A player with three years of service has been -- and will continue to be -- a restricted free agent (RFA), able to receive offers from other teams, with his incumbent team having a right to match any offer, depending on the level of tender (offer) made to the player.

In the event of no new CBA – and no salary cap -- prior to the bell ringing for 2010 free agency in late February or early March, the requirement to be a UFA will shift from four years to six years in the league. A player with four or five years in the NFL will not be a UFA in 2010; that player will become an RFA, subject to control by his team just as three-year RFAs have been

An RFA’s incumbent team has a right to match any offer – a right of first refusal (ROFR). And depending on the level of tender made to the player by the incumbent team, the team will receive compensation from the acquiring team in the form of a draft choice(s).

Roger GoodellAPNFL commissioner Roger Goodell

Suffice it to say, the status of UFA is much more desirable to an NFL player than the status of an RFA. Players work the early parts of their careers to gain unfettered bidding among teams for their services and create escalated prices; they do not want other teams to know that their team can always match any offer made to them. And the amount of RFAs changing teams has been minimal – last year there were no RFAs who switched teams.

Now there are 212 players who – under the prior capped system – would be UFAs who are not going to be as we sit here today. Rather, they will now be RFAs.

With that in mind, let’s take an early look at the players from each team who find themselves in this uncertain status. Let’s call then the “limbo group” of RFAs. As a few general managers have told me, this group is certainly more attractive than the true UFA class of 2010 – the potential UFA class with six years of service, that is.

Starting with the AFC, here’s a team-by-team look at some of the players in this limbo group. We’ll take a look at the UFA list at another time.

AFC North

Jerome HarrisonAPCleveland RB Jerome Harrison

Baltimore: Dawan Landry
Cincinnati: Frostee Rucker
Cleveland: Jerome Harrison, D’Qwell Jackson, Brodney Pool, Lawrence Vickers, Matt Roth
Pittsburgh: Willie Colon

Comments:

-The Ravens’ Landry has been a starter since the team drafted him in the fifth round in 2006.
-The Bengals’ Rucker may scare off suitors because of character questions.
-The Browns didn’t have to worry about Harrison a few weeks ago. Now they do. Jackson and Pool each missed games as a result of injuries. The Browns like Roth.
-The Steelers’ Colon may have some interest from teams as the Steelers have a lot of UFAs to deal with, including Casey Hampton.

AFC East

Buffalo: Keith Ellison
Miami: Ronnie Brown, Anthony Fasano
New England: Logan Mankins, Stephen Gostowski, Pierre Woods
New York Jets: Braylon Edwards, Leon Washington, Brad Smith

Comments:

-Ronnie Brown had a six-year rookie contract that voids to five, meaning it will expire. He certainly expected it to expire and become a free agent. Now the Dolphins will own his rights another year.
-The Jets have interesting decisions with Edwards -- for whom they gave up two picks and two players – Washington, now on injured reserve, and Smith, someone they like a lot.
-The Patriots have a host of issues to deal with in the offseason, including UFA Vince Wilfork and the last year of Tom Brady’s deal.

AFC South

LenDale WhiteAPTennessee RB LenDale White

Houston: DeMeco Ryans, Owen Daniels
Indianapolis: Marlin Jackson, Antoine Bethea
Jacksonville: Clint Ingram
Tennessee: Bo Scaife, Stephen Tulloch, LenDale White

Comments:

-The Texans will have an interesting offseason, with decisions on their coaching staff, a couple of desirable RFAs in Ryans and Daniels and the issue of what to do with franchise player Dunta Robinson.
-The Colts have a rising star in Bethea, but their primary issue will be addressing the expiring contract of Peyton Manning, whose next deal will no doubt be the largest in the history of the sport.
-Coming into the season, it appeared that Titans Scaife and White might be in line for big paydays. Now, not so much. The team will have other issues with UFAs and how to deal with Kerry Collins’ contract.

AFC West

Denver: Elvis Dumervil, Brandon Marshall, Kyle Orton
Kansas City: Brodie Coyle, Derrick Johnson, Jarrad Page
Oakland: Thomas Howard, Kirk Morrison
San Diego: Vincent Jackson, Malcolm Floyd, Marcus McNeill, Shawne Merriman

Comments:

-No teams in the NFL are more affected by the potential lack of a salary cap and six years required for free agency than the Broncos and Chargers. Their limbo groups are as impressive as any in the league. Having rights to these players compared to not having them – in a capped year – are worth tens of millions. The only question is how much the teams will spend to address these players as RFAs, albeit a much smaller amount than if they were UFAs.

Coming soon: a look at the NFC.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

Comments

Add a Comment
Kevin
Jan 04, 2010
02:20 PM

Andrew - have poison pill offer sheets been effectively banned or will that be a major issue in signing restricted free agents?

Swansoncide
Jan 04, 2010
02:21 PM

Didn't ESPN just do this exercise last week? I'd much rather have a deeper look at the ramifications of these changes than another list. With WAY more RFAs than ever before, including many pro bowlers, will the RFA market change? Without a salary cap won't it be much easier for teams to splurge on pro bowlers (or splurge to match offers)? Couldn't you conceivably rip the heart out of a division rival (or cripple their payroll flexibility for years to come)?

I realize that Andrew writes this column from the owner's/front office perspective, but surely there are scenarios which would, in fact, raise payrolls significantly, aren't there? I'd like to hear a little more insight than the NFL company line. Can you at least attempt to imagine a worst-case scenario for the owners? Or is this all just propaganda to scare the "union?"

Mitch
Jan 04, 2010
02:41 PM

My question is how the tender amounts will work. They are usually set each year
but what if a 5 year player made more then the amount this year ?

CW
Jan 04, 2010
03:29 PM

Anyone else thinking Brandon Marshall is going to the Redskins?

Andrew Brandt
Jan 04, 2010
03:35 PM
Andrew Brandt

Kevin and Swanson-
Although we haven't seen the poison pill in a few years -- more civility amongst teams, I suppose -- there still exists that possibility.
A lot of this will depend on owners' willingness to indulge without the governor of a Salary Cap. Not one RFA changed teams in 2009. I cannot believe that will be the case again with this list of players.

British
Jan 04, 2010
03:43 PM

But it's not just the case of offering massive contracts.

The best RFAs will get the top tender which would mean the big spending team would have to give up a 1st and 3rd round pick as well as their blockbuster contracts to land the player.

I think many teams above would be content to take a 1st and 3rd round compensation for most of those players.

The 1st and 3rd round tender is $2.5m for the year, hardly breaking the bank in an uncapped year.

Mark
Jan 04, 2010
06:51 PM

The other topic big risk for the players is not being paid for 2011 if there is a lock out, or so I've read.

What is the advantage to the NFL to locking out the players? Couldn't they just extend the 2010 rules another year?

GottaLovett
Jan 04, 2010
07:15 PM

How does no CBA affect the money at the top of this years entry draft? Is it still going to be in the huge guaranteed sums/do owners unite to curtail the money spent/year of the top ten holdout?

Andrew Brandt
Jan 04, 2010
07:18 PM
Andrew Brandt

British-
The 1st and 3rd round tender for this year is not 2.5M, rather 3.04M for 3-year players and 3.17M for four-year players.

GottaLovett
Jan 04, 2010
07:24 PM

How does no CBA affect the money at the top of this years entry draft? Is it still going to be in the huge guaranteed sums/do owners unite to curtail the money spent/year of the top ten holdout?

Tim
Jan 04, 2010
10:17 PM

Andrew,

You have the AFC in this list but where is the NFC list????

British
Jan 05, 2010
07:30 AM

Thanks for the clarification Andrew.

Still, that's pretty reasonable for one year (in an uncapped year) and gives a team another 12 months to get something worked out.

BroncosFanTX77
Jan 07, 2010
11:53 AM

Andrew, got a question for ya.

Tony Scheffler is an RFA and Denver doesn't seem to wanna retain him. What are their options? If he is an RFA, due to his draft status he would require a 2nd round pick for compensation, but would any team in their right mind offer a 2nd for him? Is the compensation negotiable between the two teams? Thank you in advance for any reply.

Next 1 - 13 of 13 Prev COMMENTS

Add a Comment

* Required - Keep track of your comments Login or Register with NFP
(will not be published)