Category: NFL (Page 1035 of 1282)

In a unanimous vote, all 32 NFL owners opted out of the league’s Collective Bargaining Agreement. The original agreement meant there would have been a cap until 2012, but now there might be an un-capped season in 2010 if a new deal cannot be reached.

What does this mean to fans and games on the field?
Regardless of whether a new agreement is reached, NFL football will be played without threat of interruption for at least the next three seasons. The 2008 and 2009 seasons will be played with a salary cap. If there is no new agreement before the 2010 season, the 2010 season will be played without a salary cap under rules that also limit the free agency rights of players. If not extended, the agreement would expire at the end of the 2010 league year.

What are the key issues?
The NFL states that clubs are obligated by the CBA to spend substantially more than half their revenues — about $4.5 billion this year — on player costs. There are also growing costs for stadium construction, operations and improvements. The NFL feels the current labor agreement does not adequately recognize the costs of generating the revenues of which the players receive the largest share, nor does the agreement recognize that those costs have increased substantially in recent years due to difficult economic times. Owners also have concerns about the inability to recoup bonuses paid to players who subsequently breach their contracts or refuse to perform, as well as the current system that allows some rookies to secure contracts paying them more than top proven veterans.

One thing the league has to work on is how much rookies make. It’s ridiculous that a rookie top 10 pick could essentially make more than a five-year veteran coming off a Pro Bowl appearance. I don’t like the idea of an un-capped NFL, but maybe this expected opt-out by the owners will drive both parties to figure out a better system. Then again, it could be a disaster that leads to a future lock out.

In an opinion piece for NBC Sports, Steve Silverman suggest the Bears best move with linebacker Brian Urlacher is to trade him.

He may be royalty in Chicago football lore, standing with the likes of Bill George, Dick Butkus and Mike Singletary among the Bears’ dominant middle linebackers, but the truth is that he is fourth in that group and he’s not getting any better. Trading Urlacher before the 2008 season would be the best move for a Bears team that slipped dramatically in 2007 and may be even worse this year.

Urlacher’s trade value is high right now, even if he did have “minor” surgery on his neck during the offseason. He claims he is 100 percent and will be able to perform up to his usual standards.

That means at a Pro Bowl level. But if you’re Angelo you have to think of the players that are going on the field with Urlacher. The offense is going to be Lilliputian and that means the defense is going to be out on the field for 33 or 34 minutes a game on the average Sunday. Guys with nagging injuries are going to get hurt and the defense is going to start breaking down.

That’s simply a fact of life in the NFL. It’s usually not an overwhelming offense or a dominating defense that wins or gets a team to the playoffs. It’s balance. An offense must be balanced between run and pass. A team must be balanced between offense and defense. If a team has those elements and can also play on special teams, it can win.

The Bears are caught between a rock and a hard place with the Grrlacher situation. It’s understandable that they don’t want dole out a huge pay raise to an aging player who’s dinged up. But there’s no question Urlacher can still play and you don’t want to be known as an organization that doesn’t take care of your players. (The Bears just did this song and dance with Lance Briggs.)

I get why Silverman suggests the Bears trade Urlacher for offense, but it’s not that easy. Even if they do land offensive contributors, those players still might not pan out and then you have a hole in the middle of your defense. And the middle linebacker position in the Tampa 2 is the most important position on the field. It’s a slippery slope the Bears are on.

Former Patriots video assistant Matt Walsh is speaking out about his role in Spygate.

“If it was of little or no importance, I imagine they wouldn’t have continued to do it, and probably not taken the chances of going down onto the field in Pittsburgh or shooting from other teams’ stadiums the way we did.”

“On average, when you’re scouting a team, we’d do anywhere from 60 to 70 cut-ups on offense, 40, 50 cut-ups on defense. Special teams, you’re making another 10 to 15 tapes,” Walsh told The Times.

“When Belichick came along, we added even more to the preparation. We were doing more cut-ups, and we were also coming into the age of digital technology, too. So we were able to attach statistics to the video, on computers. The great thing about technology, it’s supposed to make things easier, but in a sense it creates more work for you.”

As SR friend John Paulsen mentioned to me in an e-mail, Walsh comments essentially throw Belichick’s “I misunderstood the rules” comments right out the window. At least from what Walsh is saying, it’s clear that Belichick wanted the tapes so he could have a clear advantage over his opponents. (As if that wasn’t obvious already.)

Should be interesting to see where this issue goes from here now that Sen. Arlen Specter wants to conduct his own investigation.

Despite NFL commissioner Roger Goodell stating Tuesday that no further punishment would be handed out to the Patriots or head coach Bill Belichick in light of Matt Walsh turning over video relating to the SpyGate scandal, the issue apparently is far from over.

Now United States Senator Arlen Specter wants to get in on the act ala Sen. George Mitchell when he probed into baseball’s steroid issue. Specter wants to conduct an independent investigation.

Must be a Jets fan.