Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    171

    Vikings and the CBA

    Which do you think is better for the Vikings, a new CBA, a extension of the current CBA, or no new CBA? Advantages? Disadvantages?

  2. #2
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,271

    Vikings prefer labor stability over a short-term gain

    [size=18px]Vikings prefer labor stability over a short-term gain[/size]

    The team has an eye on the big picture of the stalled CBA talks, even though it could clean up in free agency with no extension.

    Mark Craig, Star Tribune
    Last update: March 01, 2006 – 1:02 AM


    The Vikings prefer long-term league stability to instant gratification, which is why Rob Brzezinski, their vice president of football operations, said the team is still holding out hope that the NFL's collective bargaining agreement can be extended by today's 3 p.m. deadline.

    "It's the best thing for the league, and something that we're in support of," Brzezinski said Tuesday morning. "A labor extension is good for the long-term competitive balance of the league."

    The CBA doesn't expire until after the 2007 season, but without an extension, this will be the last year with a salary cap. Talks broke off between the league and the NFL Players Association on Tuesday afternoon. The NFL said no new discussions were scheduled as of Tuesday night.

    The Vikings have a league-high $24.1 million of cap space.

    That and more restrictive cap rules governing contracts signed in 2006 puts the Vikings in the best position of all 32 teams if there is no CBA extension heading into the scheduled start of free agency on Friday.

    However, without a salary cap in 2007 and possibly beyond, the Vikings would be on the other end of the competitive spectrum as one of the lowest revenue-generating teams.

    There were indications of progress toward an extension Tuesday afternoon until talks broke off. Gene Upshaw, the NFLPA's executive director, sounded discouraged afterward.

    "We're deadlocked. There's nowhere to go," Upshaw told the Associated Press. "There's no reason to continue meeting.

    "We're too far apart on our economics and too far apart on revenue sharing -- the ball is in their court. We'll go to the uncapped year, there won't be an extension."

    The league said Friday's scheduled start of free agency will not be moved back.

    According to ESPN.com, the sides differ on the percentage of revenues to be allocated to the players. The NFLPA is asking for 60 percent, and the league's offer was 56.2.

    Only three other teams -- Arizona ($23.6 million), Green Bay ($20.7) and Cleveland ($20.1) -- have at least $20 million of cap space. Several teams are over the cap. Some will have to make significant roster cuts to get under the projected $95 million cap, creating an even bigger pool of talent for the Vikings to shop from.

    An extension, on the other hand, would provide instant cap relief because it would raise the salary cap to $105 million or more.

    "If there isn't a labor extension," Brzezinski said, "it would be a significant short-term competitive advantage for the Vikings."

    On the other hand, few teams would suffer more over the long haul without a salary cap than the Vikings. Forbes magazine ranked them as the least valuable franchise in the league last year. The Vikings also are among the lowest revenue-generating teams because of the Metrodome, and they have no deal in place for a new stadium.

    Brzezinski, however, said owner Zygi Wilf is willing to spend to the limits of the cap.

    "Zygi has indicated to us that he will give us the resources we need to build a championship football team," Brzezinski said. "That's his goal."

    Running back, offensive line, linebacker and kicker are among the team's priorities in free agency and the draft.

    It's possible the Vikings could be in the running for some of the top free-agent running backs such as Edgerrin James and MVP Shaun Alexander. Or some of the top free-agent linemen such as LeCharles Bentley of New Orleans and Philadelphia's Jon Runyan.

    Or how would Adam Vinatieri look in purple? Vinatieri, who kicked game-winning field goals in two of the past four Super Bowls, is available because the Patriots decided not to put their franchise tag on him.

    NFL owners were scheduled to discuss the CBA via conference call at 5 p.m. Tuesday. Wilf declined to comment through a team spokesman.

    Vikings prefer labor stability over a short-term gain

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  3. #3
    Del Rio Guest

    Re: Vikings prefer labor stability over a short-term gain

    Upshaw said yesterday he was schedueled to be there until Friday and he was going home, so he said that is an indication of just how far apart the two sides are.

    There is no way in hell it gets done. The Vikings will have an opportunity to have the biggest offseason in our history.

    Short term great Long term bad, we don't really have a choice though.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    158

    What does the CBA mean for the Vikings?

    Just wondering. We are way under the cap. So, doe this give us an advantage? In what ways does it hurt?

  5. #5
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,271

    Re: What does the CBA mean for the Vikings?

    This might help answer your question;

    Vikings prefer labor stability over a short-term gain

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  6. #6
    NordicNed is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    9,513

    Re: What does the CBA mean for the Vikings?

    Not sure of the total in's and outs of the CBA, but from what I understand.

    The CBA, puts teams on an even level of how much they can spend each year on their teams roster.

    This way someone willing to spend alot of money, or has the meens to, can't run away with all the great talent out there, while the owner with less money or resources can't compete with someone likt that..

    It should be like that. Keeps teams more comeptative.

    Down side..

    You don't see the long term players that much anymore like in the old days, when a player was drafted and would spend a whole career with a team.

    I hate to say it, and wouldn't want to be labeled that way but, we have an owener who is filthy rich, and if there was no CBA that could easily turn into a big plus for a team like ours....Wilf could buy a winning team like aLa Steinbrener of the Yankees....

    But personaly, I'de rather see the CBA stay in place.....


    I LOVE THE SMELL OF VICTORY IN THE MORNING AIR.

  7. #7
    Del Rio Guest

    Re: What does the CBA mean for the Vikings?

    One of the biggest results if they dont get it done today, is a ton of big name free agents become available.

    In addition there is this information

    "However, they differ on the percentage of revenues to be allocated to the players -- the union is asking for 60 percent and the league's current offer is 56.2 percent.

    However, there are also disputes among groups of owners on that issue, too. Tagliabue has called a league meeting in New York for March 2 to try to resolve them.

    Teams with lower revenues -- mostly small-market clubs -- say that if the contributions to the players' fund are equally apportioned among 32 franchises, they will have to pay a substantially larger proportion of their nontelevision and ticket money because they have less. Owners of high-revenue teams, like Dallas' Jerry Jones, claim spreading the load equally would force some teams to work harder to generate new sources of money.

    Another high-revenue owner, New England's Robert Kraft, says the formula does not take stadium debt into account, as he has on Gillette Stadium in Foxborough, Mass.

    NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said "internal "

  8. #8
    Ltrey33 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,618

    Re: Vikings prefer labor stability over a short-term gain

    "Del Rio" wrote:
    Upshaw said yesterday he was schedueled to be there until Friday and he was going home, so he said that is an indication of just how far apart the two sides are.

    There is no way in hell it gets done. The Vikings will have an opportunity to have the biggest offseason in our history.

    Short term great Long term bad, we don't really have a choice though.
    I agree Del. Either way we're screwed down the road, so we might as well make the best of it while we can. I say spend, spend and spend some more, because with an uncapped 2007 season we're gonna be up shitcreek.

    On another note, Mike Greenberg was reading off a list of names today on Mike & Mike of guys that might be cut to free up space. Here are some guys I remember: Terrell Owens, Lavar Arrington, Will Shields, Warrick Dunn, Domanick Davis, Brett Favre, Chris Mcallister, DAUNTE CULPEPPER, and a few others too.

  9. #9
    Ltrey33 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,618

    Re: Vikings and the CBA

    I'd post that in here....it seems to be where most of the conversation about the CBA is going on.

    http://www.purplepride.org/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=326492#3264 92

  10. #10
    aceclown is offline Coach
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    948

    Re: What does the CBA mean for the Vikings?

    "VIKINGinGEORGIA" wrote:
    Just wondering. We are way under the cap. So, doe this give us an advantage? In what ways does it hurt?
    read the article before you ask questions.

    However, without a salary cap in 2007 and possibly beyond, the Vikings would be on the other end of the competitive spectrum as one of the lowest revenue-generating teams.


    Chuch.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •