Posted By: n8er (17/04/2008 7:48:31 PM)
Comment: thanks, while the anger and confusion have subsided, i'm still raw that allen isn't being pursued by the 9ers

Posted By: Nevyn (17/04/2008 7:42:12 PM)
Comment: n8er, it has to do with timing. Briggs had signed his franchise tag (a one year deal) and did it past a certain deadline. Allen has not signed his franchise tender and that deadline has not passed. And we could have traded for Briggs, we just couldnt give him a long term deal as part of the trade.

Posted By: n8er (17/04/2008 6:25:13 PM)
Comment: no wait, my bad its on foxsports.com

Posted By: n8er (17/04/2008 6:07:12 PM)
Comment: it's on cbs.sportsline.com btw if anyone wants to read it.

Posted By: n8er (17/04/2008 6:04:59 PM)
Comment: Hey matt, just read that the Vikings and Bucs and Jags are inquiring about trading for and signing Jared Allen to a long term deal. How is this possible considering the Niners couldn't do so with Briggs because he had the Franchise Tag. Allen has the franchise tag yet 3 teams are all talking extention. I confused and a bit angered.

Posted By: RK (17/04/2008 1:19:33 PM)
Comment: Is this much different than tanking the last game of the season to get a better draft pick, ie. not winning now in order to have a better chance next year? If anything, this seems like it would be even seedier in that they still theoretically have a chance to win this year, as opposed to a team starting all their backups week 16 to get the top draft spot. Why don't they sign Pacman Jones and Chris Henry and give them the league minimum, plus millions of dollars in "likely to be earned" incentives that are as difficult to reach as blocking 15 punts...say not getting arrested or playing every game?

Posted By: Ryan (17/04/2008 1:11:13 PM)
Comment: Interesting strategy. This tells me that Scot McGloughan feels secure enough in his job to save some extra cap room for next year. I wonder if Nolan thinks the same thing. Maybe they should trade their first round pick this year for a crappier team's first and third for next year and hope to run into the same luck that the Pats did when they got the rights to our top pick...

Posted By: 9erfan (17/04/2008 11:52:10 AM)
Comment: Hey Matt, Do you know whether Scott M is the youngest GM in the league?

Posted By: EdK (17/04/2008 10:50:22 AM)
Comment: Matt, Do you think some of the remaining cap money will be spent on bonuses as part of giving contract extensions to folks like David Baas, Joe Nedney, Delanie Walker, or anyone else who steps up this year?

Posted By: niner (17/04/2008 7:46:57 AM)
Comment: without a cap doestn that mean Synder and JOnes will maek their teams great and the Niners bottom feeders?

Posted By: Mike Nolan (16/04/2008 9:44:34 PM)
Comment: Hey Matt, can you delete the idiots that keep posting "first"??

Posted By: Razoreater (16/04/2008 9:18:23 PM)
Comment: I think the more important question is who is backing up jennings at right tackle?We need another guy who can step right in.

Posted By: SB from SF (16/04/2008 8:13:09 PM)
Comment: I am pleading for everyone to please just ignore oneniner. Every time someone here tries and argue with him it gives him an excuse to post again. We all knew he makes no sense so please don't encourage him. We all suffer and get a little dumber each time he posts.

Posted By: Nevyn (16/04/2008 7:46:35 PM)
Comment: AF - the cap determined based off of a percentage of league revenue, but how they calculate it changed in the last extension. The league shares revenues for things like attendance and TV and thats what the cap used to be based on. Any other revenue (like Stadium naming rights fees) was not part of the calculation (and was not shared). As of the last change, those revenues are now counted as part of total league revenue (which means revenue looks higher and the cap goes up). But some teams (Bills, Bengals) make a lot less money off of those sources than others, so because it isn't shared, those teams basically have had the % of their revenue they have to spend on salary jump. Another issue is cash vs cash charge. Owners are rich, and people think of rich people as having $50 million under their mattress. In fact, they often don't have a huge amount of cash, and need to borrow against their assets to spend. So normal payroll is fine. But if you give a player a 6 year, 60 million dollar deal with a 20 million dollar signing bonus, thats 20 million you need to have TODAY. The result is, to be competitive in free agency, a lot of owners are taking on debt, and more debt than they'd like to. You can alleviate that with roster and option bonuses at later times instead of all signing bonus, but then if you're player is caught dogfighting and sent off to jail, you can't recover all that bonus money. Personally I don't really have much sympathy for the owners, and the players should really make them pay to fix the things they don't like, but basically thats the problem.

Posted By: oneniner (16/04/2008 5:18:09 PM)
Comment: Does a rookie P. Willis deserve to be the highest paid athlete on our defense?......that answer should cap all this ridiculous talk about a rookie cap.

Posted By: Alex Smith (16/04/2008 4:16:54 PM)
Comment: The NBA rookie cap works well. If they pan out, they will get paid the big contract.

Posted By: ninermaniac (16/04/2008 4:12:31 PM)
Comment: whos Stricklands Agent, i guess he thought thats a good deal. Blocking 15 punts is not that hard, just make sure you wear moon shoes.

Posted By: Marc - NJ49er (16/04/2008 3:40:14 PM)
Comment: Without injecting too much political spin oneniner, who deserves an immediate payday first, an athlete or a school teacher? Think about priorities and ROI. The NFL rookie class should be slotted and capped or flat out set aside from the overall team cap to allow teams to better manage a play for pay system. Tuna is trying to break the cycle of escalating #1 pick salaries, the agent isn't. Tough spot unless the Commish steps in and says New Rules for Rooks.

Posted By: Alex Smith (16/04/2008 3:31:31 PM)
Comment: Oneniner you are a fool, plain and simple. There should be a limit on how many posts you are allowed a day.

Posted By: oneniner (16/04/2008 3:29:43 PM)
Comment: Sir Thomas More-..."give me one example of a player being drafted into the NFL because he was a good student"....I think all NFL teams want players that were good students in college, that is why the term character guys means alot....and honestly i believe the best players like manning and brady are NFL playbook nerds.....i guess it dependes on your definition of a book..."Kurt Warner vs Matt Lienart, who gets paid more? Is Kurt Warner not the better QB?"...sure, maybe he his better this season with a young team that can't get to the playoffs, but i rather invest on someone who i think could be good in the next 2 yrs, knowing that is when the rest of my young team would be more experienced to handle a challenge like getting to the playoffs, and at the same time i am very sure in the next 2yrs you won't be saying Is Kurt Warner not the better QB! ....

Posted By: Alex Smith (16/04/2008 3:24:10 PM)
Comment: Hey NinerKing, the "signing bonus" is where most of the guaranteed money comes from, not the contract and yes it is way out of control. Needs to be capped

Posted By: oneniner (16/04/2008 3:17:21 PM)
Comment: ...i know its easy to say this kids need to earn their stripes...but what if Willis was the number 1 pick last yr and got the number 1 pick money....will you be sayin he deserved it or not?....the kid drafted by Cleveland thomas made a huge difference in a team that wasn't even considered an average team, he allowed an unproven QB get better (who got paid this offseason).....are you saying thomas does not deserve the money the number 1 pick got. Dont blame the kids, blame the teams/owners that pick kids who are not proven and paying them big bucks.....there are kids drafted in the 2nd to 7th round every year that end up making a difference in wins and losses as full time starters (not getting paid starter salary).....how come you never talk about them?.....you focus on the ones that do not produce immediately in yr one and blame them for getting paid huge salaries....that makes no sense.....blame the scouts not the kids. almost all this kids are college grads, they paid their dues in college, they should be paid now not later.....and again most of this kids drafted in the 1st round are assumed to be starters, so shouldn't they be paid starter salaries....its ok for a college grls to get paid $millions to be naked on online but not ok to pay million to a kid drafted to play football....give me a break......

Posted By: NinerKing (16/04/2008 3:07:23 PM)
Comment: The owners are wanting to opt out because the current CBA gives a 60%-40% split of revenues, with the former percentage going to the players. If you were an owner, would you want to only get 40% of your teams revenue? todd: the issue with the rookies isnt so much the "signing bonus" it's more an issue of the guaranteed money they're given. The top 5 picks in the draft have been given anywhere from $15 - $30 million in guaranteed money before taking a snap. That is ridiculous.

Posted By: AF in WC (16/04/2008 3:04:00 PM)
Comment: Thanks Nevyn. But I thought the salary cap was set as a specific percentage of the leagues revenue which was then shared amongst the teams equally.

Posted By: Nevyn (16/04/2008 3:00:26 PM)
Comment: AF in WC - The owners like the salary cap. They just don't like the level that it is now set at, nor a bunch of other provisions that were put in the last CBA. Basically, player costs have risen more than they anticipated, which none of them like, and the small market ones are livid, because they don't get the same unshared revenue streams that the big markets do. Just look at where the cap has gone in the last 5 years. Revenues have been going up, but not that much.

Posted By: AF in WC (16/04/2008 2:45:48 PM)
Comment: Why would the owners opt out of the current CBA? I thought it was very lucrative for the owners to have a salary cap as structured. Anyone who can answer, please advise.

Posted By: Cody Pickett (16/04/2008 2:17:45 PM)
Comment: Salary cap Q: What limitations, if any, prevent a Team from circumventing the salary cap by arranging for a business associate to additional compensation to a player, eg, Radio station with local broadcast rights hires player (at generous salary) to host a sports talk program, Team's law firm hires player's wife (at generous salary) as "Special Assistant to Senior Partner", etc.

Posted By: todd (16/04/2008 2:12:15 PM)
Comment: Hey oneniner, Chris and Stonerlab are right man. A CBA is critical for any pro sports league. Without one your looking at large market, big spending teams essentailly spending their way into the playoffs and beyond. Who get's left out? Those teams without new stadiums, cable contracts etc. Before the season even starts there will be teams who simply can't compete. As for salaries, I think what stonerlab is referring to are the massive signing bonuses these kids are getting on draft day. Those bonuses are out of control...so much so that teams dont want to be in the top 10 because it's too high a risk. Those bonuses will only increase without a CBA.

Posted By: Scott (16/04/2008 1:39:07 PM)
Comment: Matt- Please answer Berger's question as it's right on topic: What happens to the cap carry-over if Strickland is cut before the season? Why would the 49ers do this with Strickland (instead of someone else) unless they are virtually certain he'll be on the team? Thanks! - Scott

Posted By: steveh (16/04/2008 1:24:03 PM)
Comment: I would love to see no salary cap, but sadly enough eddie isn't our owner anymore. So it might be a bad thing for the niners!!

Posted By: VoiceofReason (16/04/2008 12:37:16 PM)
Comment: "just like when a kid who is brilliant in science gets hired by a science company and pay him big bucks compared to the old man who has been there forever??" WRONG! No one should be paid a massive amount of money before they prove themselves. That's just good business. Besides, any retainer that a student gets out of school for a good job is nothing compared to the signing bonuses that these athletes receive. Earn your stripes, prove your worth...........THEN get paid.

Posted By: Big Jim, Reno (16/04/2008 12:31:36 PM)
Comment: This might not be news to some people, but this is news to me. I haven't read this anywhere else. Please share if you saw this anywhere else.

Posted By: Fifth Grade Teacher (16/04/2008 12:29:05 PM)
Comment: Oneniner, How come you're on this blog, but you weren't able to go to school today?

Posted By: Sactown49er (16/04/2008 12:25:18 PM)
Comment: Do you think that with the lowering of the time b/w 1st RD draft picks that teams will have to dicuss situational trades before the draft begins? Eg. If Atlanta thinks that Miami will take Brohm with the #33 pick they will tell the niners or another team, before the draft, we might want to trade with you. Or in the event a player might fall to the end of the first round, teams will let late 1st RD teams know they would be interested in moving up before the draft. Thanks, liked the dark office atmosphere you got.

Posted By: Sir Thomas More (16/04/2008 12:07:50 PM)
Comment: Oneniner, give me one example of a player being drafted into the NFL because he was a good student. NFL teams want football players not book nerds. Scientists do deserve the money, Football players do not. Kurt Warner vs Matt Lienart, who gets paid more? Is Kurt Warner not the better QB? didn't he play more and have better stats. Vernon Davis vs Eric Johnson another example. Johnson came off a carrer year and the niners still paid a rookie 3 times as much money even though he was unproven.

Posted By: oneniner (16/04/2008 11:38:49 AM)
Comment: Actually JT you are the one making a fool of yourself. Its very easy - nobody is forcing you to read the first post, why can't yu ignore it?....you can still read the blog and add your comment....what is eating you inside, to care so much ?....

Posted By: oneniner (16/04/2008 11:35:02 AM)
Comment: StonerLab- "unproven players a "truck load of money" right from the word jump!"...what are you talking about?...they do deserve the money...they spend 4 yrs in college playing football with no pay, and those that excel in both school work and athletics get rewarded by the nfl ...whatz wrong with that?, just like when a kid who is brilliant in science gets hired by a science company and pay him big bucks compared to the old man who has been there forever....dont hate on the kids....they deserve the money. ....how can u blame the kids, ...dat is dummiiculous....."when proven players who have earned their srtipes & pay get the short-end of the stick"......what are you talking about?.....who are the proven players who are not getting paid?.....Who are this players you talk about?

Posted By: oneniner (16/04/2008 11:29:00 AM)
Comment: I thought yu already went over this .....Likely-to-be-earned incentives - Not-likely-to-be-earned incentives ...before.....dammit no news?

Posted By: StonerLab (16/04/2008 11:21:22 AM)
Comment: I'm with you Chris on both sides hammering out a new deal for the CBA. One thing that HAS to change is a "rookie pool" It's time to stop giving these young unproven players a "truck load of money" right from the word jump! It makes no sense at all when proven players who have earned their srtipes & pay get the short-end of the stick. The whole thing is backwards in my opinion. I believe there would be alot more continuity with every team keeping their own & make the draft that much more important. Free Agency would be minimal as far as player movement from one team to another. Matt, your thoughts?

Posted By: Berger (16/04/2008 11:19:56 AM)
Comment: Matt- What effect does this have on Strickland making the team? It seems this would give him an advantage because if he were cut we would lose the carry over. What are the facts and your thoughts about this?

Posted By: chris (16/04/2008 11:05:37 AM)
Comment: I really hope they find a way to come to an agreement that includes a cap. You think first round picks are over paid now? You think ticket prices are expensive? Just wait. Players in sports without salary caps get paid stupid amounts of money.

Posted By: todd (16/04/2008 11:05:12 AM)
Comment: I feel great about our ability to manage the cap and use our dollars wisely. Now we need to focus on drafting well and making solid game day coaching decisions.

Posted By: JT (16/04/2008 10:58:20 AM)
Comment: Hey Matt! If by chance Jennings is cut this year (personal issues...demoted from the starting line up...anything else) what would be his cap hit? Is this his last year on the cap? Is it spread out over the next few years? Hate to see a big chunk when it's likely he won't be starting this year.

Response: If Jennings were to part ways with the 49ers after June 1, he could count $2.392M against this year's cap and $3.484M against the '09 cap. So the 49ers would create a cap savings of his base salary of $3.45M this year. By the way, I think it's highly, highly unlikely Jennings is going anywhere. It sure looks as if he's going to be the starting right tackle. --Matt M.

Posted By: JT (16/04/2008 10:56:21 AM)
Comment: C'mon guys! Enough already with this FIRST thing....you're morons! Matt ended this about 3 months ago...STOP! You're making fools of yourselves!

Posted By: XL (16/04/2008 10:55:48 AM)
Comment: what happens when there is no more Salary Cap after 2009, are we looking at a MLB type system?

Posted By: Jay T. (16/04/2008 10:31:38 AM)
Comment: Good... this is a major loop hole in the cap system that most teams take advantage of, so why not?

Posted By: ZURDO (16/04/2008 10:21:51 AM)
Comment: FIRST!!!!

Posted By: 49ER FOR LIFE (16/04/2008 10:16:02 AM)
Comment: FIRST!!!