Nobody has asked or answered this question from what I've read or heard. I know this year is uncapped, but once they get a new CBA, and the cap is reinstalled, will pro rated signing bonuses from this year's free agents count against a teams cap in subsequent years? That's the way it always was. Or was this literally a freebie year and it's just base salary that counts against the cap with the guys you've given bonuses to in this uncapped year?

Anybody have an answer? Irish Boy?

I don't know. I'm sure if anyone does until the next CBA is signed. Presumably that is something that can be adjusted. I have a feeling that if the owners are going to be able to keep the salary cap, they're going to have to give some major concessions. Treating this year as a freebie might be one of them. But capology is not one of my strongest suits.

_________________
Fire Phil Emery

If this year is a freebie it makes what the Bears have done that much better. This was the perfect year to go crazy like this. Cuz now you have more money to spend in other years. These free agents don't hurt the cap in other years. Cuz it's that signing bonus that's pro rated through the duration of contracts that would hurt the Bears. Now it's just their base salary which isn't much for any of these guys.

There is absolutely, positively no salary cap as of last night due to the lack of progress in the NFL's collective bargaining agreement. While there will be a 2011 season, it's anybody's guess regarding 2012 where the chances of a lockout are growing.

Right, but the CBA negotiations are just as much about owners v owners as it is about owners v players. That's what has made this so difficult. There was a train of thought that some teams, specifically Dallas and Washington, would go crazy this year and lock themselves into a situation where the cap simply could not be reimposed without blowing up their teams. Dallas was prevented from doing that by the interim rules and Washington has, thus far, resisted that urge. But owners aren't going to be happy about no applying any of the money. Players, of course, don't want a salary cap at all.

_________________
Fire Phil Emery

Pro Football Weekly/The SCORE's Hub Arkush, who has been as crystal clear as anyone regarding the NFL's impending labor storm, joins "Boers & Bernstein" following Brian "The Whipping Boy" Paruch's 3p "Scoreboard Update" this afternoon. Based on what Hub told Terry & Dan during football season, the fact there is no salary cap means that teams can definitely spend money like water on players. It also means that players need 6 years of service time and that teams can also use transition tags on players as well.

Correct SHARK, but that kind of misses the point. There's no implications for this coming year. However, once the new CBA is put into place, the teams will have to reach agreement on how to handle the money spent this year. For example, they may decide that some of the money in bonuses be pro-rated once again in addition to what previously in place as a small penalty for drastic front loading of contracts. Or they might not. We can't be sure yet.

_________________
Fire Phil Emery

I was under the impression of two things. Before the NFL's free agency window opened late last night, Bears' President Ted Phillips told ChicagoBears.com that the team wasn't going "hog wild" on free agency, while also raising ticket prices at Soldier Field. Talk about the opposite of what he said for starters, and I've also heard many sports talk radio hosts suggest that an uncapped year would mean teams like the Bears wouldn't necessarily break the bank on free agents. This when you also consider the deep pockets and vast resources teams like the Washington Redskins & Dallas Cowboys have, let alone own their stadiums to boot.

I think that the concern those organizations have is that they cannot strap themselves down too far (especially in the case of Washington, which was in a salary cap mess) this year, because once the new CBA gets imposed they'd be in trouble if there is any salary cap. Those teams could be intransient and demand that there be no cap, but ~20 or so owners would vehemently fight that. The biggest danger of lockout IMO is not between the players and the owners. It's if the players and a group of big money owners team up against the rest of the owners. To their credit, Snyder and Jones seem to want to avoid that.

_________________
Fire Phil Emery

That's probably why the league and union took so much time to look at the language in Pepper's contract.

The fact that Peppers agent isn't really an agent only benefits the Bears. From what I read this week, Tommie Harris isn't gonna be making jack shit, as DE-escalators hit his contract because the guy hasn't been able to stay on the field.

Did you hear Jerry Angelo compliment the Bears 'salary cap guru' / contract man compliment Cliff Stein repeatedly at the press conference.

The Bears are going for it this year, and 2012. End of story.

Any money Peppers has been paid this year up front has NO influence on the CBA when it returns. Only the money due him during the new salary cap agreement ...if there even is one.

_________________
Disclaimer: Most of my posts are not suitable for work or home viewing.

The name's Rockmore. Beef Rockmore