Bleacher Report - Articles by Andrew Brandt

More on Crabtree and 49ers

Andrew Brandt — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 08:00:00 -0400

Hopefully, my look inside the 49ers-Michael Crabtree negotiations on Friday proved the point that it’s not as simple as “slotting the pick” and filling in the numbers accordingly.

This one is complicated for a few reasons, some of which we discussed then.

In negotiating the contract for Jeremy Maclin, the wide receiver taken after Crabtree in the first round (albeit nine picks later), one of the difficulties was that the selection was sandwiched in the first round by players who were defensive linemen, offensive linemen, a tight end, a quarterback, etc.

Should that matter, you ask? For the purposes of base contract and guaranteed money, not really. The player is picked where he’s picked; it’s of no importance—except for a quarterback—what position he plays.

The Michael Crabtree saga continues as the 49ers begin Week 3 of the season.

The place it matters is upside, i.e., escalators. It’s challenging to equate the level of difficulty of the escalator to players in entirely different positions where statistical accomplishments—very important to a wide receiver—are largely irrelevant, save for sacks. The primary escalation marker for many positions is playing time, not directly relevant to a receiver.

Similar challenges have been present in the Crabtree drama. Directly above him are linemen B.J. Raji of the Packers and Eugene Monroe of the Jaguars, whose upside is based primarily on playing time. Above those picks is the much-discussed Darrius Heyward-Bey deal with the Raiders, whose contract the Crabtree camp is trying hard to latch on to for obvious reasons.

Although it will be extremely difficult to approach the hard numbers of the Heyward-Bey contract, it’s the escalator that Crabtree’s camp argues should be the apples-to-apples comparison.

Heyward-Bey’s contract has a base value of $38 million, almost $16 million more than the pick above Crabtree, Raji at $22M. While Raji has been the marker used by the 49ers—a reasonable data point for both sides—Heyward-Bey has been a focal point for the other side.

Heyward Bey’s contract value goes to nearly $41 million for 60 catches one time in his first four years; it escalates to more than $43 million for 60 catches twice.

Crabtree has taken notice. While he makes the argument that this contract should be a key data point because of the position the players play, especially regarding upside, the 49ers point to the fact that the deal is three picks away, buffered by two deals in between.

Another dynamic appears to be one first written about by Mike Sando of ESPN and discussed here at the NFP by my colleague Brad Biggs: the lack of production of wide receivers in offenses run by 49ers coordinator Jimmy Raye.

Just as opponents have scouting reports on whom they’re playing, agents have scouting reports on philosophies of coordinators that affect the earning potential of clients.

As Sando and Biggs pointed out, in Raye’s 12 previous seasons as an offensive coordinator, only twice has a wide receiver reached 1,000 yards, and only twice has a receiver had more than 64 receptions. To put that in perspective, 22 receivers had more than 1,000 yards last season and 30 had more than 64 receptions.

Jeremy Maclin was the next receiver taken after Crabtree.

In the Maclin negotiation, the concern about escalators from the Maclin camp was that even though the Eagles pass as much as any team in the league, they spread the ball around, lessening the chances for dramatic impact of the escalators. In the case of Crabtree, the concern is simply the run-oriented style of attack being used by the 49ers.

Like Maclin, the Crabtree talks are complicated by factors beyond the base contract and the guarantee. Upside is key to any contract, especially first-round contracts. And slotting is in play here, but slotting against whom? The picks next to Crabtree, or the wide receiver three picks away? The drama continues.

Yet another complicating factor is what may have been said to Crabtree about his contractual value in the event he sits out this season and enters the 2010 draft.

While most feel he would be making a huge financial mistake sitting out this year, it’s something no one can be sure of. Now reports have surfaced that Jets-tampered-with-Crabtree.html" target="_blank">tampering may have been a factor in the negotiations and has been alleged by the 49ers. This is yet another twist to this saga.

With the games on the field beginning, it hasn’t stopped the action off the field in front offices and the business of football. Here are some recent moves that have been engineered over the past couple of weeks around the league:

Arizona

Adrian Wilson converted $3 million of his $8.5 million salary into signing bonus, prorated for salary cap purposes, to lower his present cap charge while raising his future cap amounts.

To be clear, let’s dispel two myths about this contract: (1) that Wilson sacrificed money to help the team, and (2) that this restructure foreshadows a pending contract extension for Anquan Boldin.

Wilson’s restructure simply gives the Cardinals breathing room for the season, not additional resources to address his deal. As with the earlier Larry Fitzgerald restructure by the Cardinals, they’re worried about cap and cash flow right now, not a big new contract for Boldin.

New Orleans

Drew Brees restructured his contract to provide the Saints with some much-needed cap relief, converting over half of his $9.8 million salary into signing bonus. He’ll make the same amounts over the next three years and have the same cash flow while giving the Saints $3.4 million of additional cap room this year, putting them at $5.5 million of available room to last the season.

Carolina

A.J. Feeley received $50,000 to sign. The only team in the NFL under the Mendoza line of $1 million of cap room, look for the Panthers to try to restructure a contract or two soon since we’re in a season where all earned incentives are going to count on the cap when earned—unlike previous years—due to next year being uncapped.

Philadelphia

Jeff Garcia also received $50,000 to sign and a two-game guarantee of salary. The amount is moot, however, because Garcia, as a vested veteran, is guaranteed at least one-quarter of the 10-year minimum salary, an amount worth approximately $211,000.

Indianapolis

Hank Baskett, released by the Eagles and unclaimed due to his $1.545 million salary (the restricted free-agent tender for the second-round draft compensation) was given a $100,000 bonus to sign with the Colts after being pursued by the Rams and a couple of other teams.

And here are some players who took pay cuts prior to the start of the season, avoiding release by their teams:

- Sean Jones, Eagles
- Ryan Denney, Bills
- Cornell Green and Paul McQuistan, Raiders
- Jamar Nesbit, Saints.

All of these reductions were in the $500,000 range. The players made the decision that, in this economy, it’s better to be working at a reduced rate than maybe not working at all.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

The National Football Post is a unique and premier online source of quality and credible news, information and insight about all sides of football featuring professionals with experience in all facets of the NFL.

Throw Me the Money: Getting Inside the Michael Crabtree Contract Negotiations

Andrew Brandt — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 09:09:00 -0400

National Football Post

It seems like every year there’s one negotiation that stands out as the last remaining battleground between a player and a team. The fact that this year’s last man standing is Michael Crabtree is not surprising, for a few reasons:

1. Crabtree appears to have a “herd” of enablers around him, including a cousin who’s a self-proclaimed adviser and enjoyed his 15 minutes of fame earlier this summer when he announced that Crabtree might sit out the season.

2. Eugene Parker, Crabtree’s agent, is going to pursue his concept of “value” to the fullest extent and will be pleasant, professional and maddeningly patient in trying to get the deal he wants.

3. The 49ers were admittedly elated when Crabtree fell to them in the draft and have not wanted (and don’t want) to inject a contentious tone into the negotiations.

The deadline has passed for any potential trade of Crabtree; that ship sailed on Aug. 14. Crabtree will be a 49er. Pay no attention to the rumor of him sitting out the season.

Now there’s a report of a requested meeting by the president of the club, Jed York, to try to inject a fresh new voice into the negotiations, which have been handled by the club’s able contract negotiator, Paraag Marathe. This is a nice public relations move by the team to show it’s doing everything it can to sign the player, although probably not something that will have much effect.

This negotiation has been dissected by many, including myself and my NFP colleague Bob Boland yesterday. Here, though, is a more in-depth look into the issues and the points of contention that may be taking place:

Term

Parker’s calling card is to try to negotiate the shortest length possible on contracts.

In Green Bay, I negotiated two first-round picks with him in the past five years—for Ahmad Carroll in 2004 and Justin Harrell in 2009—and like clockwork, Eugene’s first and foremost request was a contract of four years in length, matching the number of years required to reach free agency. Parker understands that the most important thing about a first contract is to set up the second contract, where the true money is made.

Recently, Parker has negotiated two remarkable wide receiver contracts, those of Larry Fitzgerald in 2008 and Greg Jennings in 2009. Beyond the top-of-market APY (Average Per Year) and guaranteed money of these deals, Parker was able to have a term of four years in length, allowing both Fitzgerald and Jennings to have another shot at the free agency spending spree before they turn 30. These are gold standard contracts.

When I negotiated the contract of Jason Peters for the Eagles with Parker this spring, Peters was made the highest-paid offensive lineman in the NFL, but only with a six-year term. Parker fought hard but eventually agreed to a six-year deal kicking and screaming along the way.

Although there hasn’t been a four-year deal in the first round for 10 years—not since Parker client Chris McAlister in 1999—Parker will try with Crabtree, knowing he will have to let go of that demand but try to use it as a bargaining chip for a concession. He does not have any leverage to ask for that term.

These deals are for five or six years. The 49ers are willing to pay more guaranteed money to have a six-year deal, but Parker will take less to have the five-year term, a term he will accept while feigning disappointment to not get a four-year.

Total Base Contract and Guaranteed Money

Despite all the banter about whether Crabtree, the 10th pick in the draft, deserves to be paid like a top five or top-seven pick, that argument is a nonstarter—and Parker is smart enough to know that.

The contract of B.J. Raji at No. 9 is the most relevant. Normally, the team would try to slot in Crabtree between Raji and the 11th pick, Aaron Maybin, but the 49ers have generously not even tried to slot Crabtree, focusing on the Raji deal above.

Raji has a five-year deal (it’s written as a six-year but voids to five with minimum play time) with a conventional option bonus/one-time incentive structure. The base deal is worth $22.5 million; the guaranteed amount is $17.7 million (79 percent of the base contract). The increases from the 2008 pick, Keith Rivers, are 14.6 percent for total and 14.7 percent for guarantee.

This is essentially the deal that the 49ers have offered, bringing Crabtree right to the brink of the pick before him. It has not closed the deal, however, a huge source of disappointment for the club, as it would be for me if I were doing this deal.

The Escalator

The escalator provides upside in the contract based on the player’s performance. This is where things get tricky. In negotiating another first-round receiver’s deal this summer, I spent many more hours on the negotiation of the escalator than the hard dollars of the deal on Jeremy Maclin’s contract with the Eagles.

Issues to be resolved include the following:

- the year(s) in which the ability to escalate kick in;
- the year(s) in which the salaries start to escalate;
- the thresholds for the ability to escalate—number of receptions, number of touchdown receptions, amount of reception yardage, playing time percentages, etc.;
- ability to void the contract prior to expiration due to superior performance;
- honors escalators for all-rookie, rookie of the year, Pro Bowl, other honors.

These are all negotiations in themselves, creating upside for the player beyond his base contract. The 49ers are certainly trying to adjust these escalators to penalize Crabtree for time missed this year, while Parker is trying to infuse these escalators with easier thresholds and levels of performance while pushing most of the performance criteria past this season.

Parker created a monster with the rookie contract of Fitzgerald, who earned so many escalators early in his contract that the deal became unworkable for the Cardinals, with cap numbers approaching $20 million in the latter years.

Thus, Fitzgerald and Parker had extraordinary leverage in last year’s extension with the Cardinals when he received the striking contract discussed above. This is what the 49ers are trying to avoid with the escalator.

Raji had a maximum escalator of $6 million, with $5.3 million of play time, $700,000 in honors incentives. $1.8 million of the escalator was in the fourth year, $4.2 million is in the fifth year.

Parker is seeking considerably more, in line with Darrius Heyward-Bey’s maximum escalator of $15.8 million, although $6.5 million of it is what we consider “fluff,” escalators that rival the performance of a Jerry Rice or Randy Moss—funny money that the team doesn’t expect to be earned.

First-Year Money

The 49ers would like to have a larger base salary to inflict some sort of penalty (1/17th per week) for Crabtree missing these games early in the season.

Parker and Crabtree want the minimum salary, meaning that Crabtree is only missing out on 1/17th of first-year minimum ($310,000, or $18,000 a week)) and the rest in the form of roster bonus or signing bonus, earnable upon signing the contract, unaffected by this holdout period.

So, to answer a question many people have emailed me, what would I do if I were representing the 49ers? Not much different than what they’ve been doing, but here are some guidelines:

1. Maintain a positive working relationship with Parker despite the holdout. Patience is required here because Eugene is as composed as they come and will not be influenced by fan or media pressure to sign. He has probably imbued Crabtree with some of the same.

2. Try to cut through the charade of the player wanting to be paid outside of the slot. For every argument like that, the team could say that if they didn’t draft him, he may have slid way down the draft and they could be negotiating around the fact that they saved him a lot of money by taking him. He was the 10th pick, for better or worse.

3. Offer a substantially similar APY and guarantee as the Raji deal, a generous offer off of a reasonable deal done by the Packers. It’s more than the 49ers want to pay and takes the deal to the brink of jumping the slot ahead and potentially rewarding the player for holding out, but my sources say that deal has been contemplated all along.

4. Offer upside escalators between the amount of Raji and the amount for Heyward-Bey, although have a great deal of “fluff” in the escalator—performance levels only achieved by the top receivers in the game. This lets the player shout to the world that his contract has a maximum value of, say, $35 million, while everyone inside the industry knows it’s really a deal of $22 million, with another $6 million of reachable escalators. The team will also make sure the escalators are evenly balanced for performance in years one through four, extracting a penalty for missed time this year.

5. Insist on a six-year term, knowing they would agree to a five-year term. I believe, however, they are beyond posturing about years at this point.

6. Insist that much of the compensation for 2009 be in the form of guaranteed salary rather than a combination of that plus signing bonus, roster bonus, etc. With a cap number of $2 million, if the entire amount was salary, Crabtree would be losing $118,000 per week missed, a $100,000 difference compared to what he would be losing with minimum salary. With that structure, the team does not need to make hollow threats about lowering the offer. It will be lowered automatically.

7. Be as nice and patient as possible. The more that Parker, or any agent for that matter, can create angst and anger from a front office, the more they are getting inside the heads of management. Never let your adversaries become your enemies.

8. Crabtree appears to have a healthy opinion of himself. I never engaged in personal discussions of “who’s better” with agents or players; there was nothing to be gained from that. I would appeal to Crabtree’s sense of self with heavy upside at high levels of performance. One tenet of negotiations that I hold paramount is the following: Never underestimate the importance of ego and insecurity.

The 49ers do a good job in contract negotiations and have certainly thought through all of these issues. This is a tough one, but the mark of a good negotiator is to never let them see you sweat. The 49ers have to be frustrated, as are their fans and media, but they have to keep their eye on the ball.

As they know, these few weeks are about five years of contract. This, too, shall pass, and the Crabtree summer of discontent will be a distant memory...I think.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

The National Football Post is a unique and premier online source of quality and credible news, information and insight about all sides of football featuring professionals with experience in all facets of the NFL.

Wednesday Why's: The Reason for Veteran Signings

Andrew Brandt — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 07:14:00 -0400

Why Are Teams Now Starting to Sign Vested Veterans?

The financial ramifications of signing vested players became much less severe on Monday. As I wrote last week, any vested player on a roster at the start of the regular season is required to be paid his full salary—as termination pay—in the event he’s released. That requirement was significantly reduced as of Monday.

Now, a vested veteran must only be paid one-quarter of his salary or one-quarter of the minimum salary for a 10-year veteran ($845,000, one-quarter being $211,000), whichever is greater. That’s a long way from a full salary. It is this quirk in the CBA that causes teams to think twice about retaining veterans on the roster bubble prior to the first game.

Vested veterans signing this week include quarterbacks Jeff Garcia and A.J. Feeley, linebacker D.D. Lewis, wide receiver Bobby Wade, guard Sean Mahan and running back Verron Haynes.

In the case of Haynes, he was cut on Saturday as the Falcons avoided full-year termination pay while still paying him for the week (any player on the roster on Tuesday of the week receives his weekly pay). He was re-signed on Monday, thus not missing a paycheck yet only due the lesser termination pay if he’s released again.

Why Did Commissioner Roger Goodell Not Suspend Charles Grant and Will Smith of the Saints for Their Positive Drug Tests?

Although Grant and Smith tested positive for Bumetanide, the same banned diuretic that Pat and Kevin Williams of the Vikings did, the commissioner ruled that for competitive reasons the two Saints players would get similar treatment as the two Vikings players despite the fact no legal ruling exists for Grant and Smith to be treated as such.

As written here on Monday, Minnesota state law—an employee-friendly testing policy— NFL-has-few-options-in-Williams-case.html" target="_blank">trumped the CBA in allowing Pat and Kevin Williams to continue playing.

Although no such case or precedent exists in Louisiana, the commissioner felt that suspending these players for the same positive test as the Williamses—although certainly within his power—would upset the all-important competitive balance that exists between teams.

In theory, Deuce McAllister, also originally suspended for use of the same substance yet not currently on an NFL roster, would also not be required to serve a suspension should he sign with a team.

All of this creates a messy and chaotic scenario for enforcement of any positive test of this substance, exactly the kind of disorder and confusion the NFL abhors. The appellate court's ruling in the Williamses’ case has the league and the union still buzzing.

The parties are astounded that a collectively bargained agreement can be ignored due to a state law, meaning that the same thing could happen throughout the league, rendering the Policy for Substance Abuse impotent.

Why Is There Still One Saints Player Who Has to Be Upset Over These Rulings?

The first player suspended for use of Bumetanide was Saints guard Jamar Nesbit. Nesbit started the process of uncovering the suspect labeling of the StarCaps product and filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer.

Nesbit served a four-game suspension last season, losing more than one-quarter of his 2008 salary. He also recently took a pay reduction with the Saints to avoid being released. He must be shaking his head (and fist) watching other players avoid suspensions for ingestion of the same product he took.

Timing is everything. Nesbit’s wasn't good.

Why Are The Financial Consequences of the Michael Crabtree Holdout Not Severe Enough to Cause a Dramatic Reaction?

The way that contracts of top rookies are structured allows Crabtree to continue to be absent without dramatic financial consequences. Unlike veteran contracts, such as those of Richard Seymour and Dunta Robinson, both of whom reported in the last week in order to receive hundreds of thousands of dollars in Week One salary, rookie contracts are structured much differently and, in an odd twist, in a way that does not discourage this type of behavior.

As with many of the first round deals negotiated this and every year, Crabtree's base salary this season will be at or close to minimum. The bulk of his compensation—both this year and for the contract as a whole—will be in bonuses: roster bonus, option bonus, signing bonus, one-time incentive bonus, future workout bonuses, etc.

So the only amount Crabtree has potentially lost on his contract by missing the first game is 1/17th of the rookie minimum ($310,000), or approximately $18,000.

That is, of course, unless the 49ers are "modifying" their offer with each missed game (more on that below).

An area of the contract that a long absence could affect is the escalator, a mechanism to increase future salary and, in some cases, bonus payments based on established levels of performance.

For a receiver, the levels revolve around number of receptions, reception yardage and touchdowns. Establishing the thresholds for these levels and the amounts accorded to each is a process that can take longer than the negotiation for the hard money of the contract (I speak from experience, having just participated in negotiating Jeremy Maclin’s contract with the Eagles).

Crabtree has missed one game and there’s no end in sight, thus reducing his chance for early production on his contract. The levels of production may still not be agreed on, but his chances to earn escalators based on 2009 production will continue to dwindle.

So Why Is Crabtree Continuing to Hold Out?

For the same reason Brett Favre could continue to make the Vikings wait on a decision—because he can.

Crabtree has an offer on the table that essentially matches the deal given to the pick above him, the Packers’ B.J. Raji. Now the president of the team and son of the owner, Jed York, has reportedly requested a meeting. That’s a sign the 49ers are still negotiating in good faith with no sign of contentiousness.

Until the 49ers present significant consequences to not taking that deal, which my source says they have not done, Crabtree feels he can continue to wait.

Why Is the Threat to Reduce the Offer to Michael Crabtree a Risky One?

It isn’t, as long as the team is prepared to follow through with the threat. If not, the threat is a hollow one and will demonstrate to Crabtree and the rest of the team that the front office has more bark than bite. Crabtree and his agent, Eugene Parker, know they have the leverage of being a player the team was thrilled to draft and sees a strong future for.

We have reached a test of wills in San Francisco; Parker and Crabtree continue to have faith that the 49ers will blink first. Despite reports that Crabtree will sit out the season and enter the 2010 draft, I don't believe it for a second. He has until Nov. 17 to sign before that can become a reality. That’s a long time.

And now for my Pet Peeve Why of the Week:

Why Do We Hear About Mark Sanchez Being Destined for Greatness After One Win Against the Texans?

I get the fact that Sanchez represents a great deal of hope and is the future of the New York Jets. However, the one highlight of the game that keeps rolling is a touchdown pass from Sanchez to Chansi Stuckey in which the nearest Texan is not even in the picture. Let’s see where Sanchez is in a couple of months.

Join me today at 3:30 p.m. for a live chat where I’ll answer questions about the business of football and the inner workings of the game. See you then.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

NFL Has Few Options in Williams Case

Andrew Brandt — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 09:34:00 -0400

National Football Post

Before discussing the landmark decision regarding Pat and Kevin Williams on Friday, a couple of comments.

As to last night’s game, I have long referred to Greg Jennings of the Packers as a special player. Greg is not the fastest, strongest, or biggest receiver, but he finds the ball and has incredible balance, hands, and body control.

I remember the early morning of draft day 2006 when Packers scout Eliot Wolf rolled tape of this kid from Western Michigan and said he would be our player in the second round. He was, and recently was extended to a whopping contract extension. Kudos to Eliot for locking in on Jennings.

As for the Bay Area dramas, Richard Seymour has reported for duty in Oakland; Michael Crabtree has not reported in San Francisco. Seymour had a lot more to lose. His salary of $3.65 million calls for him to make $215,000 (1/17th) by reporting and playing tonight.

Crabtree, however, will likely make the minimum salary, as most of his compensation will eventually be in the form of bonuses and potential escalators. Thus, he only forfeited 1/17th of $310,000, or $18,000, by missing Sunday’s game.

Williamses Win

Pat Williams

In a stunning opinion Friday, a federal appeals court ruled that Pat and Kevin Williams of the Vikings were NFL-cant-suspend-Williams-wall.html" target="_blank">cleared to play for the entire 2009 season, despite the fact the NFL had suspended them nine months ago for violating its Policy and Program for Substances of Abuse by testing positive for a diuretic that masks the presence of steroids.

I teach my first class of the semester today in sports law, and we now have a new addition to the syllabus, an astounding result as the federal policy favoring the sanctity of collectively bargained agreements between employers and employees has been disturbed here.

The opinion is on our site for anyone who cares to read it. It reflects a result that is antithetical to the uniformity that the NFL hopes to achieve with players and teams through the application of a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) that was negotiated by the league and the players.

What happened in court Friday?

A three-judge panel of the Eighth Circuit United States Court of Appeals essentially ruled that the NFL did not have complete jurisdiction over its drug-testing program, allowing the courts to get involved and sending this case back to state court to weigh the merits of the NFL policy against the protections of the Minnesota laws, a process that will take place some time after the season.

The court held that the Williamses' claims were predicated on Minnesota law, not the NFL’s CBA, nor its testing policies. Therefore, no interpretation of the CBA was necessary, and state law would apply.

The court found that, despite the policy of preference for federal labor policies trumping state laws, this was not intended “to displace any state law they found inconvenient…” saying, “...such a rule of law would delegate to unions and unionized employers the power to exempt themselves from whatever state labor standards they disfavored.”

But aren’t players responsible for what’s in their bodies and subject to suspension?

Kevin Williams

Yes, according to the NFL, that is a strict liability policy. Whether a player is taking a cold medication, a weight-loss pill, or any other substance, he’s completely responsible for what’s in his system and faces penalties for positive tests. That, however, is how the NFL interprets it, not necessarily how the courts in Minnesota interpret it.

What about the Minnesota state laws is different than the NFL testing policies?

The Minnesota Drug Testing in the Workplace Act (DATWA) has rigid guidelines and procedures as to how and when employers can test employees, standards that are tougher for employers than the NFL requires in its Policy for Anabolic Steroids and Related Substances. These guidelines are more employee-friendly than most other states. What are those employee protections? Among them, the employer must:

- Provide employee who tests positive written notice, an opportunity to explain that result, and ability to request a re-test at the expense of the employee;
- Not discharge or discipline the employee until positive tests verified;
- Give first-time offenders the chance to get treatment before action is taken.

Notwithstanding that, however, the league hopes it doesn’t have to worry about different applications in different states. It thought it had a uniform policy that was immune from state-by-state interpretation. That argument was rejected by the court as the ruling was that the players’ state law claim is independent of the NFL CBA.

The court ruled that the CBA cannot and does not pre-empt the state law claim, even if it results in potential anarchy among the many teams and states with NFL teams.

What about the players for the Saints? Will they be protected in the same way?

Charles Grant

Not likely. Louisiana does not have the same protections for employees that the DATWA has in Minnesota, nor a Consumer Products Act, which is also present in Minnesota and was helpful to the Williamses, as well, in this case.

Charles Grant and Will Smith of the Saints are still subject to serve their four-game suspensions imposed by the league for their positive tests, as is the unsigned Deuce McAllister. It will be interesting to see how strongly the league pursues those suspensions, which were imposed 10 months ago.

What happens now?

The NFL could appeal to the United States Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, which could obviously decline to hear the case.

The NFL could also request that the entire panel of judges on the Eighth Circuit review the case, although it’s unlikely the court would do so after its own three-judge panel issued a ruling. In other words, the league’s options are limited.

Can states’ drug-testing procedures trump those of the NFL?

With this ruling, evidently. There is a real potential for anarchy in the drug-testing environment of the NFL and, for that matter, every league that has a collectively bargained drug testing policy.

Spokesman Greg Aiello of the NFL said Friday: “The real losers today are the players on 31 other clubs who no longer live under the same rules as players on the Minnesota Vikings—a result of the NFL Players Association's failure to stand behind the program it negotiated with the league.”

Does the state law in the NFL player contract trump the CBA?

That is now the question. In Paragraph 22 of the standard NFL player contract, the language states, “This contract is made under and shall be governed by the laws of the state of ________.”

The contracts of the Williamses obviously have “Minnesota” in that space. Although all NFL player contracts are ultimately governed by the Collective Bargaining Agreement, this case raises the question as to which source of governance trumps the other.

This is not over. Stay tuned.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

Now It's "We" Time in the NFL

Andrew Brandt — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 08:34:00 -0400

National Football Post

As of Thursday night’s scintillating opener, another NFL season is upon us, seven long months since a meaningful snap was last taken.

I have always referred to football’s long offseason as “me” time, when players seek to get the best they can get for themselves, with the interests of the team being secondary. We have now finally reached “we” time, when teams galvanize together in the ultimate team sport, a sport where the absolute best players in the game are on the sidelines for at least half of it.

And what an offseason of “me” time it was. It included:

Anquan Boldin

- Annual contractual gripings by regulars such as Anquan Boldin and Chad Ochocinco.

- Massive contract extensions for players who used the strong leverage of impending free agency (Nnamdi Asomugha, Jordan Gross).

- Unrestricted free-agent deals that set new standards of pay for defensive linemen (Albert Haynesworth), linebackers (Bart Scott) and centers (Jason Brown).

- Franchise players who leveraged their status into megadeals (Matt Cassel, Terrell Suggs).

- Traded players who complained their way into better situations (Jay Cutler, Jason Peters).

- This year’s poster child for what’s wrong with rookie compensation, Matthew Stafford, now the NFL’s highest-paid player in terms of guaranteed money at $41.7 million.

Michael Vick

Perhaps the two most talked about players in the 2009 NFL offseason were not members of any NFL team until a couple weeks ago. Michael Vick has resurfaced with the Eagles, a team that presented him with the best option for redemption, as his other choices for employment would not have set him up well for the future.

And, of course, my old friend Brett Lorenzo Favre finally agreed to a date with the Vikings, who had been asking him out for more than a year.

Note on Favre: I’m amazed at how many people ask why Favre made the Vikings wait, why he couldn’t make up his mind, why he acts the way he does, etc. The answer is very simple: Because he can. Had the Vikings threatened to pull the plug or lower the offer at any time, we may have seen different behavior from Brett.

And, of course, what would an NFL offseason be without bad behavior?

Donte Stallworth gave us a chilling reminder of how a blink of an eye can change a career and, much more tragically, a life.

Plaxico Burress gave up his self-delusion that he would get another large contract and avoid jail time and finally accepted reality and took the plea bargain for his crime.

Brandon Marshall

Brandon Marshall was suspended for conduct detrimental to the Broncos due to his scripted insubordination.

Now, however, “me” season is over, and as we look into the crystal ball for the 2009 season, it’s important to remember the adage, “The more things change, the more they stay the same.” There will be some constants in 2009, such as:

- The teams that have been built for sustained success—Giants, Packers, Eagles, Patriots, Colts, Chargers, Steelers, Titans, Ravens, etc.—will likely continue to have success.

- The teams drafting high in the 2009 NFL Draft—due to a poor record in 2008—will likely have the top choices in the 2010 draft, due to a poor record in 2009.

- Wide receiver divas such as Terrell Owens, Marshall, Ochocinco, Boldin, and others will have production on the field but cause headaches for their teams off it. Memo to Denver: Throwing money at Marshall will not solve the problem. Step away from the bargaining table now!

- A month from now, there will be three or four teams talking about 2010 already. So much for 2009.

- Brett Favre will give weekly press conferences where he’ll say things like, “I’m not saying....” which means he is saying, “I don’t care about records...” and “This will be my last year...” And people will believe him.

- Teams will be very hesitant to extend contracts this season (save for a record-setting deal to come soon for DeMarcus Ware) due to, in some cases, cash flow issues, but in most cases because of the great uncertainty about a future that appears to include no salary cap in 2010 and potentially no football in 2011.

Roger Goodell

- Commissioner Roger Goodell and NFL Players Association executive director DeMaurice Smith will do more negotiating in the media than with each other about a new Collective Bargaining Agreement. Only a deadline—perhaps Mar. 1—will spur action.

- The combative relationship between the NFL and cable companies over carriage of NFL Network will continue, with the league holding to its price and insistence on not being placed on a sports tier.

- The tweeting issue will not go away. The league has covered the problem of tweeting immediately before and after games, but the individualistic nature of tweeting at times will outweigh the team-first mentality that coaches, management and the league desire. We have not seen the last of the tweaking of the tweeting rules.

- The blackout rule will be adjusted, although not enough to please teams and fans.

- Flatline coaches such as Andy Reid and Bill Belichick will frustrate fans and media with their platitude answers but will continue to win.

- Emotional and fiery coaches such as Tom Cable and Mike Singletary will delight fans and media with their outbursts as their teams will have similar mood swings.

- Richard Seymour will play for the Raiders and Michael Crabtree will sign with the 49ers; the financial consequences are too severe for them not to.

And, of course, the National Football Post will be publishing every day to bring you the best news, information, insight and opinion available about the sport we love. Enjoy the games and enjoy the NFP.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

NFL Wednesday Whys: Critical Time for Cap Planning

Andrew Brandt — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:34:00 -0400

National Football Post

Why is today such an important day of the year for the NFL salary cap?

Today marks the turn of the calendar in which all players on teams count toward the salary cap.

When the 2009 league year started on Feb. 27, that date marked the beginning of the “Top 51” view of the salary cap. In other words, from Feb. 27 until today, only the highest 51 salaries on a team counted toward the cap, with all amounts below those falling out.

That allowed teams to do two things: (1) carry full rosters of 80 players with only the highest 51 counting, and (2) net the cost of signing new players against the 51st salary.

For instance, if a team signed a new player for a salary of $1 million, it would knock out the 51st salary on the team that was, say, $350,000, meaning the team only need to have $650,000, not $1 million, of available room to sign the player.

As of now, every single team expense counts against the cap: players 52 and 53, all eight practice squad players, all LTBE (likely to be earned) incentives, all workout bonuses, all roster bonuses, all prorated signing bonuses, all salaries on injured reserve, all injury settlements, all grievance charges, all non-roster (dead) money from players no longer on the team, etc.

It all counts, and it will all continue to count, as there is no cap-dumping into the subsequent year for the first time (since there is no cap next year).

Cap planning becomes paramount at this time of year, and this year more than any other, as teams must budget accordingly to effectively use their remaining cap room—as, again, none can be carried over into 2010—while leaving room for any potential earned incentives and/or extensions.

Why is it unlikely that veteran players such as Jeff Garcia, A.J. Feeley, Zach Thomas, Jon Runyan, Sean Mahan and others will be signed this week?

The reason is the rule requiring vested veterans who are on opening-day rosters to receive full salary in the form of termination pay if they are released. Teams are careful to note any vested players on their roster at the start of the season, as they are financially committed to them for the year.

This doesn’t mean that these players won’t be signed soon, but it’s unlikely to be this week. After this week, the requirement to vested players is a four-week requirement, a far cry from a full year.

Teams routinely play the circumvention game during this week, signing a vested veteran early in the week and releasing him before the weekend, thus avoiding the termination pay requirement.

In that case, the player gets paid his week’s salary but doesn’t count on the opening-day roster for those purposes. I’ve seen firsthand teams play fast and loose with these rules, and it was frustrating to deal with from a competitive standpoint.

Why hasn’t Richard Seymour reported to the Raiders, and why are his options very limited?

Seymour has been Oakland.html" target="_blank">slow to report to the team that just acquired him through a trade, the Oakland Raiders. Why? You know the answer: Follow the money.

Seymour is in the last year of his contract and is approaching the wrong side of age 30. Thus, he would certainly like some assurances—the financial kind—about his future.

Those assurances could come in the form of a formal promise by the Raiders not to tender him as the franchise player next year, or they could come in the form of a new contract.

Once he reports to the Raiders, his leverage for a new contract lessens. So he is likely using this time to try to influence some concessions from a team that has been very, shall we say, player-friendly in compensation.

Having said that, the Raiders have the leverage here.

Seymour, as part of the NFL Players Association and its collectively bargained agreement with the NFL, is subject to trade and having his contract assigned to another club, as it has been.

He can report or be subject to the reserve/did not report list, which would force him to miss the season (as the Patriots did with Terry Glenn a few years ago).

Seymour does not have a no-trade clause in his contract, a rarity in the NFL (only the Redskins’ Andre Carter and the Cardinals’ Larry Fitzgerald have them).

The only unknown factor is the wording of the trade papers between the two clubs. In the event there is some requirement about signing Seymour to an extension or the like, things could be different.

My sense is that Seymour will be in uniform on Monday night to collect 1/17th of his $3.7 million salary, or $217,650 in pay for the week.

Why are Matthew Stafford and Mark Sanchez starting for their teams in Week One of their careers?

Follow the money. The Lions ($41.7 million in guaranteed money) and the Jets ($28 million) want to start getting some ROI (return on investment) as soon as possible.

And for my Pet Peeve Why of the Week:

Why, in team preseason scouting reports, do writers discuss released players in the context that teams will miss them?

If the Colts were going to miss Marvin Harrison, if the Saints were going to miss Deuce McAllister, if the Buccaneers were going to miss Derrick Brooks, if the Cowboys were going to miss Terrell Owens, they wouldn’t have let them go.

No one should forecast these teams’ seasons as if the players left willingly when the teams tried to keep them. That wasn’t the case.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

NFL Cutdown Weekend: Financial Impact

Andrew Brandt — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 09:02:00 -0400

National Football Post

The way my crazy mind works, I always look at players released during cut-down weekend and focus on the money teams wasted by paying them significant amounts—only to flush them out to the street with golden parachutes months later.

In managing player costs for the Packers, the league’s only publicly-held franchise, for nine years, I always thought in terms of what was in the best interests of the shareholders. I believed that we—as employees of the team—were stewards of this national treasure called the Green Bay Packers and had a fiduciary duty to our fans and stockholders to serve their interests financially.

Here are some prominent examples of what just happened that may raise some financial eyebrows:

$ands of Time

The Raiders have been rumored to have cash issues. They have struggled with a lack of funding for a new stadium and the need for more revenue sharing among the clubs as they fall further down the revenue rankings of the NFL.

That, however, didn’t stop them from excessive spending in 2008, including massive deals for players such as Tommy Kelly, Javon Walker (now cheaper to keep than release), DeAngelo Hall (released after eight games), Gibril Wilson (released after one season), and now Terdell Sands (released this weekend).

Sands was in Green Bay when I was there; he was as big a defensive lineman as I have ever seen. He showed brief flashes of ability but ended up disappointing, playing only one game with the Packers. Sands hooked on with the Raiders and showed enough to earn a four-year, $17 million deal in 2007, which I used as a comparable in negotiating the contract of Packers' defensive lineman Cullen Jenkins.

Sands received a $4 million signing bonus as part of that deal and $1 million in offseason bonuses this year before his release. For a team struggling for revenue, Sands was another expensive mistake who pocketed millions of dollars before being set free to work for a minimum contract—at best—elsewhere.

The Raiders have also forfeited their top pick in the 2011 draft to acquire Richard Seymour from New England, a pick that’s expected to be quite high. But given the exorbitant cost of guaranteed money for previous first-rounders such as JaMarcus Russell, Michael Huff, Darren McFadden, and Darrius Heyward-Bey, it will be a welcome non-expense.

The problem with acquiring Seymour is that he’s a free agent after this season. The Raiders run the risk of either (1) renting a player for one year and giving up the extremely high cost of a potential top pick, or (2) having to extend Seymour for top-of-market defensive lineman money, potentially upwards of $35 million guaranteed—which is, coincidentally, the price of a top-five draft pick.

The Raiders keep adding to the cost side of their ledger while worrying about the revenue side.

It’s Good to be a McCown

The signing of Luke McCown in Tampa Bay earlier this year shows how long an offseason it is in the NFL and how things can change dramatically. When the Bucs rewarded McCown with a two-year, $7.5 million contract with $2.5 million in an upfront bonus in February, he was their starting quarterback. This was certainly not a typical backup quarterback deal.

But that was then, this is now. Since then, the Bucs drafted Josh Freeman in the first round and added veteran Byron Leftwich. And on Saturday, McCown was no longer a Buc, having that contract traded by the team with a parting gift of his $2.5 million already earned. The Jacksonville Jaguars now assume the contract, but it’s for salary and incentives only, as the bonus has been paid.

This is the second time in two years that a McCown brother has signed early in the offseason for $2.5 million in guaranteed money and then been traded at cut-down time due to changing circumstances.

Last year, Josh McCown was the victim/beneficiary of the Brett Favre drama in Green Bay: The Jets’ acquisition of Favre led to the release of Chad Pennington, which led to the Dolphins’ acquisition of Pennington and the trading of McCown to Carolina, who assumed the contract with the bonus having been paid by the Dolphins early in the 2008 offseason.

Other financial notes on the cuts

• No one values draft picks, especially those as high as the second round, more than Packers general manager Ted Thompson.

Brian Brohm, last year’s second-round choice of the Packers (and his $1.5 million guaranteed money that came with the contract), was released and then signed to the practice squad, leaving only 2008 seventh-rounder Matt Flynn as insurance for Aaron Rodgers (who is now one of the most important players in the NFL a year removed from being a backup).

The Packers haven’t given up on Brohm, but the true test will be when a team comes calling to add him to their roster. What will the Packers do then?

• The duo that played a role in one of the most memorable plays in Super Bowl history is no longer part of the NFL.

On Saturday, the Giants released David Tyree, recipient of the dramatic catch on top of his helmet in last year’s scintillating victory over the Patriots. The player covering Tyree, Rodney Harrison, retired earlier in the offseason after not receiving enough interest to continue playing.

That play happened 18 months ago. How quickly things can change.

• Dunta Robinson, a franchise tag player with the Texans who has missed every second of the six-month offseason, will now sign his tender and report to the team. With training camp per diems of $2,000 a week and no obligation to be there, Robinson has stayed away. Now, with regular-season checks beginning this week—his franchise tender salary is $9.957 million, meaning a weekly check for 1/17th of that amount, or $585,706—he will report. You think?

• I heard that the Chiefs offered Zach Thomas the “retirement” option before they released him, an option taken by Tedy Bruschi last week. He refused and was released, still wanting to play. We’ll see.

The Harsh Truth About Cutdown Day

Andrew Brandt — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 08:12:00 -0400

National Football Post

First, a comment on the opening salvos in the pending negotiations between the NFL and the NFL Players Association on a new collective bargaining agreement: Pay no attention to the rhetoric.

We’re in a full-on posturing phase as the two sides present their cases to the media and public. On the union side, executive director DeMaurice Smith has harped on the “show us your books” argument, to which the league has responded that it has shown enough.

On the league side, senior executives have said that they are not only expecting but are comfortable with an uncapped year in 2010, figuring it will hurt the players more than it will help them. The recent Forbes value rankings for all clubs—which I’ll address in detail next week—will be a new subject for both sides to put their spin on. The bottom line is that both sides aren't negotiating yet; they are still posturing.

On to cutdown day...

Unless they have no heart, and have become immune to emotion through the cold business of the National Football League, this weekend is the hardest weekend of the year for front offices and coaches to manage from a personal, as well as professional, stance.

Approximately 25 percent of the players who have been working for them for months will now be pushed into a flooded market with hundreds of other players looking for a handful of open NFL jobs. By Labor Day, the labor force in the NFL will have shrunk by a quarter.

Being on the Same Page

Andy Reid and the Eagles' front office personnel will have tough roster decisions to make by Saturday.

Cutdown day also shows the symmetry, or lack thereof, of teams’ front offices. Every team tries to have the three areas of the football operation—coaching, personnel and contract/cap management—on the same page, but inevitably one of the three prongs wields more influence. The makeup of the final roster is a defining moment for the power source of the team because these decisions can have lasting effects for years.

Coaches tend to favor older players familiar with their systems and more dependable in tense situations. They will sacrifice higher upside to have a better insurance policy in place.

Personnel staffs tend to prefer young players they have brought in to develop. They fear the prospect of those players playing for someone else after the investment made in them. They advocate patience with draft choices, even from previous years, rather than pushing them farther down the depth chart or off the team. Also, younger players usually play special teams; veteran players are more reluctant to do so.

Cap and contract managers play advisory roles in the process, mapping out scenarios of cap room and cash commitments with different rosters. I would often have up to 10 roster scenarios, and the cap/cash commitments associated with each. Cap/contract managers are also responsible for monitoring the risk on vested players, for whom the team is fully responsible for the year’s salary if the player is on the roster the first weekend of the season.

Also, of course, cap/contract managers have to allow for budgets for practice squad, injured players, injury settlements, injury replacements, planned contract extensions, planned earned incentives, etc. With the rules changing this year due to no cap in 2010, these forecasts are more important than ever.

The Bane of Teams’ Existence: Injuries

Injury discussions are the most vital conversations of the weekend. The type and length of injuries of players on the roster bubble are debated intensely; roster decisions have to be made that affect whether these players will be kept on the roster, released, released with an injury settlement or placed on season-ending injured reserve. For players with four- to six-week injuries, such as MCL strains, high-ankle sprains, and hamstring injuries, these decisions are especially difficult.

This is also the time when players are placed on reserve/injured with injuries that are, uh, season-ending. Officially, the team doctor has to certify that the injury is “major,” which qualifies it for a minimum six-week time frame and can leave the upper time limit indefinite.

As to confirming the veracity of such injuries, the league has spot-checkers who appear at team headquarters to check on them. However, this seldom happens; in my nine years with the Packers, I encountered one spot-checker.

As to the underbelly/unknown side of what really happens with injuries, there are situations that no one would believe unless they were there. I was always amazed that on the morning after the last preseason game, there would suddenly be a couple of injuries to players who were about to be released. These players checked out fine after the game, but had mysteriously developed injuries that would require them to receive their pay over the coming weeks or months (teams can’t release injured players; if they do, they’re subject to grievances).

Tim Couch, the former top pick in the 1999 NFL Draft, was a player who never solicited treatment in his time in Green Bay, but ended up filing a grievance for his elbow. I always wondered what happened to these players between the last preseason game and cutdown time that would eventually earn them tens, even hundreds, of thousands of dollars? I’m not saying...I’m just saying...

Cutting Down to 53 and 45—and Adding, and Cutting Again

Steve Spagnuolo may find a few players on the waiver wire that are upgrades to players on his current roster.

After all the debates and harangues in cutting the roster to 53, which usually include a more detailed discussion of what the game-day roster of 45 will look like, a team’s front office and coaches take a deep breath—and then it’s time to scour the league waiver wire for players who are better than the ones they have, sparking more debate about the 45- and 53-man rosters.

A staple of cutdown weekend is trade talk. The usual conversation between teams involves which players may be available, and the bluffing about how many teams may be interested if the team were to release the player.

The good personnel staffs are able to sift through the posturing and have conviction about the players they want and what they are willing to do to acquire them. The vast majority of players who are discussed are eventually released, and the majority of trades that occur are in exchange for the minimum allowable trade compensation, a “seventh if” pick—the trading team gets a seventh rounder if the traded player is on the 45- or 53-man roster for a certain number of games—in a future year.

Dreams Deferred and Dashed

This is a tough weekend. Hundreds of players have been working intensely for months, many since January, doing everything the team has asked them to do. Many of them had little or no chance of making the team from the moment they signed, but clung to dreams of turning enough heads to get a shot.

Now a member of the personnel staff is calling them, asking them to come by and start the process of handing in playbooks and taking exit physicals with trainers.

Almost half the group that assembled five weeks ago for training camp in any NFL city is gone. Although around 250 of those players will come back Monday as practice squad players, there is no time in the NFL calendar that displays the true cold, hard nature of the business as much as this one.

As I’ve said to dozens of players, it’s the numbers; there just aren’t enough spots. It’s not personal. Even when I said it, I knew it was a cliché, but what else can you say?

Enjoy the Labor Day weekend, despite the shrunken NFL labor force.

Be sure to get the best fantasy football products anywhere here at the National Football Post.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

Wednesday Whys: Was Umenyiora's Snit About Money?

Andrew Brandt — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 09:37:00 -0400

National Football Post

Why was Osi Umenyiora’s one-day absence from the Giants perhaps about more than a flare-up with a coach?

Sorry for being jaded, but after being in the business of pro football for so long, I have to believe that Umenyiora’s one-day snit was related to his contract, one that he perceives has been outdated for some time.

The greatest myth of all quotes is, “It’s not about the money,” which translates to, “It’s all about the money.” It usually is, especially when the player says it’s not.

Osi took notice and, although he has not resorted to any dramatic stances, has expressed a low rumble of discontent since.

For players who signed long extensions in 2004 and 2005, there tend to be issues. Even if the player has a strong sense of security about the contract, he’s constantly reminded by the whisper crew—other players, competing agents, hangers-on—that he is underpaid compared to extensions signed in 2006 and beyond.

The NFL salary cap went up dramatically when the Collective Bargaining Agreement was extended in 2006. Here are the recent amounts:

2004: $80.5M
2005: $87.5M
2006: $102.5M
2007: $109M
2008: $116M
2009: $123M

Players such as Umenyiora who received extensions before 2006 have taken note and expressed various degrees of discontent.

It’s not known how much Umenyiora was fined, although missing practice could cost him close to $9,000. The Giants set a strong precedent with fines for Plaxico Burress last year; this is another opportunity for coach Tom Coughlin to set a tone.

Umenyiora’s situation may be fine and his brief absence much ado about nothing. Also, the Giants do a nice job with their contract management. Having said this, something tells me we may not have heard the end of it.

Why are “retirements” like the one Tedy Bruschi of the Patriots announced this week not really retirements at all?

The vast majority of NFL players do not retire voluntarily. Most are “retired” by their teams via phone call from someone on the personnel staff to hand in their playbooks, a process that ended hundreds of contracts Tuesday and will do the same this weekend.

In some cases, players not only meet with the personnel staff but also with either their position coaches and/or coordinators upon their departure.

And in rare cases, the club’s head coach will visit with the player upon his release, especially if the team wants to get a young player back on the practice squad or has genuine interest in bringing him back later in the year.

Cases like Bruschi’s are even a smaller minority. These are players who are inextricably linked to the franchise and strongly identified with the brand. In these cases, there is a more formal sendoff such as the one Monday that included effusive praise from coach Bill Belichick.

Bruschi was certainly deserving of such praise. He is one of the most intense individuals I have ever met, as I remember negotiating with him to come to the Packers years ago when he was a free agent—he was acting as his own agent—and came away with great respect for him as a negotiator (he was honest that he was unlikely to leave New England, even if we offered more money).

What is interesting, however, is that these flowery tributes are mostly to players that would gladly stay on the team if asked. The team, however, has decided to go “in a different direction” and would like to keep everything on a high level rather than have to place the player on the waiver wire.

Over the past couple of years, we’ve heard the Patriots extol the virtues of players such as Willie McGinest, Rodney Harrison, Troy Brown and Bruschi (who was in training camp practicing with the second team). I’m sure all of them would have continued to play if the Patriots had asked, which they didn’t.

There are examples all over the league of teams speaking in glowing terms of players as if they’re signing them to a big new contract rather than (as nicely as possible) asking them to leave.

In Green Bay, we dealt with these situations with players such as LeRoy Butler, Dorsey Levens, William Henderson, Santana Dotson, Earl Dotson, Frank Winters, Gilbert Brown, Antonio Freeman and others. And, of course, there was that situation with a former quarterback who decided he didn’t really want to leave but had no choice.

The teams that no longer employ players such as Derrick Brooks, Deuce McAllister, Marvin Harrison, Warrick Dunn and others speak in shimmering terms about them much in the same way the Patriots did about Bruschi. These players would much prefer another contract than the kind words.

Why did Ricky Williams not use an agent in negotiating an extension to his contract?

Ricky Williams is as different a person as I’ve met in professional sports. His retirement a few years ago to travel in India and Asia didn’t surprise me in the least. His decision to come to an agreement with Bill Parcells without the use of an agent is certainly fitting for him. He has been through several agents; now he’s representing himself, par for the course for Ricky.

How do I know so much? I was his agent once -- his first agent, in fact, the one he had before he left for the inimitable Master P. I spent two years working with Ricky and will never forget that time, even if it ended with him choosing a rapper over me to represent him with the Saints.

More on my life with Ricky in a future column.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

Why Osi Umenyiora's Absence From Camp Was About Money

Andrew Brandt — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 08:42:00 -0400

National Football Post

Why was Osi Umenyiora’s one-day absence from the Giants perhaps about more than a flare-up with a coach?

Sorry for being jaded, but after being in the business of pro football for so long, I have to believe that Umenyiora’s one-day snit was related to his contract; one that he perceives has been outdated for some time.

The greatest myth of all quotes is, “It’s not about the money,” which translates to, “It’s all about the money.”

It usually is, especially when the player says it’s not.

Umenyiora signed an extension with the Giants for $41 million over six years in 2005, a high-end deal at the time. Not long after the ink was dry on that contract, the marketplace changed for quality defensive linemen. Osi took notice and, although he has not resorted to any dramatic stances, has expressed a low rumble of discontent since.

For players who signed long extensions in 2004 and 2005, there tend to be issues. Even if the player has a strong sense of security about the contract, he’s constantly reminded by the whisper crew– other players, competing agents, hangers-on- that he is underpaid compared to extensions signed in 2006 and beyond.

The NFL salary cap went up dramatically when the Collective Bargaining Agreement was extended in 2006. Here are the recent amounts:

2004: $80.5M
2005: $87.5M
2006: $102.5M
2007: $109M
2008: $116M
2009: $123M

It’s not known how much Umenyiora was fined, although missing practice could cost him close to $9,000.

The Giants set a strong precedent with fines for Plaxico Burress last year; this is another opportunity for coach Tom Coughlin to set a tone.

Umenyiora’s situation may be fine, and in the end, his brief absence may just be a blip in the offseason radar, but one thing we have learned, is that the Giants do a nice job with their contract management. Having said this, something tells me we may not have heard the end of it.

Why are “retirements” like the one Tedy Bruschi of the Patriots announced this week, not really retirements at all?

Tedy Bruschi retired this week.

How much influence did the Patriots have in the decision?

In some cases, players not only meet with the personnel staff, but also with either their position coaches and/or coordinators upon their departure. In rare cases, the club’s head coach will visit with the player upon his release, especially if the team wants to get a young player back on the practice squad or has genuine interest in bringing him back later in the year.

Cases like Bruschi’s are even a smaller minority.

These are players who are inextricably linked to the franchise and strongly identified with the brand. In these cases, there is a more formal sendoff such as the one Monday that included effusive praise from coach Bill Belichick.

Bruschi was certainly deserving of such praise. He is one of the most intense individuals I have ever met, as I remember negotiating with him to come to the Packers years ago when he was a free agent. At the time, he was acting as his own agent, and I came away with a great deal of respect for him as a negotiator (he was honest that he was unlikely to leave New England, even if we offered more money).

There are examples all over the league of teams speaking in glowing terms of players, as if they’re signing them to a big new contract rather than (as nicely as possible) asking them to leave.

In Green Bay, we dealt with these situations with players such as LeRoy Butler, Dorsey Levens, William Henderson, Santana Dotson, Earl Dotson, Frank Winters, Gilbert Brown, Antonio Freeman and others. Of course, there was that situation with a former quarterback who decided he didn’t really want to leave, but had no choice.

The teams that no longer employ players such as Derrick Brooks, Deuce McAllister, Marvin Harrison, Warrick Dunn and others speak in shimmering terms about them, much in the same way the Patriots did about Bruschi. These players would much prefer another contract than the kind words.

Why did Ricky Williams not use an agent in negotiating an extension to his contract?

Ricky Williams is as different a person as I’ve met in professional sports.

His retirement a few years ago to travel in India and Asia didn’t surprise me in the least. His decision to come to an agreement with Bill Parcells without the use of an agent is certainly fitting for him. He has been through several agents; now he’s representing himself, par for the course for Ricky.

How do I know so much?

I was his agent once-his first agent, in fact-the one he had before he left for the inimitable Master P.

I spent two years working with Ricky and will never forget that time, even if it ended with him choosing a rapper over me to represent him with the Saints.

More on my life with Ricky in a future column.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

Brandon Marshall Plan Has Precedent

Andrew Brandt — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 09:34:00 -0400

National Football Post

Before getting to my opinion and similar experiences regarding the Brandon Marshall imbroglio, it’s worth noting that we are down to one unsigned rookie in football.

Andre Smith signed. Will Michael Crabtree be next?

Andre Smith has agreed to terms with the Bengals, leaving Michael Crabtree as the last pick standing from the 2009 NFL Draft. I’ll have complete numbers on Smith soon, but it appears the Bengals have successfully disregarded the Raiders’ contract with Darrius Heyward-Bey immediately below Smith, the No. 6 pick, and used the Jaguars’ deal with another offensive lineman, Eugene Monroe, picked No. 8, as the most relevant comparable.

As to reports that Smith’s deal is for four years, do not believe it for a minute. No team in the first round is going to pay the type of guaranteed money required and not tie up the player for at least one year of potential free agency.

The option on Smith will be exercised in March. The Bengals would not commit $21 million in guaranteed money for a four-year contract.

As for Crabtree, my strong sense is that he and his agent, Eugene Parker, have a date in mind when they will close this deal and finally report. That date is in the next two weeks, probably Sept. 6, 7, or 8. Do not fret. Crabtree will sign. They all do. More on him later this week.

Baby Brandon

Brandon Marshall has become the latest test case in the NFL for players who engage in insubordinate and team-destructive behavior in their ongoing attempts to get out of their current situations. Marshall is the latest in a line of players who resort to conduct that’s detrimental to the team and their teammates, all orchestrated to become such a pain in the you-know-what that the team just wants to rid itself of the player/problem.

Will Brandon Marshall sour the Broncos' season?

The most celebrated of these distractions were Keyshawn Johnson with the Buccaneers and Terrell Owens with the Eagles. In those cases, the coaches and front office literally paid the players to stay away, lest they infect the locker room any more than they already had with their petulance.

Packer Petulance

In Green Bay, I dealt with these situations a couple of different times with Mike McKenzie and Javon Walker. For reasons I still don’t completely understand, both players wanted out of Green Bay.

Their initial problems were with their contracts, but there was much more to it than that—they felt disrespected by coaches, they felt uncomfortable with the social scene in Green Bay, they felt some animosity from teammates, etc. Simply, they wanted out.

As I said, both players claimed it was not about the money (which translates to “It’s all about the money”). In the case of McKenzie, he perceived racist comments about his dreadlocks.

In the case of Walker, he felt that Brett Favre had betrayed him in criticizing his contract stance and had an ongoing rivalry/jealousy/competition on and off the field with Donald Driver.

In both cases, these players were not the same people who came to Green Bay as high draft choices. Success had clearly changed them. Ultimately, they were dealt for second-round draft choices (who turned into Pro Bowlers Nick Collins and Greg Jennings).

The Marshall Plan

Is Marshall following in T.O.'s Philly footsteps?

The game plan for players such as Marshall has been laid out repeatedly. Step One is a request to have the contract renegotiated to reflect the new marketplace, pointing to recent deals of players who the player thinks are inferior in talent. When rebuffed in those efforts, the player usually moves to Step Two: the trade demand.

When the team expresses no interest in trading the player, it’s on to Step Three: express a rumble of discontent throughout the offseason and training camp, followed by a repeated request for the agent to be granted permission to seek a trade.

The goal of this behavior, usually orchestrated by the agent, is to try and create enough angst and worry among the front office and coaching staff that they feel like the best option is to try and get value for the player and move on.

Marshall has taken the syllabus to another level—used by McKenzie in Green Bay and Owens in Philadelphia—in Step Four: not trying in practice, showing no respect for the game or his team and infecting young players in the locker room with negativity.

The Portis Principle

It’s ironic that the team involved is the Broncos. For those out there who do not like the tactics of one Drew Rosenhaus in his efforts to get players out of their current situations, this whole game plan began with a Bronco, Clinton Portis.

Portis, who switched to Rosenhaus from his previous agent in hopes of getting out of Denver, hit the trifecta: He got out of Denver, got his wish with a trade to Washington and landed the biggest running back contract in the NFL—all in the same transaction. Rosenhaus has traded on that experience in attracting many new clients, including McKenzie, Walker, Owens, Anquan Boldin, Lito Sheppard, Plaxico Burress and many others.

Tough Precedent

Clinton Portis triggered a long list of recent headaches for Broncos management.

The Broncos were also the unfortunate losers in an arbitration involving former player Ashley Lelie, another player who wanted out and eventually got his wish.

When the Broncos pursued arbitration to recover bonus money paid to Lelie after he refused to report to camp, they lost a landmark case that allows NFL players to keep option bonuses previously paid, a ruling that deemed those monies “earned,” unlike signing bonus money that has forfeiture provisions.

The Lelie case has had dramatic ramifications in structuring contracts of top picks in the draft, including the deal for one of the Broncos’ two top picks this year, Robert Ayers.

And, of course, the Broncos dealt with a similar situation earlier this year with their quarterback, Jay Cutler. Cutler had an unpleasant introductory meeting with new coach Josh McDaniels and that relationship never recovered, leading to the trade of the year in the NFL.

Now the Broncos are dealing with this issue again. They have suspended Marshall and issued a warning of “escalating discipline” to come. Marshall will likely continue his bad behavior with the goal of a Portis/Cutler type of result.

Meanwhile, the NFL Management Council is advising the Broncos’ front office to document, document and document some more, advising copious notes on every action or non-action by Marshall toward whatever discipline they want to impose.

The option of renegotiating Marshall’s contract has to be off the table now. It would not only set a terrible precedent in the Broncos’ locker room but also continue to enable Marshall and his questionable conduct.

If Marshall—who barely has escaped a league suspension after two domestic violence incidents—has been a problem making lower wages, he will certainly not become a better citizen with money in the bank. Throwing money at this problem will not solve it.

A Common Problem

In talking to many people in NFL management, there’s a common theme that this is a problem that needs fixing—soon. Agents and players are realizing there is little downside to this strategy. Marshall probably feels he can act out for a while during training camp and the per diem of less than $2,000 per week and eventually shape up to collect his $2.2-million salary when the season starts.

Or he can continue this formula and see if he actually gets traded and perhaps even a sparkling new contract. At this point, there are very limited financial consequences to Marshall for his childish behavior.

There will be a lot of focus on the economics of the coming collective bargaining negotiations between the NFL Players Association and the NFL in the coming months, specifically the percentage of football revenues shared with players, rookie salaries, etc. Beyond these matters, however, this Marshall issue of bad behavior to force a trade is something that will draw a lot of attention from the league.

Every team in the league has dealt with or is dealing with some form of this. If a team says otherwise, it is lying. This is a problem that’s getting worse, not better, and Marshall’s behavior is cause for concern for every team and league official. Something needs to be done here as it represents another important issue teed up for bargaining.

Follow me on Twitter: @adbrandt

Brandon Marshall Plan Has Precedence

Andrew Brandt — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 09:34:00 -0400

National Football Post

Before getting to my opinion and similar experiences regarding the Brandon Marshall imbroglio, it’s worth noting that we are down to one unsigned rookie in football.

Andre Smith signed. Will Michael Crabtree be next?

Bengals-sign-Andre-Smith-holdout-over.html" target="_blank">Andre Smith has agreed to terms with the Bengals, leaving Michael Crabtree as the last pick standing from the 2009 NFL Draft. I’ll have complete numbers on Smith soon, but it appears the Bengals have successfully disregarded the Raiders’ contract with Darrius Heyward-Bey immediately below Smith, the No. 6 pick, and used the Jaguars’ deal with another offensive lineman, Eugene Monroe, picked No. 8, as the most relevant comparable.

The Bengals would not commit $21 million in guaranteed money for a four-year contract.

As for Crabtree, my strong sense is that he and his agent, Eugene Parker, 49ers-GM-optimistic-about-Crabtree.html" target="_blank">have a date in mind when they will close this deal and finally report. That date is in the next two weeks, probably Sept. 6, 7, or 8. Do not fret. Crabtree will sign. They all do. More on him later this week.

Baby Brandon

Brandon Marshall has become the latest test case in the NFL for players who engage in insubordinate and team-destructive behavior in their ongoing attempts to get out of their current situations.

Marshall is the latest in a line of players who resort to Broncos-season.html" target="_blank">conduct that’s detrimental to the team and their teammates, all orchestrated to become such a pain in the you-know-what that the team just wants to rid itself of the player/problem.

Will Marshall sour the Broncos' season?

The two most celebrated distractions were Keyshawn Johnson with the Buccaneers and Terrell Owens with the Eagles. In those cases, the coaches and front office literally paid the players to stay away, lest they infect the locker room anymore than they already had with their petulance.

Packer Petulance

In Green Bay, I dealt with these situations a couple of different times with Mike McKenzie and Javon Walker.

For reasons I still don’t completely understand, both players wanted out of Green Bay.

Simply, they wanted out.

As I said, both players claimed it was not about the money—which translates to “It’s all about the money.”

In the case of McKenzie, he perceived racist comments about his dreadlocks.

In the case of Walker, he felt that Brett Favre had betrayed him in criticizing his contract stance and had an ongoing rivalry/jealousy/competition on and off the field with Donald Driver.

The Marshall Plan

Is Brandon Marshall following in T.O.'s Philly footsteps?

The game plan for players such as Marshall has been laid out repeatedly.

Step One is a request to have the contract renegotiated to reflect the new marketplace, pointing to recent deals of players who the player thinks are inferior in talent.

When rebuffed in those efforts, the player usually moves to Step Two: the trade demand.

The goal of this behavior, usually orchestrated by the agent, is to try to create enough angst and worry among the front office and coaching staff that they feel like the best option is to try to get value for the player and move on.

The Portis Principle

It’s ironic that the team involved is the Broncos.

For those out there who do not like the tactics of one Drew Rosenhaus in his efforts to get players out of their current situations, this whole game plan began with a Bronco, Clinton Portis.

Portis, who switched to Rosenhaus from his previous agent in hopes of getting out of Denver, hit the trifecta. He got out of Denver, got his wish with a trade to Washington, and landed the biggest running back contract in the NFL—all in the same transaction.

Rosenhaus has traded on that experience in attracting many new clients, including McKenzie, Walker, Owens, Anquan Boldin, Lito Sheppard, Plaxico Burress, and many others.

Tough Precedent

Portis triggered a long list of recent headaches for Broncos management.

The Broncos were also the unfortunate losers in an arbitration involving former player Ashley Lelie, another player who wanted out and eventually got his wish.

When the Broncos pursued arbitration to recover bonus money paid to Lelie after he refused to report to camp, they lost a landmark case that allowed NFL players to keep option bonuses previously paid, a ruling that deemed those monies “earned,” unlike signing bonus money that has forfeiture provisions.

The Lelie case has had dramatic ramifications in structuring contracts of top picks in the draft, including the deal for one of the Broncos’ two top picks this year, Robert Ayers.

And, of course, the Broncos dealt with a similar situation earlier this year with their quarterback, Jay Cutler.

Cutler had an unpleasant introductory meeting with new coach Josh McDaniels and that relationship never recovered, leading to the trade of the year in the NFL.

Now the Broncos are dealing with this issue again.

They have suspended Marshall and issued a warning of “escalating discipline” to come.

Marshall will likely continue his bad behavior with the goal of a Portis/Cutler type of result. Meanwhile, the NFL Management Council is advising the Broncos’ front office to document, document, and document some more, advising copious notes on every action or non-action by Marshall toward whatever discipline they want to impose.

Throwing money at this problem will not solve it.

A Common Problem

In talking to many people in NFL management, there’s a common theme that this is a problem that needs fixing—soon.

Agents and players are realizing there is little downside to this strategy. Marshall probably feels he can act out for a while during training camp at the per diem of less than $2,000 per week and eventually shape up to collect his $2.2-million salary when the season starts.

Beyond these matters, however, this Marshall issue of bad behavior to force a trade is something that will draw a lot of attention from the league.

Every team in the league has dealt with or is dealing with some form of this. If a team says otherwise, it is lying.

This is a problem that’s getting worse, not better, and Marshall’s behavior is cause for concern for every team and league official. Something needs to be done here as it represents another important issue teed up for bargaining.

Michael Vick Finally Has a Plan

Andrew Brandt — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 09:09:00 -0400

National Football Post

The Real Importance of Thursday for Vick

Thursday was an extremely important day for the future of Michael Vick, although not for the reasons that many football fans think. Much of the focus has been on his on-field debut with the Eagles, his first action in the NFL in two years.

While that was intriguing, the real importance of Thursday was that a bankruptcy court approved a plan for Vick to repay creditors and move on with his financial life.

Thanks to the Eagles and the new contract given to Vick and a renewed sense of reality in repaying more than $20 million to creditors, Vick displayed a much more favorable plan to satisfy his creditors, a far cry from an unworkable arrangement he and his team presented months ago.

As I always say to players until I’m blue in the face, it’s what they keep, rather than what they make, that is truly important.

Vick was the highest-paid player in the game a few years ago, rewarded with a $120 million contract in 2004 at a surprisingly early stage of his career and still a delicate age of 24. Five years later, he is working out a bankruptcy plan.

Judge Frank Santoro approved the plan only on the condition that Vick retain a personal financial planner to manage his future earnings with the Eagles, saying that Vick has proven himself unable to manage his finances in the past. You think?

It’s fascinating to me that Judge Santoro ordered Vick to retain a financial planner. Has Vick not had a financial planner before, in years where he was earning upwards of $10M a year? Or perhaps that was the problem, that he had a planner who failed.

As to his future earnings with the Eagles, in a relative sense they’re modest, earning him $100,000 per game this season for a salary of $1.6M, right at the average for an NFL player.

Whoever that financial manager is, he or she would be best served to be cautious with that amount, as the future is still unclear.

Even in the event Vick is on the Eagles’ roster around March 5 of next year, when he will earn $2.5M guaranteed and $5.2M total compensation, there isn’t much a financial planner can do with him except be as conservative as possible and pay off his considerable debt.

As I have noted often, players with issues rarely seem to be acting solo. A common problem with many professional athletes is that they are surrounded by the herd: friends, wanna-be friends, advisers, gurus, cousins, uncles, former coaches, competing agents, etc.

Controlling and corralling the enabling herd is one of the most difficult jobs for the player and his representative.

And wait until Vick gets his bill from the people he praised after the plan was approved: his lawyers. That will be a big one.

Treasure to Trash

This week’s version of a team’s treasure to trash features Ernest Wilford. A year ago, Wilford signed a first-day free-agent deal with the Dolphins, a much-heralded signing designed to bring a big and (hopefully) productive receiver into their fold.

Jacksonville.html" target="_blank">Now Wilford and his free-agent contract, one of the worst deals of 2008, are gone, sent to the trash bin one season after the treasure.

Wilford produced three catches for 25 yards for the Dolphins. With a $6 million bonus and $1 million in salary last year, his production equated to $2.33M per catch, perhaps the most money per reception in the history of the NFL.

Wilford now returns to the team where he was developed and earned his free-agent contract, the Jacksonville Jaguars. I guess you can go home again, especially for a minimum contract.

Rice, Rice Baby

Well, at least Wilford’s minimum salary (if he makes the Jaguars) will be about seven times that of Simeon Rice. Rice, the third overall pick in the 1996 draft and a three-time Pro Bowl player, is reportedly signing with the New York Sentinels of the UFL.

In 2003, Rice signed what was then the highest contract for a defensive lineman, joining the Buccaneers for a record $41 million over five years, with nearly half that amount guaranteed.

Now he has agreed to play for the UFL-mandated salary of $35,000, the amount the new league said it would pay its players with the exception of one quarterback per team.

Without NFL Europe or the Arena Football League, the UFL currently is the only other option to the NFL for professional players.

This option is for young players coming up short in their attempts to make NFL rosters, players who washed out of the NFL after some brief experience (J.P. Losman), and now a player or two with accomplished NFL backgrounds not ready to hang up their cleats.

Rice, at 35, will certainly be an elder statesman for the Sentinels, provided he’s willing to take on that role.

When I was general manager of the Barcelona Dragons of the World League years ago, we had a player in a very similar situation to Rice. Bruce Clark was a Lombardi Award winner (the first junior to win the award) at Penn State.

He was drafted as the fourth overall pick in 1980 by the Packers but chose the Canadian Football League over Green Bay. He eventually played eight seasons in the NFL for the Chiefs and Saints before ending his career with us in Barcelona.

Bruce bristled a bit at being so much older and more accomplished than most of our team (and league) but eventually became a person who took charge on and off the field, a true man among boys at that level and a natural leader for the team in many ways.

Brett Favre is certainly not the only player who has a hard time giving up the game. For the vast majority, however, the NFL retires them before they can retire themselves. Now Rice, like Bruce Clark in Barcelona, has an option to keep playing and is willing to do so.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

Wednesday Whys: No Complaints from Rivers

Andrew Brandt — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 09:03:00 -0400

National Football Post

Why was it expected that Philip Rivers would sign a mega-contract extension prior to the start of the season?

Rivers was the other shoe to drop after the Eli Manning extension in New York. With the market set the past year and quarterbacks such as David Garrard, Tony Romo, Aaron Rodgers and Matt Cassel receiving guaranteed money in the $20-million range, with APY(average per year) in the $10-million range, the stage was set for these two to do their deals. As the Chargers and Giants noted, there was not going to be much in the way of new comparables over the season to influence where the market might go.

Philip Rivers' contract extension is worth $98 million and lasts through 2015.

The complicating factor in all negotiations now, of course, is the expiration of the Collective Bargaining Agreement after next season, a season that presently does not include a salary cap. Were the Giants or the Chargers to allow these contracts to expire, they would face the prospect of (1) losing the player in free agency to a team with deep pockets to spend on the rarest of assets – a franchise quarterback not under contract; or (2) placing the franchise tag on the players in an uncertain environment in 2010 and – even more so – beyond.

The Chargers still have a long shopping list of their own free agents in 2010, including Shawne Merriman, Darren Sproles, Vincent Jackson, Chris Chambers and Marcus McNeill. Bringing Rivers under contract is a key first step in what could be in an interesting year ahead for the team’s fortunes and finances.

The Rivers extension lasts through 2015 and is worth $98M, with $38M guaranteed. It’s eerily similar to the recent deal for Eli Manning in APY over the first three years: $16.95 million for Manning and $16.75 million for Rivers. The guarantee amount is larger than that given to Manning and is the largest guaranteed quarterback money in the history of football, not including a QB who has yet to take a real snap in the NFL, Matthew Stafford.

Rivers can’t complain about Stafford, however. For one, Stafford’s deal probably helped his negotiation. Also, Rivers was once one of those top-pick contracts that everyone complained about, a player making more than most veterans without having played a game.

The enormity of rookie contracts has helped Manning and Rivers, not only when they were the ones with those contracts but now that they can point to the more recent ones to help their leverage.

Why has there been no discussion of extensions for the league’s two true superstar quarterbacks, Tom Brady and Peyton Manning?

These two players, arguably the most important players in the game, have contracts that expire not at the end of this year but at the end of next year. As they watch other players with a fraction of their accomplishments get rewarded with extensions, they have to be wondering when their time will come.

Of course, these A-list players are making top-tier money even for deals signed in 2004 (Manning, $14M average) and 2005 (Brady, $10M average). However, we need not be naïve as to the fact they’re watching an escalating market for lower-echelon players.

Having said this, my sense is that neither player will receive an extension any time soon. There’s a big difference in the present circumstances between a contract expiring after 2009, preceding an uncapped year, and a contract expiring after 2010, preceding the great unknown. As I mentioned above, with the CBA expiring after 2010 and rumblings about a lockout in 2011, teams will be hesitant to extend players expiring then, even the top players in the game. The landscape is just too uncertain right now.

Is a contract extension on the horizon for Tom Brady?

Earlier this offseason, Eagles-closing-in-on-agreement.html" target="_blank">the Eagles addressed their franchise quarterback, a fellow named Donovan McNabb, whose contract expires after 2010. While doing so, they did not change the fact his contract expires after 2010. That, in itself, is telling about the future of football as we sit here today, a future as uncertain as another quarterback’s future whose contract expires after 2010 (one who now plays for the Minnesota Vikings).

Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. Their names evoke football royalty. They, however, are watching and waiting while other quarterbacks receive big paydays. And they may be waiting a while.

Why was Larry Fitzgerald’s contract restructuring more about the moving of cash than of cap?

Fitzgerald agreed to defer some cash but actually took on more of a cap charge in 2009 in doing so.

In one of the more interesting restructures in the NFL this year, Fitzgerald agreed to take $3M of his $4.6M salary in the form of a roster bonus rather than in salary. The roster bonus has already been earned, yet the payment date is now March of 2010. Thus, Fitzgerald agreed to help the Cardinals’ cash flow by deferring until March what would have been salary paid from September to December.

The Cardinals, in consideration of Fitzgerald’s doing so, moved $150,000 from his 2010 salary into the 2009 roster bonus (also paid March 2010).

Why did the Cardinals do this? One can only assume that cash flow issues are the reason. As to the creation of cap room to ostensibly allow for an extension for Anquan Boldin or others, that is certainly not the case. Fitzgerald’s cap charge actually went up $150,000 as a result of bringing forward that amount from 2010.

An interesting twist on a contract that has been known as one of the more player-friendly deals in the league.

And now for my pet peeve Why of the Week…

Why did coach Marvin Lewis of the Bengals allow Chad Ochocinco to kick an extra point and kickoff in a preseason game last week?

This was cute and allowed for some ESPN SportsCenter moments for the Bengals. But why would Lewis encourage more attention-seeking behavior from one of the game’s true divas? Hasn’t Ochocinco had enough of putting himself in front of the team, whether through annual whining about his contract, racing horses, boxing or whatever else he’s allowed to get away with? Putting him in the game as a kicker only enables his “look-at-me” behavior in the ultimate team game.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

First-Rounders are Cashing In

Andrew Brandt — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 09:47:00 -0400

National Football Post

While we all wonder when the two last picks standing—Andre Smith of the Bengals and Michael Crabtree of the 49ers—will put their signatures on documents that will provide them with long-term financial security, I thought I’d look at three other picks in the top 10 who have actually done so. Smith and Crabtree will eventually sign—believe me, they will.

Earlier in the offseason, when the first and fifth picks in the draft—quarterbacks Matthew Stafford and Mark Sanchez—inked their mega-contracts, a familiar outcry was heard about how rookie contracts are ruining the sport.

At least one veteran quarterback was happy to see it, however. Stafford’s outrageous $41.7-million guarantee—still the largest guarantee in the history of the NFL—was Exhibit A for agent Tom Condon in his recent negotiation for Eli Manning, pointing out the same inequities that the league and management point out about the rookie system that Condon and others are exploiting.

Beyond the quarterbacks, there have been some interesting deals at the top.

Tyson Jackson, Kansas City Chiefs

The contract for the third pick in the 2009 draft has the fingerprints of Tyson Jackson’s agent, Eugene Parker, all over it.

Parker is all about getting the shortest deals possible (with, of course, the most money possible). While many picks at the top, such as Stafford, opt for the maximum allowable six-year term to secure the greatest possible bonus money, Parker is always insistent on a five-year deal. He really wants deals to be four years but can’t find any support among his agent peers to try to get to that length.

I’m sure he’s trying in vain with the 49ers to procure a four-year deal for Crabtree.

Parker believes the true value in professional football is having not one, but two opportunities for a highly-leveraged contract in a player’s career. His recent deals for Larry Fitzgerald and Greg Jennings, in my opinion, are masterpiece contracts for the players since they provide top-market wide receiver earnings with an opportunity to hit free agency again in four years, at age 29, thereby maximizing their high earning potential.

Jackson received a five-year deal from the Chiefs with a total value of $49 million, or an APY (average per year) of $9.8M. He has another $8 million of upside based on his performance on defense and sack production, giving the five-year contract a maximum value of $57M, of which $31M is guaranteed. The guarantee is $3M more than Sanchez two picks behind him, another five-year contract.

It’s hard to compare Jackson’s deal to the pick last year, which was a “quarterback-premium” deal for Matt Ryan with the Falcons.

Aaron Curry, Seattle Seahawks

At No. 4, Curry went for the biggest possible bonus and guarantee in taking the six-year deal. He and his agents at Octagon also did quite well.

Curry’s six-year deal with the Seahawks is worth a total value of $48.1M, or an APY of $8M. Curry also has $12M of potential upside based on performance and sack production, giving him a six-year contract with a maximum value of $60M.

Curry’s guaranteed amount is $34 million. That’s $3M more than the pick above him, Tyson Jackson, albeit with another year on the deal.

Curry’s deal is eerily similar to the contract given recently to Chiefs quarterback Matt Cassel. That’s where we’ve come: Top picks in the draft are paid similarly to the going rate for franchise quarterbacks.

Last year’s fourth pick, Darren McFadden, received $26M in guaranteed money. Curry was able to garner an increase of more than 30 percent over last year. This also means that next year’s fourth pick in the NFL Draft can reasonably expect to receive guaranteed money on a six-year contract in the range of a 30-percent increase over $34M, or about $44M, which would eclipse Matthew Stafford as the highest guaranteed contract in the NFL! And that, of course, would be for the fourth pick, which would be bettered by the top three.

These geometric annual increases that teams are agreeing to with the top picks in the draft appear to be a vicious spiral with no end in sight—unless, and until, collective bargaining negotiations do something about it.

As I’ve written, the vast majority of rookie contracts represent a fixed (and reasonable) cost for NFL teams, but the disproportionate pay at the top is mind-boggling.

B.J. Raji, Green Bay Packers

A bit further down, the Packers came to terms with the ninth pick in the draft, B.J. Raji.

Although written as a six-year deal, it’s really a five-year deal since the sixth year is just there to contain prorated pay for the second-year option. The sixth-year voids with minimum playing time.

Raji will receive a total value of $22.5M, with $17.7M of that amount, or 79 percent, guaranteed. While Raji’s increase over Keith Rivers’ deal last year is relatively reasonable at 14 percent, the fact that nearly 80 percent of the contract is guaranteed is cause for concern among management. As the picks go further down in the round, this trend continues, with many of the picks receiving around 75 percent of their contracts guaranteed.

This has become a rallying cry for the union and the players as much as the eye-popping numbers at the top. First-round picks are becoming a new class of players in the NFL, with virtually guaranteed contracts. They're moving toward the model set in the NBA and Major League Baseball.

Whether it’s the amounts or the percentage of guarantees, rookie contracts at the top of the draft are setting off alarms throughout the league. Theoretically, teams have the leverage—the players are not going to go back to school or play another sport—but year after year, teams have a hard time saying no to these prized possessions.

Coming soon: More analysis of contracts for first-round picks as well as a deeper look inside the Eli Manning deal.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

Do broadcast deals help owners?

Andrew Brandt — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 08:46:00 -0400

National Football Post

Broadcast Deals Extended

In the midst of this economic downturn, the NFL has extended important broadcast deals with its partners for two more years. Set to expire following the 2011 season, if there is a 2011 season, the league’s deals with the following partners will run through the 2013 season: Fox, CBS, DirecTV and now NBC, as the NFL announced it has extended its six-year agreement with the network for two more seasons of Sunday Night Football. Reports indicate the extension includes an increase of two percent over current levels.

Although the exact terms of these deals have not been released, the most important point is the answer to the following question: Do payments to the NFL continue in the event there’s no football in 2011 because of a lockout of the players by ownership?

Although the answer to that question is unclear regarding the network deals, a source with knowledge of them confirms that at the least, the DirecTV deal does include payments as scheduled in 2011, with or without football.

Thus, if the lockout scenario were to take place and there were no football revenues to be shared with the players in 2011, ownership would still have a revenue source coming in even without the games. Of course, we’re a long way from that time, but the discussion will continue to ramp up over the coming months.

Just the Facts, Plax

Plaxico Burress is headed to jail for two years

Plaxico Burress finally faced reality, perhaps for the first time in his life. An enormous talent who the Giants rewarded with a large contract extension this time a year ago, Burress has been around yes-men and enablers his entire life. As it usually is with people who have no reality in their lives, his crew has always told him what he wanted to hear rather than what he needed to hear.

Somehow, some way, someone got to Burress. Notorious for his continued self-delusional behavior, he decided not to con himself any longer and accepted a two-year prison term. In the past six months, Burress had turned down deals from both the Giants and the prosecutors. He probably wishes he took both as he now faces the harsh truth.

Venus, Serena Swim In

Stephen Ross continues to leverage celebrity in his nascent ownership of the Dolphins. First, it was Jimmy Buffett and his Land Shark Lager branding opportunity. Then Ross brought in Emilio and Gloria Estefan as minority owners, followed by Marc Anthony (and his wife Jennifer Lopez). Now, two of the most marketable and well-known female athletes in the world, Venus and Serena Williams, have joined the gathering, reportedly the latest in the group of renowned minority investors of the team. I would expect Venus and Serena would use this investment as a cross-promotion opportunity for their other brands in tennis, fashion and design.

Ross made his intentions clear by trying to find that elusive concept of “buzz” in a marketplace crowded with options. Kudos for having the gumption to try and give the Dolphins the cachet of a Lakers game in the NBA, with equal parts watching the game and gazing at the stars.

Treasure to Trash

There have been a couple of recent examples of one of my favorite mantras about free agency in the NFL: A team’s treasure can become – sooner than you’d think – its trash.

Jason David

The Saints gave Jason David a generous offer sheet two years ago, which he signed on April 30, 2007. David leveraged his Super Bowl-champion performance into a strong contract with the Saints at top-level cornerback proportions.

Two seasons later, David is gone, replaced by shinier new parts of the Saints such as free agent Jabari Greer and first-round pick Malcolm Jenkins. David went from a big free agent signing to termination in two years.

And, in a much shorter time frame, a couple of players intertwined with the Raiders were signed by their teams in the spring, only to be released in the summer. I worked on a small deal with former Raiders safety Rashad Baker with the Eagles in March – complete with a Capitol Grille dinner with Baker and his two agents – and heard the story of how he put the Eagles in the playoffs last season by intercepting a pass for the Raiders to seal a win against the Buccaneers. Baker’s upfront amount was nominal, only $25,000, but he was released this week by the Eagles.

But the Raiders signed him again, causing a ripple effect in which Oakland released venerable fullback Lorenzo Neal, who was signed on May 8 for a minimum-salary benefit contract (a contract paying Neal his 10-year minimum, but only counting as a two-year minimum against the salary cap).

Between Baker and Neal, the total amount of at-risk dollars for the teams was $25,000, and the teams are no worse for having signed them. It just shows how things can change in a few months.

Wednesday Whys: It's all About Brett

Andrew Brandt — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 08:36:00 -0400

National Football Post

Why is it no surprise that Brett Favre signed with the Vikings?

The bigger news is that this surprises anyone. Having lived through Brett’s long bouts of indecisiveness for many years, I know that this is predictable behavior from someone who’s a good guy but troubled by having to make decisions without a clear, apparent choice.

He would much rather have someone else, through his or her actions or words, make the decision for him.

On June 20, 2008, Favre had “the conversation” with Packers coach Mike McCarthy. Brett expressed his desire to get his helmet back from the Packers, a conversation that the Packers certainly should have expected. That’s when McCarthy said those three poignant words: “We’ve moved on.” That stung Brett and continues to resonate more than a year later.

Favre is back...to the surprise of nobody.

Through all the drama about Brett over the past several years, I have never felt any sense of closure from him about playing football. He retired a year ago because he wanted the Packers to court, woo and recruit him to play another year, as they had in the past. But he didn’t get that affection from the team he felt he had put into the national consciousness.

Brett wanted the Packers to make the decision on his return last year so that he wouldn’t have to. As it turned out, they did (it’s no coincidence that Brett retired on the day Randy Moss returned to the Patriots after another brief dalliance with the Packers in free agency).

I always felt Brett wanted to do in football what Roger Clemens was able to do in baseball: join a team early in the season, bypass the minutiae of training camp and the offseason and just play the games. Now he’s able to do that—sort of.

Why is there also no surprise as to the team signing Favre?

The Vikings have placed an added value on players and coaches associated with Green Bay. Brad Childress strategically used the fact he was about to interview with the Packers to secure a contract with the Vikings before boarding a plane to Green Bay.

The Vikings paid premiums for players such as Darren Sharper and Ryan Longwell and chased other Packers players such as William Henderson, Craig Nall and Aaron Kampman.

They even took a coaches’ assistant away from Green Bay. Now they’ve landed the biggest fish that ever swam in the Green Bay waters, albeit a year removed from being a Packer.

Brett wanted to play for the Vikings last year, and there was mutual interest. That, thanks to the Packers controlling his rights, was not an option. The Vikings left the light on for him for over a year and he finally accepted their long-standing invitation. The early financial returns on his signing validate their decision from a financial point of view.

Darrell Bevell was the quarterbacks coach in Green Bay from 2003-2005. Interestingly, Brett took a while to warm up to Bevell—Darrell had to earn Brett’s respect as a young coach with little experience, and Brett had a hard time listening to him. They eventually developed a relationship, which is the genesis of this marriage.

Why is the contract he signed déjà vu all over again?

When I negotiated Brett’s 10-year, $100-million contract with his agent, Bus Cook, for the Packers in 2001, Bus and I felt that we would be lucky to get three years out of that contract. It actually lasted until a couple of months ago when the Jets terminated the contract in order to allow Brett, for the first time in his career, to exercise his rights as a free agent.

The amounts for years eight and nine of that contract, which would have been 2008 and 2009, were $12M and $13M, respectively. Brett will make those exact amounts in a two-year, $25-million contract he signed with the Vikings.

As to this year, that amount essentially became guaranteed when Brett walked on the practice field Tuesday as he will be paid his salary were an injury to occur. As for next year, well, we’ll certainly wait out his decision again in a few months, an annual rite of spring for those who follow the NFL.

Why does Brett have the Wally Pipp syndrome?

Brett has an insecurity about him that is not logical for one of the most established players in the game. He knew how he got his job—Don Majkowski was injured—and how he could lose it in the blink of an eye. Thus, his relationships with rising young backup quarterbacks were always at arm’s length.

I saw this from afar in representing Matt Hasselbeck 10 years ago and up close in watching him and Aaron Rodgers for three seasons.

The bottom line is that he wants to continue to play, and unlike other “retired” players such as Edgerrin James, Deuce McAllister and Marvin Harrison, he had a suitor that wanted him to unretire. The fact that the suitor is a rival of the team that didn’t hold his seat while he excused himself for a couple months certainly adds to the continuing miniseries.

Brett is back, although he never really left.

Follow me on Twitter: @adbrandt

NFL Training Camp: The Last Picks Standing

Andrew Brandt — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:19:00 -0400

National Football Post

First, I ask for your indulgence to note the passing of Eunice Shriver last week. Shriver was the founder, defining voice and embodiment of a movement that will hopefully live on in perpetuity: the Special Olympics. She used her name and influence for something that resonates with every sports fan and pulls at the heartstrings of everyone of the power of hope. She was the Special Olympics.

I grew up and went to school with her sons, who were and are very involved with the Special Olympics. I remember attending an event in an area of Washington, D.C., that can charitably be described as rundown. There were gangs, sirens blaring and chaos all around us, but she cheerfully stood there handing out sandwiches to the participants and hugging every competitor.

Eunice Shriver gave thousands of people a chance. She believed in them more than they believed in themselves. She will be missed

The Last Picks Standing

As we have now entered the start of preseason games with a handful of first-round picks still unsigned, it’s time to take stock of what’s going on.

There usually ends up being a draft pick or two who, from the moment they’re selected, look as though they might have the makings of a long absence from training camp.

This year, there are two rookie deals that—from the moment the players were drafted—shaped up as difficult and challenging negotiations. What’s interesting is that Darrius Heyward-Bey, picked No. 7 overall by the Raiders, is an important factor in both.

49ers/Michael Crabtree

APShould Michael Crabtree be paid like the No. 1 receiver in the draft?

This negotiation, which I discussed last Monday, set up as a holdout from the moment Crabtree slid past the top five in the draft. The fact that the team is the 49ers is not really the issue; Crabtree would be holding out from most, if not all, teams as a player picked far below what he thought he would be.

Eugene Parker is one of the better agents in the business. He is professional and respectful. I negotiated two No. 1 picks with Eugene over a four-year span (Ahmad Carroll in 2004 and Justin Harrell in 2007) and know him to be tough but fair. Both of those picks were done without a holdout situation.

A top-10 pick, however, is a different animal for Eugene, and my sense is that Crabtree and his camp are different clients. The agent and the player have strong principles about value and will hold tight to them for, it appears, as long as it takes. Parker seems to have no interest in paying attention to either the B.J. Raji contract, done right before him at No. 9 ($18 million guaranteed), or the Eugene Monroe contract at No. 8 ($19 million guaranteed). Rather, this negotiation has been about nearing, matching or outdistancing the Heyward-Bey contract at No. 7 ($23.5 million guaranteed), a strong contract for a player Crabtree feels is not at his level.

The 49ers, of course, will stick with the slotting system that has been part and parcel of the draft compensation system since its inception, willing to slot in behind Raji.

Parker and the 49ers appear at a standstill. Parker will wait and presumably has a client with no worries about missing August. What can the 49ers do? They can pull the offer or reduce it and hope it brings the situation to the head. Parker, however, knows they won’t and will continue to wait for the right deal.

With the Crabtree negotiation on hold, the next pick, Aaron Maybin of the Bills, waits and watches. Maybin’s clear preference is to slot in behind the Crabtree deal whenever that happens, assured that the deal will look good and the player and agent will not be trumped by a more superior contract right above them.

We’re headed toward a battle of wills and a question of who will blink first with Crabtree and, by extension, Maybin.

Bengals/Andre Smith

APAndre Smith

A bit higher in the round at No. 6, the Andre Smith/Bengals negotiation has always appeared to be destined for drama. Smith was picked right behind Mark Sanchez, who had a strong deal with $28M in guaranteed money. The Bengals can rightfully play the “quarterback premium” card with the Sanchez deal, but that doesn’t appear to be the issue.

After Smith’s eventful offseason and musical-chairs games with agents, he now has to deal with a traditionally tough team in the Bengals.

As to this negotiation, the Bengals feel that the Monroe contract—another offensive lineman two picks away—more accurately set a standard for guaranteed money ($19M) rather than the Heyward-Bey contract ($23.5M) sandwiched in the middle.

The Bengals, as well as some other teams, are fans of the Jaguars, who stood their ground on a holdout last season by Derrick Harvey in the same part of the draft. The insanity at the top of the first round came to a grinding halt with the Harvey deal.

The two picks above Harvey in the 2008 draft, the sixth and seventh selections, had increases in their APY (Average Per Year) of the following:

Vernon Gholston of the Jets, 48 percent
Sedrick Ellis of the Saints, 39 percent

This is not to say that Harvey didn’t get an appropriate increase from the 2007 draft (he received a 19-percent increase); it is to say that his increase was in the more normalized range compared to picks above Harvey. The Bengals would like the Jaguars and Monroe to set the market for Smith and the Bengals rather than the Heyward-Bey contract that seems to be a factor in both of these rookie absences.

Regarding these last few rookie negotiations, as the Snickers commercial says, “This may take a while.”

Whither Strasburg?

The 49ers and Bengals may be wishing the NFL had the system now in place in Major League Baseball. There, a deadline of midnight tonight takes care of any lingering drama about whether players will sign with their teams. After midnight (sounds like a song), any unsigned draft choices from the 2009 MLB draft will have to wait for the 2010 draft to sign with a team. The deadline in baseball serves as a leverage point for both sides to end the rhetoric and haggling and do a deal -- or not.

Stephen Strasburg was the presumptive top pick in the MLB draft and represents more than a draft pick to the Washington Nationals.

Although they’ve had a surge of late, the Nationals have been a long-running sad-sack franchise back to the days of my childhood following the Washington Senators. Yes, I was a diehard Senators fan and cried when they left Washington (for the second time) and moved to Texas. Although they were the worst team in baseball, they were a team nonetheless. As the venerable Washington Post sportswriter Shirley Povich said of losing the team at the time, “Halitosis is better than no breath at all!”

Now, Strasburg’s agent, the inimitable Scott Boras, and the Nationals enter a showdown as the hours tick away. Both sides have already agreed to shatter the previous signing-bonus record for a draft choice in baseball, the $10.5M received by Mark Prior years ago. The National have reportedly made an offer in the $15-$16M range. Boras, who sees this negotiation as a chance to use his formidable leverage to create an entirely new way of paying rookie players—i.e., more like veteran free agent players – is scoffing at that record-breaking number.

This one is up to Boras and Strasburg. In the event the record-setting offer by the Nationals is not enough to bring him under contract by midnight, Strasburg will be looking at a year in an independent league or overseas, somewhere besides Major League Baseball. Perhaps he should realize that halitosis is better than no breath at all….

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

Culpepper Will Start For Lions

Andrew Brandt — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 08:49:00 -0400

National Football Post

From The Associated Press

AP Matthew Stafford

ALLEN PARK, Mich.—Daunte Culpepper will start at quarterback in Detroit's preseason opener against Atlanta on Saturday.

Lions coach Jim Schwartz said Friday that top draft pick Matthew Stafford will enter the game at some point in the second quarter of Saturday's game in Detroit.

The 32-year-old Culpepper wants to start the season for the Lions, though he knows Stafford is the team's future. The former Georgia star says he has already learned a lot from his veteran teammate.

Detroit is coming off the NFL's first 0-16 season.

Michael Vick Decision Came from the Top of the Philadelphia Eagles' Organization

Andrew Brandt — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 08:34:00 -0400

The long wait is over.

Michael Vick has agreed to terms on a contract with the Philadelphia Eagles, which assuming he passes a physical today, he will sign before participating in all team activities starting on Saturday.

With the signing, here are some answers to a few questions I have received via email:

As a Consultant with the Eagles the Past Several Months, Did You Negotiate This Deal?

I did not.

This was a matter handled at the highest levels of the organization (which certainly did not include the consultant)—ownership, head coach/general manager, and team president.

As I wrote in a general piece on the potential signing of Vick, it was an organizational decision that needed buy-in from the top of the franchise down to the bottom: from ownership to personnel, to coaching, to contract management, to community and public relations.

In the case of the Philadelphia Eagles, having the same person, Andy Reid, hold the titles of head coach and general manager allowed for a more streamlined decision to take place. Of course, this was only possible after ownership bought into the concept of having Vick represent the Eagles.

The Luries gave their consent, and the process was set in motion.

Are You Surprised by This?

Not really.

Andy Reid is an offensive coach at heart; offensive coaches like to have weapons. The more, the merrier. The dream of every offensive coordinator and coach is to have multiple ways of attacking defenses, to keep defensive coordinators from focusing on one or two options.

The Eagles' offense now is one that will keep defensive coaches working late into the nights the week before they play the Eagles.

After solidifying the offensive line in free agency, with pieces like Stacy Andrews and Jason Peters, Reid was able to draft a couple of nice weapons in LeSean McCoy and Jeremy Maclin. Having been actively involved in the deals of these four players, I knew how important they would be in the present and future of the team.

Now comes another piece, one that has the potential to be as fancy as any out there. Vick is an electrifying talent; there’s no debate there.

It will be interesting to see what he’ll eventually bring to an offense that can be an offensive coordinator’s dream. Lots of toys to play with.

What Do You Think of This Signing beyond Its Impact on the Field?

A couple of things.

First, I believe there was no greater favor Commissioner Roger Goodell could have done for Vick than "assign" Tony Dungy to be his mentor and liaison with potential NFL employers. Dungy has the utmost respect among coaches and management in the NFL, Andy Reid included. Without the endorsement and approval of Dungy, I’m not sure the Eagles or anyone else signs Vick as easily.

Whatever words or actions Vick has said or shown to him, Dungy has come away a believer. That was good enough for Reid.

On the other side of the fence, however, I learned long ago that it really doesn’t matter what people say; it only matters what they do. Vick has clearly said the right things to the commissioner, Dungy, Reid, and others.

Now he has to do the right things.

The part that always concerned me was not Vick, but what I always refer to as the "herd" that surrounds him, a large group that includes friends, family, and other enablers. It is this crew that seems to always be there for Vick to tell him what he wants to hear rather than what he needs to hear. Vick even admits in his 60 Minutes interview, to be televised Sunday, that he should have taken more control of what was going on around him with his friends and dogfighting.

Hopefully, Dungy—and now Donovan McNabb and his new teammates—will offset the enabling herd.

That will be something to watch.

What Kind of Contract Did Vick Sign?

I can’t comment directly on the contract, but I know that risk management is very important to the Eagles and all teams that considered signing Vick.

It has been reported that Vick signed a deal for this season with a club option for next year. In order to have Vick under contract for 2010, a potential uncapped year, with a year under his belt to prove to the league that any lingering character questions have subsided, the Eagles had to provide some upside in the form of bonus money going into the uncapped year.

That, however, is 2010.

In 2009, the Eagles certainly protected themselves from giving Vick at-risk money in the form of guarantees. With the reported amount being $1.6 million, that amount suggests a $100,000 sum for every game played by Vick. The key is that Vick must be on the roster to make that money. Thus, all of the money paid to Vick this year will be "earned", not given to him simply for signing his name.

The Eagles likely have a play-for-performance method of compensation in exchange for some potential upside in 2010. That represents a win for the Eagles in the short term and a potential win for agent Joel Segal and Vick next year, as the amount of the option is likely large enough to cause the Eagles to think twice about keeping Vick for a limited role.

In other words, Vick and Segal can reasonably conclude that they’ll be well compensated in 2010 for a solid performance in 2009, whether by the Eagles or another team as a free agent.

What Does This Mean for McNabb?

Nothing, other than he has another talent playing alongside him. The Eagles did not invest $6 million of no-strings-attached money in McNabb to have him in any kind of reduced role. McNabb remains the focal point of the Eagles.

Vick is just a new item added to the shopping cart.

Wednesday Whys: Dealing with Roddy White's Contract

Andrew Brandt — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 09:04:00 -0400

Why is the Roddy White contract about more than Roddy White?

Roddy White

Situations like these—with players flexing muscles about their contracts and the market passing them by—are out there for every team in the NFL. If a team says it has no such problems, it’s lying.

From a front office and management perspective, the importance of these issues is that whatever decision is made affects the entire team, not just the player who is being addressed.

White’s value and talent are not the issue, nor is the fact he had outplayed his rookie contract that payed him $2.28 million this year and elevated his game to the top echelon of receivers.

The difficult part for the Falcons and their precedent was that White hadn't reported to training camp and exhibited behavior—a nine-day holdout from an existing contract—that was not in the best interests of the team. That behavior ultimately led to the negotiation of one of the strongest contracts ever for a wide receiver.

The Falcons now have to deal with the team beyond White. What’s to prevent their other top players from withholding their services in order to gain a financial advantage?

Certainly, they can always try to distinguish White as different, which is what White’s agent successfully argued, but that argument may fall on the deaf ears of players looking for upgrades.

Contract holdouts and leverage plays are not about just the player; they’re about the team. Everyone in the locker room is watching and waiting to see how management reacts. Their response will determine whether there’s a line at the door of the front office for similar treatment.

Why won’t the Houston Texans agree not to place the franchise tag on Dunta Robinson in order to get him to sign his contract?

This echoes the question above as the Texans have realized that how they approach Robinson is a template for how they deal with players in this situation.

Dunta Robinson

Robinson and his agents would gladly agree to him signing a franchise tender and coming to training camp if the Texans would agree to language that promises to not place the franchise tag on him again in 2010, which, as we sit here today, is a year without a salary cap.

This is an allowance that was made to players such as Albert Haynesworth by the Titans and Assante Samuel by the Patriots, moves made to bring them into camp with a quid pro quo of this memorialized promise.

The Texans have said no—rightly, in my view. Their remarks have reflected that this is a decision not about Robinson but about all future franchise players or potential franchise players on the team. Once precedent is set, agents and players smell the blood in the water and want the same for themselves.

Now, Robinson will probably sit at home until the real paychecks start the week the season opens, where he will make one-seventeenth of his $9.96 million ($586,000) every week compared to his $2,000 a week during training camp. The Texans have made their decision and will live with his absence through these dog days of August.

Why was White a “holdout,” while the unsigned draft picks and franchise players were not really “holdouts”?

White was under contract and in breach of that contract by not reporting to training camp. He was subject to daily fines of approximately $17,000 and potentially other discipline depending on how long his holdout lasted.

The rookies—as well as franchise players such as Dunta Robinson—are unsigned players and therefore not “holding out” from any existing contract. They are simply players for whom the teams hold rights but do not have binding contracts. Thus the distinction.

And my Pet Peeve Why of the Week…

Why are questions even asked of coaches, players, and executives about how their teams will do this season?

What do media and fans expect them to say? Is it news that they think their teams will do well? It will be news when a coach or player says, “I don’t think we’ll win much this year, but hey, there’s always 2010!”

Believe None of What You've "Herd" in Overblown Michael Crabtree Situation

Andrew Brandt — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 09:34:00 -0400

National Football Post

I think we can chill on the hysteria about Michael Crabtree holding out the entire season and forgoing his chance to play with the 49ers. We at the National Football Post are not going to be pulling out the scouting reports on Crabtree that were done for the 2009 NFL Draft and recycle them for the 2010 draft.

Despite reports to the contrary, rumors of Crabtree spending the season watching, rather than playing in, the NFL are greatly exaggerated.

The situation appears to be one in which “herd” has entered the public debate. Having dealt with professional football players for 20 years from both the agent side and the team side, I have always worried about the herd—also known as the “whisper crew,” “posse,” “enable table,” and other names—that surrounds players.

The herd can include, although is not limited to, parents, friends, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, cousins, advisers, spiritual advisers, high school coaches, college coaches, AAU coaches, girlfriends, wives, girlfriends of wives, neighbors, godparents, surrogate parents, life coaches, etc.

It’s one thing for an agent and/or a team to deal with a player; it’s quite another to deal with the herd.

Now a member of the Crabtree crew has surfaced in a very public way. When asked about the contract negotiations between Crabtree and the 49ers, a fellow named David Wells—not the former pitcher, although just as outspoken—somehow had a forum with ESPN to give his take on the possibility of Crabtree holding out the entire season:

“We are prepared to do it,” Wells was quoted as saying. “Michael just wants fair market value. They took him with the 10th pick, and Raiders-agree-to-terms.html" target="_blank">you have Darrius Heyward-Bey getting $38 million? Michael was one of the best players in the draft, and he just wants to be paid like one of the best players.”

Mr. Wells, consider the clock ticking on your 15 minutes of fame. Wells appears to be the epitome of the whisper crew/herd I’ve been speaking about: He’s Crabtree’s cousin (we think) and (self-proclaimed) adviser. Sure he is. Too bad Crabtree isn’t Wells’ self-proclaimed advisee.

My first thought after reading this was that Eugene Parker, Crabtree’s agent, must have had steam coming out of his ears. Parker, who is actively engaged in negotiations with the 49ers, is as professional an agent as there is in the business.

Having done a dozen deals with him over the years, including the Jason Peters deal this year, there is no agent who serves his clients as well as Eugene in understanding the sensitive process of negotiating of player contracts.

Parker would never say anything to the media that was the least bit inflammatory, and certainly not in the midst of negotiations. Now he has to deal with damage control with the media, the 49ers, and the Crabtree herd to put the negotiations back on track.

The 49ers have wisely avoided comment. There is nothing to be gained by responding to a member of Crabtree’s crew, as there may be more of them who may also want a forum in the future.

None of this is to say the negotiations on this contract will end any time soon. Parker is going to push the envelope on this deal to try to nudge as close as possible to Heyward-Bey, and it appears that Crabtree has no problem missing training camp.

Indeed, with these negotiations quickly gaining a reputation in the industry as producing a contract that will be a strong deal for the player, the picks surrounding this one—B.J. Raji with the Packers and Aaron Maybin with the Bills among them—are clearly waiting to see the “Crabtree market” before closing their deals (Maybin’s agent has told people this strategy).

They may be waiting a while, and it will be up to the players to determine how long is too long.

How long will this one go? The answer will not be in the next day or so, nor will it be the entire season, as the “adviser” suggests. My best guess is that Crabtree reports for labor on Labor Day. Stay tuned.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

Behind the Eli Manning Deal

Andrew Brandt — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 08:04:00 -0400

National Football Post

My last, and unfortunately lasting, memory of my time in Green Bay was Eli Manning and the Giants outplaying the favored Packers in “Packer weather” that can charitably be described as brutal in the NFC Championship game, then advancing to the Super Bowl, where they would go on to shock the undefeated Patriots.

The Giants won those games due to a synergistic defensive scheme that applied constant pressure and an efficient offense run and led by Manning. I was skeptical about Manning (and may still be) but when he came into Lambeau in subzero weather and played that way in that big a moment, I became a fan.

And so did the Giants.

Now there are reports that the Giants and Manning have agreed to a contract extension for six years and $97.5 million, with $35 million guaranteed.

Having talked with the parties involved last night, it’s important to point out that the deal is not done yet. It has not been completed and has not been submitted to the NFL for review.

So all the numbers being bandied about are based on rumor and speculation. The National Football Post will have accurate numbers soon.

Assuming an extension is worked out, my strong sense is that Eli earned that extension primarily during a five-week stretch from the end of December 2007 to the beginning of February 2008.

Once he led the Giants through those five games with a poise, efficiency and leadership reserved usually for the top echelon at the position, including his older brother Peyton, the die was cast.

Eli, with two years remaining on his rookie contract at the time, was going to get paid. The only questions were when and how much.

As to the when, I understand why the Giants waited a year, but I can also understand if they regret waiting. I believe they waited because Manning had ultimate leverage with the Super Bowl run fresh in everyone’s mind and the glow of the playoffs upon him.

The Giants felt no rush to extend Eli in his highly leveraged position, figuring they might as well wait and see if his performance continued past the Super Bowl radiance. He also had two years left on his contract, so the team had an opportunity to receive good value from that (relatively) reasonable deal he signed as a rookie.

As to why the Giants may have regretted waiting, the market (as it always does) went north last year. Deals for less-accomplished players such as David Garrard, Tony Romo, Aaron Rodgers and Matt Cassel raised the bar for all quarterbacks.

Manning’s agent, Tom Condon, must have felt great comfort watching players such as these average $10M with $20M guaranteed, as he was representing a player with a much stronger resume. Now we’re about to see how much more the market can bear.

Another factor in the negotiation comparables has to be Matthew Stafford, conveniently also a client of Condon. Stafford’s $12M average and $41.7M guaranteed has been much discussed as an aberration, an atrocity and an abomination, but it is fact.

When we hear that veteran players are upset about rookie contracts such as these, there are some veterans who are not upset at all: Eli and Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Philip Rivers, Jay Cutler. Believe me, the Stafford contract is and will be Exhibit A in all of these negotiations.

Much is being made of Eli Manning’s passer rating, indifferent style, etc., in arguing that he’s not worthy of this contract. It’s likely the Giants never even brought that up.

The fact is that he was entering the last year of his contract entering a year without a salary cap, the market had been set with lesser players, and the Giants wanted to secure him for the future.

With these facts on the table, and with Matt Cassel recently receiving a “functional guarantee” of $35M from Kansas City, this contract is what can be expected.

The Colts allowed Eli’s brother Peyton to play out his contract before dealing with tense deadline negotiations prior to signing him to a $99M contract with a record $34.5M bonus (that amount in 2004 is still astounding).

The Giants have chosen an alternate course with the younger Manning, avoiding the franchise tag scenario as we enter a potentially uncapped year, where all bets may be off the table in terms of what could happen.

Again, we will have the true numbers of this contract when they come out. For the moment, Eli is in the last year of his contract making a nice sum of $9.4 million. That amount is about to change, and change radically.

Wednesday Whys: NFL Contract Complications

Andrew Brandt — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 09:34:00 -0400

National Football Post

Why did it take so long for the Eagles and Jeremy Maclin to come to an agreement?

I can’t shake that question right now, although in time it will be a distant memory. Having worked on the contract over the past few weeks, I have to respect the confidentiality of the deal and be sensitive to the process that was just completed.

What I can say is the same thing I’ve written many times: There is much more to these contracts than simply filling in numbers. Certainly, the amount of all the different type of bonuses—option, signing, roster, reporting, performance, etc.—are all obvious subjects of negotiation but only part of what is being negotiated.

The other parts of the negotiation—structure, payout, upside, downside, backside, cash flow, etc.—are just as important and try to address the sticky subject of risk and who assumes it: downside risk to the team if the player turns out to be below expectations or even a “bust,” or upside risk to the player if he turns out to be a superstar.

No one can predict the future (if we could, we wouldn’t have Las Vegas). Thus, negotiating a contract is trying to best approximate what might happen with a player and a team with a changing marketplace and a variety of potential outcomes. The hard money in the contract is a function of the marketplace; in the case of the draft, it’s a fairly well defined marketplace.

Often, negotiations bog down not because of money but because of other things. When I negotiated the contract of Aaron Rodgers, the 25th pick in the 2005 NFL Draft, the discussion about the amount of money in the deal took less than an hour. The discussion about the escalator in the fifth year of the contract—a year that was never reached because the contract was renegotiated last year—took over 50 hours.

Rodgers’ agent and I vigorously debated the amount and timing of escalator money in the contract based on Rodgers’ performance. The wild card in the negotiation, of course, was trying to determine when Brett Favre would retire, something we’ve been trying to determine for years (and perhaps still are).

With the Maclin deal, there were a lot of moving parts on the money and the structure issues of the contract, with deals around us that were not consistent in all areas, making the “fitting in” aspect of the negotiation not as easy as it sounds.

Once we were able to figure out premiums, discounts, approximate values of different escalators, structures, payouts, etc., we moved forward with a deal—with some twists and turns thrown in along the way (For a while, I wondered if I were negotiating a football contract or the Mideast Peace Treaty).

I’ll have more on Maclin at the appropriate time. Know that every time I see him make a catch, I’ll think of these past two weeks and the slow march toward execution (of the contract, that is).

Why was Percy Harvin's contract with the Vikings initially disapproved by the NFL before being approved?

My initial thought, which was confirmed by someone close to the negotiations, was that there was a slight miscalculation of the rookie pool number for the Vikings. Harvin's signing bonus was a bit high for the cap number that the team was left with after signing the rest of its rookies and had to be adjusted.

After bringing their signing bonus down approximately $20,000 and reallocating that amount to their one-time incentive in the deal, the contract now fits snugly against the Vikings’ rookie pool number and has been approved.

Most teams take their contracts right up to the brink of their rookie pool number since there’s no advantage gained by not doing so, and every now and then, there’s an unintended overage that needs to be addressed. In this case, the correction was simple, although Harvin is $20,000 lighter in the wallet in this year's cash flow.

Why is this the worst time of year for team front offices?

One word and one word only: injuries. Players whom teams have counted on since the offseason started in March, and players whom teams had no reason to think of replacing or supplementing with other quality players, are now lost for the year.

The season-ending injury problem in the first week of training camp is something that has happened for years and is happening again this year. Reggie Kelly of the Bengals, Stewart Bradley of the Eagles and Ma’ake Kemoeatu of the Panthers (a player I remember chasing in free agency a few years ago before being outbid by Carolina) have all suffered season-ending injuries that have altered their teams’ plans. And it is certain there will be more.

The teams will recover and move on with replacements, either on the team or through acquisitions, but the suddenness and finality of these injuries—these players must now prepare for 2010—is striking.

Playing 16-, 17-, 18- or 10-game seasons will not alter the reality of these injuries. The ACL, the torn Achilles, etc., are going to happen, and they often happen in the first few days of live hitting, something that can’t be simulated in the offseason, or at least if the NFL Players Association has anything to say about it.

The good teams recover quickly and move ahead. In many ways, these injuries are more impactful than retirements, as teams losing players to retirement can groom replacements more easily than a sudden loss to an injury. The only possible silver lining is the timing, since there are still a full 40 days to get the replacements ready.

For players, coaches and front offices in pro football, injuries are the bane of their existence. But they happen—a lot. This is not a contact sport; it’s a collision sport.

Why is it not surprising that Plaxico Burress was indicted?

There were a lot of factors working against Burress in this case, some of them (pardon the choice of words) self-inflicted.

The Manhattan District Attorney, Robert Morgenthau, and the Mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg, were not shy in expressing the importance of treating Burress with the full force and effect of the law (something Burress’ attorney will continue to note). It was against this backdrop that the grand jury heard the case, listened to Burress and decided to indict.

Besides, New York juries, or grand juries, are probably not the type to be swayed by celebrity, as is the case in other parts of the country (L.A. perhaps?). Burress’ name recognition might have helped him throughout his career, but it was of no help here.

As to the self-inflicted part, Burress, in my view, wasted an opportunity to help himself with the grand jury. Instead of explaining the incident and any defense of the gun charges that were alleged, he simply apologized and expressed deep regret for his actions. Huh? That’s what he should do at a sentencing hearing, not as the basis of his testimony to a group of people deciding whether he should stand trial.

The curious case of Plaxico Burress continues.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

Michael Vick Will Jump at Chance to Play, but What Are Hurdles to His Return?

Andrew Brandt — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 07:33:00 -0400

Upon the conditional NFL-reinstates-Michael-Vick.html">reinstatement of Michael Vick by Commissioner Roger Goodell this week, the former Falcons quarterback is now free to sign with any team in the NFL.

However, much like the process when Terrell Owens was set free by the Dallas Cowboys earlier this offseason, many teams have already stepped up to announce they have no interest.

This bizarre process of teams stating their lack of interest is emblematic of all the moving parts involved in the signing of a player who resonates as Vick does.

Vick is an electrifying talent; there is little debate about that. He would also help a team’s offense in a limited role, if for no other reason than the threat he would give them as a decoy to run or pass.

Those traits, however, are certainly not enough for a team to add him. If they were, there would be teams lining up to sign Vick rather than lining up not to sign him, which is what’s happening now.

More than anything else, this is an organizational decision with many layers. They are:

Ownership

Prior to a team showing interest in Vick, ownership would have to buy in. This is a large hurdle since many owners or their families own dogs. That emotional and visceral reaction to the treatment of a dog will be paramount—and do not underestimate the reaction of owners’ wives and close friends in this matter.

Even if ownership were not deterred by Vick’s involvement in dogfighting, it would have to deal with the prospect of demonstrations, picketing, and a public relations battle with animal rights groups—certainly an unattractive prospect.

And, of course, the bottom line is the bottom line. Signing Vick could cause harsh reactions from partners of all types, affecting revenue in a slumping economy.

For many, if not most teams, the discussion on Vick ends with ownership. In the event it does not, the next discussion will be...

Personnel

It’s easy to say that Vick is a talent and can help a team win. The more difficult question is whether Vick is a talent who can fit the scheme that a team runs and actually help it win. It is, in many ways, like a draft discussion. Scouts may identify a player as a first-round talent, but the tougher question is, "Would you take this player as our first-round pick?"

In the event the personnel department agrees that Vick is not only a talent worth signing but also a talent worth signing for its team, the next discussion will be...

Coaching

Calls will be placed to former Vick coaches such as Dan Reeves, Jim Mora, and others from any coach interested in having him on the team. There were concerns about Vick’s partying lifestyle even before he signed a $100-million contract. There were rumors that his first stop after his house arrest ended was a strip club. The key question from the coaching staff will be coachability.

Will Vick listen? Will he assimilate and be part of the team? Will he be a positive or negative in the locker room?

Additionally, Vick will take practice reps and game plays away from other players. How will that affect things? Vick will cause coaches to develop new schemes, new plays, and new wrinkles to an offense that has been painstakingly planned for the past six months.

In the event the coaching staff agrees that Vick can be coached and will not negatively affect the team, the next discussion will be...

What would you pay Michael Vick?

Contract

I’ve talked about this many times before.

There are obvious risks. Any front office is going to want a contract that’s as risk-free as possible. Translation: In the event the team decides to release Vick, it has not put any guaranteed or unearned money into him. The team essentially would want a pay-for-play model with potential upside, while protecting the downside.

Can a team get this type of contract? It depends entirely on leverage and whether Vick has options. If he has more than one bidder, he can probably extract a better contract. If he is negotiating with only one team, the team can mine more favorable terms.

In the end, this may be the most important aspect in signing Vick. He was once the highest-paid player in the history of the sport. Now he might be looking at a minimum contract.

If the contract is on board, the next discussion will circle back to...

Community Relations/Corporate Sales

The signing will cause a stir.

There are those who believe any publicity is good publicity, but this will not necessarily be the case here. Vick is a lightning rod; he will draw attention to the franchise and the community. Some will be positive, but a lot will be negative. The community relations/public relations/external affairs/corporate sales departments—or whatever names they are called—should be prepared for a backlash and ready with responses.

After all of that, we will see if there’s a team or teams left standing to sign Michael Vick. Stay tuned.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

The National Football Post is a unique and premier online source of quality and credible news, information, and insight about all sides of football featuring professionals with experience in all facets of the NFL.

Wednesday Whys: A Great Coach Is Gone

Andrew Brandt — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 09:34:00 -0400

National Football Post

Why is the loss of Jim Johnson being met with such sadness?

We have lost a masterful defensive football coach; everyone knows that. More important, we have lost a gem of a man who was adored and admired for his direct and refreshing manner. Having been around the Eagles for the past six months, the impact of Jim’s presence, and now his absence, resonates throughout the building.

In the rough and tumble world of coaching and its testosterone-laden machismo, Johnson had a presence that did not require that bravado. He was well respected and perhaps even loved by every employee and player I have talked to. It’s easy to see why.

The words that continue to be used to describe Jim are “a coach’s coach” and “a man’s man.” Others can go on about his coaching prowess—I witnessed it firsthand with the Packers over nine years as he frustrated our offensive game plans with his constant pressure.

Beyond the coaching, it was his honesty, directness, and care for other coaches, players, and team employees that resounded throughout the office and community.

Too often in professional sports, coaches are like many friends and agents of players: They tell players what they want to hear rather than what they need to hear. This enabling behavior may keep players happy for the moment, but provides no lasting benefit.

After talking to Eagles players, it’s clear that Johnson was not an enabler. He told players the direct and honest truth, pulling no punches about what they needed to hear.

Having been around him at the Eagles facility for a few months before he could no longer come to work, it was obvious Jim was hurting. However, he wanted no special treatment or assistance and no sympathy for what he was going through.

I recall one day when I was near him as he lost his balance and was about to fall. I helped prop him up and assisted him back to his office. He apologized profusely and was genuinely sorry that I had to do that. He felt bad for me. Amazing.

Again, my time around Jim Johnson was brief compared to the people who truly knew him. It didn’t take long, however, to realize the impact his presence had around the NovaCare facility in South Philadelphia.

As I continue to work on the Jeremy Maclin contract today for the Eagles, the passing of that elegant man in the office down the hall puts it all in perspective. Jim Johnson was an Eagle that truly soared.

Why did Brett Favre decide to stay retired?

That’s the Brett I know and love. Just when he and old friend Bus Cook, two smart men who play the role of unsophisticated country boys and are anything but, have the entire sporting public thinking Brett is coming back to play for the Vikings—whether for the money, because he can’t give it up, to spite the Packers, whatever—he does what no one expected and says he’s staying retired.

The reason given is the physical and mental grind of the season, this after having avoided any potential grind from offseason workouts and mini-camps.

Brett is someone I have known for 10 years, and I’m still amazed by his ability to pull people back in just at the brink of pushing them away (link the Behind the Helmet article). Even with his enormous talents and accomplishments, there is insecurity in him that can make him both difficult and endearingly human at the same time.

The Wally Pipp factor was omnipresent with Brett. In Green Bay, he was well aware of how he got his job—an injury to Don Majkowski—and that was always in the back of his mind when a rising young player such as Matt Hasselbeck or Aaron Rodgers came along.

And although he had limited relationships with teammates beyond a couple of close friends, he was a true friend to the “back room guys” at the Packers—the equipment managers, security officers, trainers and other assistants. He treated those people like gold.

We’ve been dealing with the “will he or won’t he” with Brett for the past decade. That’s part of the package. And it’s hard to believe that we’ve seen the end of it.

As I’ve written many times, I always had the impression that Brett wished he could do what Roger Clemens did in baseball—stay “retired” until midseason and pick a team to join for the stretch run. He loves playing the games; he hates the meetings and the regimented minutiae of the season.

Unfortunately for Brett, he lives in a sport that requires schematic design and repetition. It’s not like a pitcher walking to the mound to go one-on-one with a hitter. Clemens could do what he did, and had the leverage to do so. Favre does not—or at least not yet. Stay tuned.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

The National Football Post is a unique and premier on-line source of quality and credible news, information and insight about all sides of football featuring professionals with experience in all facets of the NFL.

Rookie contracts: Part Three

Andrew Brandt — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 06:07:00 -0400

National Football Post

The Split

From the third to the seventh rounds (and for any undrafted free agents), every negotiation includes a discussion of a split contract based on a player becoming injured and moved off the active roster during the season.

The theory of a split is that, from a team’s perspective, a player should not earn full salary and cap value in the event he suffers a season-ending injury. The player will have to be replaced on the roster by another salary and cap value and will continue to count on the team’s payroll and cap, albeit at a lower number.

There are two types of splits, one being more onerous to players than the other.

Camp Split

AP3rd round pick Asher Allen

The first type is referred to as a “camp split,” “preseason split” or “training camp split.” It operates to lower a player’s salary to the split amount in the event the player suffers a season-ending injury during training camp or before the time rosters are set for the opening of the season. In this case, should a player suffer this injury and be placed on the reserve/injured list, his salary would be superceded by a lower salary for the coming season.

The advantage of this type of split for players is that once rosters are set in early September and the season begins, the split goes away. Thus, once the player survives training camp without a season-ending injury, his “up” amount of salary is secure (assuming, of course, he is not released for skill reasons).

Full Split

The second type of split is called the “full split” or “game split.” It operates to reduce the player’s salary to the split amount in the event the player suffers a season-ending injury at any point in the preseason or season. The way these clauses are written is simply that a player will be paid the “up” amount at all times he’s a member of the team’s active/inactive 53-man roster and paid the “down” amount at any time he is not a member of such roster, meaning he has been moved to a reserve list.

Teams obviously prefer full splits; player agents obviously prefer camp splits. The annual question from agents about this, usually advanced by the union, is:

“Do you mean to tell me if that my guy has busted his butt for this team through training camp and into the season, playing hurt and sacrificing his body, that you will split his salary if he gets injured in, say, the 12th game of the season? That’s really unfair.”

Fair point. Heard it a hundred times. Here’s a response:

”Do you mean to tell me that if your guy makes it through camp and tears his Achilles on the first kickoff running down the field as a special teams player, we are supposed to pay his full salary for the year?”

The answer is usually a pause and then, “Yes.”

AP6th round pick Bernard Scott

Leverage Rules

The number and type of splits in these rookie contracts is, like everything else, based on leverage. Undrafted rookies and seventh rounders typically will have two full splits. Fourth, fifth and sixth rounders will have two splits, with different combinations of full and camp splits depending on the team and its history. Third rounders now have splits in year one, with most of those being camp splits. Players picked above the third round do not have splits, although at one time, players in the third round did not.

The discussion of the split proves the misconception that these negotiations are all about filling in a dollar amount on the signing bonus. Yes, that’s the most important area of negotiation from a visceral standpoint, yet other structural issues like the escalator and the split end up usually taking more time and haggling than the money.

As I have said many times, negotiations are about allocating risk. The split is one way teams try to shift the risk of injury to the player while agents try to have the team bear that burden.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

NFL Draft Goes Prime Time

Andrew Brandt — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 07:49:00 -0400

NFL-Draft-moving-to-primetime.html" target="_blank">The other shoe has dropped on the coverage of the NFL Draft.

The league does a masterful job holding interest in the sport long after the Vince Lombardi Trophy has been handed out, and now, we’ve come to the next logical evolutionary step.

The draft has become an entity unto itself, with increasing interest every year in players who give hope and faith to NFL teams for the coming years.

College players are poked, prodded, debated, broken down, analyzed, and sifted through by teams, their fans, and the media for four months leading up to the big April event in New York.

Now that event has taken two big steps that were only a matter of time: The draft has gone prime time, and it’s gone to three days, starting on television-friendly Thursday night.

The first round, the most popular viewing segment of the draft even with the most down time between selections, will now be on Thursday night, with the second and third rounds on Friday night and the lower rounds on Saturday.

With this change, teams will have to adjust to a couple things logistically. The date to present offer sheets to restricted free agents, whereby the incumbent team has a right to match an offer up to a day before the draft or not match and receive draft-pick compensation, has traditionally been the Friday eight days before the draft.

It will now likely be moved to the Wednesday eight days before the Thursday kickoff.

Also, the annual frenzied chase of undrafted free agents will move up a day, from Sunday to Saturday, as teams will fill out their rosters a day earlier.

It will also allow teams another day of preparation before mini-camps, most of which occur within days of the draft. An extra day to exhale after the draft before the rookies come in will be a welcome addition for teams.

The industry surrounding the NFL Draft will now continue to grow with the added day of focus. And the move to Thursday night validates that this is the most important date in the busy NFL offseason calendar and brings even more focus and attention on first-round draft picks.

As I’ve said in the past, we often hear more about first-round prospects in the NFL Draft in the weeks and months leading up to the draft than we do in their entire NFL careers.

How much did we hear about Andre Smith—his suspension from the Sugar Bowl, his weight, his taking off early from the Combine, and his dalliance with several agents—in the long winter of 2009?

Probably much more than we’ll hear about him over the next few years (at least the Bengals hope so.)

More so than any other incoming players in professional sports leagues, we as fans and media are well-acquainted with these players prior to their arrival into the league. (And no one gives better information than our own Wes Bunting.)

Now these players and the NFL enter prime time in the offseason. It’s a testament to the power of the league and the growth of the NFL Draft. For a drama show whose biggest action comes when the commissioner reads names at a podium, it’s a fascinating phenomenon.

An eye-popping 39 million people watched last April. Now, with a Thursday prime-time show as the highlight of the programming, expect that number to rise significantly.

The popularity of the draft never ceases to amaze me. Perhaps it’s a hope, a regeneration, a spring fever, an infusion of football, anticipation, optimism, and endless debate.

And we all love football and debate.

The draftnik countdown begins. Only eight months to the April 22 draft, now appearing in prime time.

Wednesday Whys: Michael Vick Has His Options

Andrew Brandt — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 09:04:00 -0400

National Football Post

First, thanks to all who wished me well on my climb up Mt. Whitney on Monday. We started our climb wearing headlamps at 3:35 a.m. and were able to summit the 14,600-foot peak by 10 a.m. before heading down (through a couple of hailstorms) and finishing in the afternoon. It was an awesome experience.

Now, on to Wednesday whys…

Why is Michael Vick still in a holding pattern with the NFL following his release from home confinement?

Commissioner Roger Goodell will rule on Vick soon and has no reason to be hasty. The fact that Vick now has his freedom is a factor in a pending ruling, but certainly not anything that makes a ruling necessary or imminent.

Vick has now paid his debt through the legal system; he must now deal with his preferred employer and the NFL Personal Conduct Policy.

Goodell has said he wants to see “true remorse” from Vick. There appear to be no specific guidelines for the display of such remorse, but like Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart once famously said about pornography, Goodell will probably know it when he sees it.

Vick would appear to have another option if his re-entry into the NFL is barred. The United Football League is open to him playing there, which would give the league (and the Versus network) some name-brand recognition that would carry it through its first season.

The league has some brands as coaches (Denny Green and Jim Fassel among them) and will have a smattering of middling names that NFL fans might know (J.P. Losman), but Vick would create another dimension as long as two things happen:

(1) the UFL and Vick are able to agree to contract terms within the parameters the upstart league is establishing, and

(2) the league is prepared to deal with the negative publicity and potential protests that will come along with his signing.

On the latter, my sense is that the UFL will take the publicity, good or bad.

Meanwhile, as to the NFL, Vick will cool his heels for a while and hopefully is in the midst of a plan to show “true remorse” to the commissioner.

Why is singer Marc Anthony coming on board as a minority owner of the Dolphins?

The new majority owner of the Dolphins, Stephen Ross, has certainly shown his hand in a marketing strategy that is tried and true: use the appeal of celebrity to attract attention to the product.

First, Ross entered into a partnership with Jimmy Buffett on a short-term branding opportunity (Land Shark Stadium) for the facility. Buffett will certainly have some sort of role with the franchise, including concerts.

Then Ross brought in Emilio and Gloria Estefan as minority owners, and now Anthony (married to Jennifer Lopez, which will help as well).

Ross, who purchased the bulk of the franchise from the classy Wayne Huizenga earlier this year, appears to have an eye toward creating a “buzz” (that elusive concept that brings sizzle to a franchise) in building on the Dolphins’ successful on-field exploits last season.

Ross has a plan for the Dolphins and an attraction to celebrity. Although the infusion of name-brand investors and performers will not help the team win games, it may help bring awareness, attention and even revenue to the Dolphins in a city with plenty of things to do and places to spend disposable income. Ross promises even more well-known investors and/or partners.

At the least, the Dolphins’ ownership will lead the league in record sales.

Why are so few deals at the top of the draft done with training camps opening this weekend?

Team negotiators and agents Browns-top-four-picks-still-unsigned.html" target="_blank">are still a bit hesitant to dip their toes in the water until the market sets in a little more.

In the first round, the Matthew Stafford and Mark Sanchez deals may have some relevance for the top of the round (although teams will dismiss most of the results due to the “quarterback premium”) but there hasn’t been a pace set for the middle or lower parts of the round yet.

Things will pick up significantly in the coming days. Unlike free agency, these players can only sign with one team. And they all will.

Why is Brett Favre still making the Vikings wait for his decision?

Because he can.

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt

Comparing NFL and NBA Contracts

Andrew Brandt — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 09:35:00 -0400

National Football Post

There are a few flashpoint dates in the NFL calendar when teams pay retail or above in guaranteed money to secure the services of players with contracts that set new levels. The most prominent time for this luxury shopping are the first days of free agency at the end of February and beginning of March.

AP Julius Peppers

Another time when the guaranteed money stood out was last week around the July 15 deadline for teams to come to terms on long-term deals with players designated as franchise players within the free agency system.

Certain teams and players tried unsuccessfully to come to terms—Julius Peppers with the Panthers, Karlos Dansby with the Cardinals—while others were able to agree on lengthy deals with eye-popping numbers. These numbers are startling, but compared to another sport having its free agency dance this time of year, perhaps not so much.

With Wednesday’s mega-deals for Matt Cassel and Terrell Suggs—both topping out at $63 million in total value—it got me thinking about how the best of the best deals compare to the NBA, another sport now going through its free agency ritual.

Here are some of the top guaranteed deals in the NFL—all but Peyton Manning in the last year—including the much-discussed rookie contracts of Matthew Stafford, Matt Ryan and Mark Sanchez:

AP Matthew Stafford

Matthew Stafford, Lions, $41.7M
Albert Haynesworth, Redskins, $41M
Terrell Suggs, Ravens, $38M
Peyton Manning, Colts, $34.5M
Matt Ryan, Falcons, $34M
Dwight Freeney, Colts, $31M
Jake Long, Dolphins, $30M
Chris Long, Rams, $29M
Nnamdi Asomugha, Raiders, $28.5M
Matt Cassel, Chiefs, $28M
Mark Sanchez, Jets, $28M

These are the cream of the crop of NFL contracts in the all-important category of guaranteed money, meaning that regardless of injury or a downturn in performance and skill, the players will make their money (there’s still the question of forfeiture of these monies for bad behavior, although the players seem to be winning most of the cases).

Let’s compare these numbers to the NBA, which is in the middle of its free agency period, admittedly amidst tough times and economic concerns for the future. The NBA did not expect a robust free agency period this year.

We’ve also heard about the “Summer of Love” a year from now as owners are keeping their hands in their pockets in 2009 for a possible seat at the table when the auction for LeBron James, Chris Bosh, Dwayne Wade and others begins on July 1, 2010.

And, more importantly, we’ve learned that the salary cap in the NBA for 2009-10 will go down $1 million from 2008-2009—from $58.7M to $57.7M—with a corresponding drop in the luxury tax number and predictions of further dips in the uncertain economic future.

Keep in mind, the NFL salary cap went up from $116M to $123M, with another $5M in a CAM adjustment to make it $128M.

With all the gloom and doom of the NBA’s financial picture presented above, and with a relatively lackluster group of free agents on the market, here are some of the contracts that have been given out in the first weeks of the NBA’s shopping season (all contracts are for five years):

AP Anderson Varejao

Ben Gordon, Pistons, $55M
Hedo Turkoglu, Raptors, $53M
Anderson Varejao, Cavaliers, $50M
Shawn Marion, Mavericks, $39M
Charlie Villanueva, Pistons, $35M
Martin Gortat, Magic, $34M
Paul Millsap, Jazz, $32M

Hardly a bunch of household names. More important, the numbers above are the amounts of the entire contracts, although the amounts of the entire contracts and the amount of the guaranteed portion in most NBA contracts is the same. Therefore, every dollar above is guaranteed money, unlike virtually all NFL contracts.

All of these players have more guaranteed money than all but three or four NFL players. Varejao, a role player with the LeBronairres, makes more guaranteed money—by almost 25 percent—than any player in football.

Gortat, a backup center to Dwight Howard, who doesn’t come out of the game that often, makes about the same guaranteed money as one of the two or three best players in the NFL, Manning.

I know the arguments, and have made them myself: There’s only a fraction of the players in the NBA compared to the NFL, many more games, only five players playing at one time compared to eleven in football, etc.

The stark reality is that the players above are not recognized “stars”—with the possible exceptions of Gordon and Turkoglu—while NFL stars are unlikely to receive anywhere close to these amounts of guaranteed money.

Like the situations of Cassel and Suggs, timing is everything, and the timing of the NBA players above, even with the economic forces in the NBA working against them, is fortunate. I have always said that free agency is like the Wild West; anything can happen, good or bad. It’s been all good for the NBA players above, players whose equals in football would not be looking at nearly the numbers these players are getting.

Whenever I discuss these facts with NFL players, I always get the same response: “I should have been taller!”

Follow me on Twitter: adbrandt