POSTED 9:24 p.m. EST, February 20, 2006; LAST UPDATED 12:12 a.m. EST, February 21, 2006

 

GANG OF NINE REVEALED

 

NFLPA executive director Gene Upshaw recently said that nine NFL franchises are resisting the expansion of revenue sharing by the league's 32 teams.  Upshaw also told Mark Maske of The Washington Post that the nine teams are planning to file suit if they are forced to share revenues that currently are not distributed evenly among all teams.

 

A league source has identified for us the members of this modern-day Mudville nine:  the Redskins, Eagles, Cowboys, Giants, Jets, Panthers, Broncos, Patriots, and Texans.

 

We'd previously heard that the NFL and the union tentatively have agreed to expand the components of  so-called "Defined Gross Revenue" (which is the basis for the team-by-team salary cap) to include money not currently shared by the various franchises.  The proponents of enhanced revenue argue that, if any currently unshared revenue streams are to be included in the determination of DGR, the corresponding revenue should be shared equally -- and that, if the revenue is not to be shared, it should be excluded from the DGR calculation.

 

The source also confirmed that the Mudville nine plan to sue if they are forced to accept expanded revenue sharing by the other 23 organizations.  Frankly, we still don't understand how it would ever come to that, since nine votes are sufficient to block any changes to the way the NFL does business, given that 24 "yes" votes would be required to, for example, impose expanded revenue sharing.

 

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello tells us that, under the current system, teams share all national broadcast revenues, all sponsorship revenues, all licensing revenues, and the visiting team's share of ticket revenues.  The following revenues aren't shared:  the home team's share of the box-office revenue, local radio revenue, local TV revenue, local sponsorship revenue, and stadium-generated revenues from signage, concessions, parking, luxury suites, etc. 

 

THANKS FOR THE RESPONSES

 

We posted on Saturday afternoon a nine-question survey aimed at gathering information to aid our efforts at identifying better marketing opportunities for the site.

 

We didn't know what to expect, but we were completely blown away by the response.  Within the first 24 hours, we had more than 700 e-mails with the requested information.  By late Monday morning, we pulled the plug after the responses hit 1,000.

 

Our next job is to process the information and to package it for potential advertising partners.  The broader goal is to develop exclusive relationships with sponsors in various different industries, and we invite anyone with an interest in securing such exclusivity to contact us.

 

HOW COULD VANDEN BOSCH ALREADY SIGN?

 

Several of our more astute readers have asked us how the Titans were able to sign defensive end Kyle Vanden Bosch to a contract extension before completion of the current league year.  Under the most recent CBA extension, a player with four credited seasons may sign a one-year deal worth $540,000 to the player, but counting only $455,000 under the salary cap and costing only $455,000 to the team.  (The salary increases with total experience, but the cap hit and total cost remain the same.)

 

The catch, however, is that the player who signs such a deal cannot re-sign with the team until after the completion of the league year in which the minimum deal was signed.

 

So how were the Titans able to ink Vanden Bosch before he got a chance to hit the open market?  Initially, we concluded that the Titans had merely paid Vanden Bosch $540,000 in 2005, eschewing the potential savings of $90,000 in order to have the flexibility to lock him up before someone else could dangle a bigger carrot in his face.

 

Impressive, if that's what the Titans indeed were thinking.  Under the 540/455 arrangement, they could have had at most a wink-nod arrangement in place with Vanden Bosch -- and he then could have signed for more money with another team at 12:01 a.m. on March 3.

 

But, alas, the Titans weren't quite so creative.  As it turns out, the media reports regarding Vanden Bosch's 2005 salary were wrong.  He didn't get $540,000, because he didn't have four credited seasons.  Instead, he got the three-year minimum of $455,000, plus a $25,000 signing bonus, since he had only three credited seasons, because he missed all of 2003 due to injury.

 

As a result, the rules limiting the ability of the Titans to re-sign Vanden Bosch simply didn't apply.

 

So there's the answer.  (You can all wake up now.)

 

EARLY TUESDAY ONE-LINERS

 

Coach Kevlar is banging the Teflon-coated pan regarding the problems caused by the final capped year:  "Everybody's worried about it.  Everybody is feeling this. You've got to have two plans -- a plan for a CBA and for no CBA.  It's a big difference in those two.  Then, if there's no CBA reached, when does it happen?  The middle of March?  Next year?  Everybody has to get ready for no CBA being reached.  Not many people realize what the impact will be."

 

Could it be that we might not have to listen to Bill Curry's Southern fried pomposity (until, of course, he gets fired from his new gig as Georgia Tech A.D.)?

 

Seahawks owner Paul Allen is selling The Sporting News and all related properties.

 

The Texans have re-signed G Fred Weary.

 

Vince Young confirms that he won't throw at the combine.

 

The Earl of Troy thinks that Lord Favre will retire.

 

Chargers G.M. A.J. Smith confirmed Monday that he won't apply the franchise tag or transition tag to QB Drew Brees (Smith also said that he could kick Brees' ass, if he really wanted to).

 

The Carolina TopCats are holding auditions on March 4 (requirements include the ability to remain standing on a toilet while . . . hell, you get the picture).

 

The Packers have announced the schedule for their offseason workouts.

 

The Jets have announced the members of Eric Mangini's staff.

 

POSTED 9:05 p.m. EST, February 20, 2006

 

RICKY TESTED POSITIVE, AFTER ALL

 

Jason Cole of The Miami Herald reports that the recent violation of the NFL substance abuse policy committed by Dolphins running back Ricky Williams was the result of a failed test -- and that the substance was something other than marijuana.

 

'This whole thing is a little confusing,'' one source told Cole.  "I'll just leave it at that.  The best way to say it is he violated the program.''

 

It's not, however, a steroid issue.  Steroids and other performance-enhancing substances are covered by a different NFL policy and program.  Williams' positive, then, resulted from the use of cocaine, opiates, MDMA, or PCP, or the abuse of prescription drugs, over-the-counter drugs, or alcohol.

 

It remains possible that Williams tested positive for a prescription medication that he had not previously disclosed to the NFL.  Williams previously used Paxil to combat social anxiety disorder.

 

Common sense (which, frankly, doesn't always apply to a guy like Williams) suggests to us that, if he was able to control his admitted affinity for marijuana, he likewise should have been able to avoid other substances with which he had not been linked.  So we're going to take a wait-and-see approach on this one until more information is released (if more information ever is released) regarding the compounds that showed up in the product of Ricky's soda fountain.

 

We'd previously heard that the violation resulted from a missed test.  We're still not ready to rule out the possibility that Williams generated a positive and missed a test, given all of the confusion surrounding this issue.

 

POSTED 10:53 a.m. EST, February 20, 2006

 

RICKY MIGHT HAVE A DEFENSE

 

It's now well know that Dolphins running back Ricky Williams missed a drug test, supposedly because he is in India.

 

But the fact that Ricky's trip to the land of the Dell computer call center staffers caused him to apparently miss one of his unannounced tinkle tests doesn't make his case open and shut.

 

A league source tells us that the testing process becomes complicated when a player travels outside of his home territory.  The player has an obligation to advise the league of his precise travel plans.  The league then has the responsibility to ensure that the player is properly notified as to the location of the testing facility to which he must report, if he ultimately is required to submit to testing while on the road.

 

If a player like Williams fails to show up under such circumstances, it might have happened because of something the player failed to do -- or it might have happened because of something the league failed to do.  If, for example, the league accidentally tried to contact Williams at a number other than the number he had provided, Williams wouldn't have known about the testing obligation, and his failure to report for testing wouldn't be his fault.

 

Under the NFL substance abuse policy, Williams has the right to appeal the alleged violation to the Commissioner for a hearing.  As part of the preparation for the hearing, the timeline and other nuances regarding the ultimate responsibility for the snafu will come to light.

 

Per the source, it wouldn't be the first time that a player who initially was found to have failed to show up for a test was later exonerated.

 

We're not suggesting that Williams definitely will be off the hook.  Instead, we're saying that Ricky might be able to show that the failure to report for the test was the result of a mistake made by the NFL, not by him.

 

POSTED 8:51 a.m. EST; LAST UPDATED 9:57 a.m. EST, February 20, 2006

 

RICKY VIOLATION WAS A MISSED TEST

 

A league source tells us that Dolphins running back Ricky Williams violated the NFL substance abuse policy not through a positive test but by failing to report for a scheduled test.

 

Players who are subject to the drug program face regular requirements to submit to testing.  Once notified of the obligation to provide a sample of kidney Kool Aid, the player has a specific time period within which to do so.  (Per the drug policy, the player has four hours from the time of the scheduled test to produce an Italian astronaut.)

 

As a participant in Stage Three of the program, Williams is subject to up to 10 unannounced tests per month.  

 

Meanwhile, The Miami Herald has revised its story regarding the failed test to leave the door open for the possibility that it was, indeed, a failure to show up for the test.

 

The difference is technical.  Either action is a violation of the substance abuse policy, and a violation (for Williams) most likely will trigger a minimum suspension of one year.  During the suspension, he still will be expected to submit to testing and other aspects of his treatment plan.  

 

LEAGUE INSIDERS SEE THROUGH RHOME COMMENTS

 

On Sunday, The Houston Chronicle ran a story containing glowing quotes from NFL assistant coach Jerry Rhome regarding Vince Young's decision to throw against the wind in a recent workout.

 

"This was a bad time to work out," Rhome said, "but he accepted the challenge and toughed it out.  That impressed me."

 

The reality, of course, is that Rhome was the latest guy added to the "Keep Vince from Pulling an Aaron Rodgers" effort.  So Rhome is going to pimp his guy . . . or the guys who are paying Rhome might decide to stop doing so.

 

Indeed, one league insider dismissed Rhome's comments as "an infomerical."  

 

And Rhome is smart enough to know that he needs to paint Young in the best possible light.  If Rhome doesn't, his chances of getting paid good money to "help" future prospective draft picks will be a few degrees south of zero.

 

CONDON SHOULD QUIT CHAD

 

The more we ponder the current conundrum facing Jets quarterback Chad Pennington, the more we believe that agent Tom Condon should do his client a favor and walk away.

 

Condon refuses, we believe, to have his name associated with the kind of salary reduction that the Jets hope to impose on Pennington.  So instead of permitting Pennington to stay in New York and possibly regain the starting job if/when his shoulder fully heals, Condon is (by all appearances) nudging Pennington toward a showdown that will likely result in the quarterback being cut -- and then scrambling to find more money than the Jets would pay on the open market.

 

Moreover, if Pennington (who'll turn 30 this year) can turn it around and return to the form that he flashed before cashing in, he possibly could retire from the Jets and parlay a long-term career into all sorts of local business opportunities.

 

But, no.  Pennington will end up trolling the market for a team who will give him a shot, just as Condon client Tim Couch did two years ago.  (Couch, by the way, is still waiting to make an actual NFL roster.)

 

If Condon doesn't want to have his name tied to a major pay cut for a quarterback who made $22 million over two years, Condon should do his client a favor and step aside.  It wouldn't be the first time Condon has engaged in such a maneuver; in 2004, Condon parted ways with late-first-round tight end Benjamin Watson because the Patriots wanted to tie Watson up with a six-year contract, and Condon didn't want his name tied to a deal of such length.

 

Why, you ask?  If Condon were to permit a guy taken at the bottom of round one to sign a six-year deal, other agents would have used it against him in the recruitment of other players.  Similarly, if Condon were to permit Pennington to cut his pay from $9 million in 2006 all the way down to $1 million, other agents would find a way to bring it up time and again when the agents are jostling for new clients.

 

If, in contrast, Pennington gets cut and can't find another gig, it's not Condon's fault -- it's because Pennington's shoulder is messed up.    

 

In the end, however, Condon won't walk away.  Because at this stage of the game that would be used against him by other agents, too.

 

Regardless, if Condon refuses to let Pennington stay in New York for money commensurate with the quarterback's current worth, Condon should do the right thing and allow Pennington to do the deal with someone else.  

 

TY GETTING HIS FREEDOM ON TUESDAY

 

A league source tells us that the Jets officially will part ways with cornerback Ty Law on Tuesday.

 

The move is no surprise, since Law's contract was specifically written to create the impression that Law had reeled in a long-term blockbuster deal while, in reality, it was a one-year arrangement that either would have been negotiated or terminated.

 

Law believes he can get more on the open market than the Jets are willing to pay, so now the relationship ends.

 

He reportedly wants $10 million in guaranteed money, which would be $1 million for each of his 2005 interceptions.

 

"I was supposed to be done, but I put 10 interceptions on they [butt],” Law told Jason Whitlock of The Kansas City, who brags in a February 14 article about doing shots of "chilled Grey Goose" with Law.  (Jason, we're impressed with how much you've accomplished in the business, given that you're apparently only 19 years old.)

 

Back to Ty and his pack of 10 picks.  The last time we checked, some of the guys who get a lot of picks got them because folks were, you know, throwing on them a lot.  Indeed, 10 in 2005 were the most interceptions of Law's career.  

 

His previous high came way back in 1998, when he snatched nine.  The next year, it was down to two.  He picked two more in 2000, and three in 2001.  

 

So getting 10 picks doesn't mean that Law deserves the kind of money that a shut-down corner would be getting paid in his prime.  Law is clearly on the downward slope of his career, and he should expect to see many more balls thrown his way in 2006, wherever he lands.

 

MONDAY MORNING ONE-LINERS

 

Former Steelers RB Jerome Bettis landed a studio gig with NBC for 2006; Bettis and his parents popped in on future partner Bob Costas for the announcement during the Olympics (which temporarily quadrupled the number of African-Americans present for the games).

 

The Jets will sit down with agent Tom Condon to continue to discuss QB Chad Pennington's contract.  ("Will you take a million?" . . . "No." . . . "Really?" . . . "Truly." . . . "Okay, but will you take a million?" . . . "No.")

 

You know it's a slow news day when the manager of the Steelers' traveling basketball team gets an interview request (yours truly went to one of those games 30-some years ago, and Frenchy Fuqua tried to bogart Florio Sr.'s pen during a post-game autograph session).

 

Steelers OL Trai Essex recently was arrested after a fight outside a Miami night club.