A league source with knowledge of the status of the Collective Bargaining Agreement negotiations tells us that all issues between the NFL and the NFL Players Association have been resolved, and that the only remaining sticking point is the dispute between owners regarding the extent to which revenue sharing will be expanded.

Said the source:  "It is the rich Johnny-come-lately owners who can't figure out that they are making money because they own a team in a large market and not because they own a team."

Of course, the owners at the other end of the spectrum would argue that teams not in a large market should be required to try to earn as much money as possible before asking for revenues to be shared beyond their current extent, which represents 80 percent of all revenues.

Any proposal must attract the votes of at least a few of the 11-12 owners who are opposed to any changes to the current system of revenue sharing.

The disagreement arises from the growing disparity between unshared local revenues.  Because the new CBA will determine the team-by-team salary cap based on a percentage of total football revenues, the teams making less of the money that isn't shared will see their player costs increases by revenues earned by the teams making more money in comparison.

One of the possibilities under consideration is a limitation on the amount of cash payments made in a given year above the salary cap.  Such a measure will restrict the ability of the big-money teams to use their extra cash to lure free agents with signing bonus money.

MORE ON PODCASTING THINGEE

Thanks to everyone who provided input on whether we should supplement our current content with a podcast.

Here's what we've decided to do, for starters. 

Yours truly and official PFT miserable guy Dante will do a weekly show that reviews the big issues of the week.  It won't be a regurgitation of the rumor mill, but a discussion-and-debate show.  It'll last between 45 minutes and an hour.

First one will be coming on Sunday.  Maybe.

CHEESIEST COMMERCIAL EVER

Thanks to the reader who sent to us the worst, goofiest, and at the same time the most unintentionally hilarious commercial we've ever seen.

It's for an outfit called Eastern Motors, and it features NFL players such as Kevin Jones, Clinton Portis, Laveranues Coles (the graphic in the commercial misspells his name), and LaVar Arrington.

Enjoy.

Five hours of negotiation between the NFL and the NFLPLA resulted initially in more empty rhetoric from union officials, followed by a glimmer of optimism from the NFL, which has said that the talks will resume before Sunday night.

On Saturday afternoon, we'd heard that significant progress had been made toward a new CBA.  Then, the negotiations ended for the day, with NFLPA lawyer Jeffrey Kessler proclaiming the talks "as dead as a doornail" (real original), and that it's "a sad day for the NFL."

Jeff, it's only a sad day for the NFL because guys like you are in a position to dictate the future of the sport.

Indeed, we've heard opinions from league insiders that Commissioner Paul Tagliabue and NFLPA executive director Gene Upshaw could get the deal done if they would hammer out the remaining issues face-to-face, man-to-man.  It's the other guys, we hear, such as Kessler and NFLPA general counsel Richard Berthelsen, who are preventing the thing from getting done. 

Like any other matter that is remotely adversarial in nature, ego can quickly get in the way of common sense, and men hoping to prove that they're smart and tough can be a distraction at a time when there are broader objectives in play.

In this case, the NFL, the owners, and the union aren't wrestling with issues like cash over cap because the present system is pushing the league to failure, but because the present system has yielded unprecedented, but disparate, success.  For the NHL, hammering out a new compensation system was a matter of life or death.  For the NFL, the golden goose could end up starving to death while the guys fighting over how to divvy up the eggs neglect the damn thing's food supply.

So get it done, guys.  You're all richer than most of the folks who pay for the tickets and generating the ratings points.  So it's really not wise to risk pissing us all off.

Just ask hockey.  And baseball.

A league source tells us that the NFL and its players union are getting closer and closer to reaching an agreement on an extension to the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Per the source, the two sides have tentatively agreed that 58 percent of all football revenues will be devoted to player salaries.  The last remaining hurdle is the "cash over cap" limit, which is the device that the owners will utilize to ensure that franchises earning high amounts of unshared revenue cannot skew the competitive balance by making total cash payments in any given year that greatly exceed the salary cap for that season.

From the players' perspective, unlimited cash over cap helps to get more money into the hands of players sooner rather than later.  In a league where the only guarantee is the money already paid, placing a limit on this device is a potentially significant concession.

For owners, an agreement limiting the extent to which a team like the Redskins can borrow against future salary caps by pouring excess money into a team that might be only a couple of parts away from a championship run will make it easier for lesser-earning teams to compete for free agents.

Still, the key factor (as we see it) is the salary floor.  If teams like the Bengals and Cardinals choose to rebel against a salary cap amount driven higher by the enormous revenues generated by teams like the Redskins, the union needs to push hard for a high minimum.  Currently, the minimum is based on 54 percent of the so-called defined gross revenues.  We think that the new CBA should contain a per-team minimum of at least 50 percent of the total football revenues.

As to revenue sharing, our guess is that the NFL will continue its current system of equally sharing amounts that presently equate to roughly 80 percent of all dollars earned.  The league also is likely to tinker with its supplemental revenue sharing system, which already provides additional money to teams with a defined need for it.  Moving forward, our guess is that the NFL will tweak the formula for determining whether a team is entitled to supplemental revenue sharing -- and will require that the team demonstrate some tangible desire and effort to enhance its own revenues before the team will be eligible to share even more of the money earned by others.

WITNESS TAMPERING ALLEGATION IN TAYLOR CASE

The criminal trial of Redskins safety Sean Taylor has been bumped yet again, from March 20 to April 10.  Although past continuances were largely the result of the fact that Taylor preferred to be banging hats in lieu of finding out whether he'll be breaking rocks, this one has arisen from claims of witness tampering.

According to The Washington Times, prosecutor Michael Grieco said that a witness had received threatening phone calls about the case and had been offered money to influence testimony.

Taylor's lawyer, Edward Carhart, identified the witness as Ryan Hill, whose testimony will be utilized by the prosecution.  Carhart also said that Taylor has received threatening phone calls (yeah, but those probably came from Bucs running back Michael Pittman, who caught a face full of spit from Taylor during a playoff game in January).

This is some serious stuff, folks.  The justice system doesn't take kindly to proof that efforts have been made to get witnesses to tell anything other than the truth.  Though it might be a challenge to pin the threats and the attempted bribes back to Taylor, he'll be spending a long time in the joint if Grieco ultimately can show that the allegations are true, and that Taylor orchestrated the efforts to sway testimony against him.

Also, The Washington Post reports that Taylor's defense team has identified coach Joe Gibbs and owner Dan Snyder as potential character witnesses at the trial.

Meanwhile, Taylor is now likely to miss some of the team's offseason workouts, which commence on March 27.  

Taylor faces three felony charges for allegedly pointing a gun at a group of people who allegedly had stolen his four-wheeler.  In Florida, such charges carry a mandatory minimum of three years, per count.  

As we explained when Taylor was arrested and charged in June 2005, the team would be able to pursue millions in bonus money if he ultimately is convicted and misses any mandatory team activity due to his conviction or unfortunate incarceration.

SATURDAY ONE-LINERS

The Steelers have a Plan B if there's no new CBA (it's called "Operation Spend as Little Money as Possible and Sign No Free Agents Anyone Has Ever Heard Of" . . . coincidentally, that's the title of their Plan A, too).

The Packers are trying to re-sign RB Ahman Green, even though his status due to a serious quad injury is still unknown.

The Steelers have tendered RFA CB Ike Taylor at the first-round level of $1.552 million.

QB Gus Frerotte, LB Junior Seau, and DL Kevin Carter could be cap casualties in Miami absent a new CBA.

The Steelers cleared another $2.5 million in cap room by dumping QB Tommy Maddox and CB Willie Williams.

Bucs RB Michael Pittman agreed to a contract extension that reduces his cap hit by $700,000 in 2006.

The Dolphins would be interested in LB Willie McGinest, if he's cut by the Pats.

Steelers RB Duce Staley wisely restructured his contract to stay in Pittsburgh (and if he can stay healthy, the Steelers will look even wiser for keeping him).

Vikings C Matt Birk has apologized for calling NFLPA executive director a "piece of [sheet rock]."

Packers DL Kenny Peterson is the only one of the team's three restricted free agents to receive the RFA tender.

Chiefs DT Junior Siavii has been ordered to perform 80 hours of community service after pleading guilty to a charge "assault fear" (which in legal terms means scaring someone to the point of taking a habeas corpus in their jockey shorts).

The agent for WR David Givens doesn't expect the Pats to make an offer to keep him.

Former Packers LB Na'il Diggs is taking his release surprisingly well (then again, maybe he views the move like getting pulled out of a wrecked and burning train).

The Vikings have signed OL Jason Whittle, who was cut by the Giants last week.

The Redskins aren't expected to release any "front-line starters" if there's no new CBA (yeah, it'd just be a lot of the guys who would have been the "front-line starters" when the inevitable injuries to the "front-line starters" occur). 

Bears G Terrence Metcalf has signed a six-year, $12.5 million deal, which includes a $3.5 million signing bonus.

The Jags have opted to pay TE Kyle Brady a $300,000 roster bonus.

The Chiefs have opted not to pull the plug on the Kendrell Bell experiment.

The Vikings have signed S Willie Offord to a two-year deal.

The Jets have raised prices on some tickets (which many fans gladly would pay for in 2006 -- if the seats are obstructed view).

If QB Kerry Collins is cut by the Raiders, he might be pursued by the Ravens.

A league source has given us some sound advice to pass along to players who are faced either with taking a salary cut under their current contracts or less money on the open market to stay with their current teams.

Think about the future.

It's hard for guys in their 20s to do.  We know.  We were in our 20s once, and we didn't want to hear what anyone else thought we should do.  (Hell, we still don't.)  But if we were playing pro football and if we were trying to decide whether to take $250,000 a year more on a new contract in a new city with a new team after building up four or five years of goodwill with local fans and businesses, we'd welcome these words of wisdom.

Although former pro football players seem to be dying younger and younger, there's still usually another 40 or more years to live after the spotlight finds a younger, faster, and/or stronger version of the guy who currently is playing the game.  For many, they've chosen to worry about how they're going to make money outside of the NFL only after they are outside of the NFL.

A lot of guys presume they'll find a seat at the table in broadcasting.  But, you know, there really aren't that many spots available.  Besides, for every guy Jerome Bettis, who has the personality and the smarts to make it in that world, there are ten or fifteen guys like Gary Baxter.

So how else can a former pro football player parlay his NFL career into a lifetime supply of easy money?  Easy.  By staying in one city, busting his ass on the field, ingratiating himself to the fans and the media, and remaining a pillar of the community after his NFL career ends.

Of course, it also helps to be in a city that gives a crap about its football team, and to be on a football team that gives a crap about winning games.

For guys who fall within that category, the key is to know when to stay put, even if it means having a contract that prevents you from crowing in the locker room.

Consider the example of Ray Lewis.  He wanted that $19 million signing bonus.  And he got it.  But now he's stuck with three more years of a contract that doesn't pay him what he thinks he's worth, and his constant complaining (privately, for now) about his deal threatens to end his time in Baltimore or to fritter away his otherwise enormous opportunities there after he retires.

And what are we talking about when we refer to post-football opportunities?  Appearance fees, which are higher than ever for former NFL players.  Autograph sessions.  Endorsements.  And other sh-t that allows you to make money without having to think or to labor like the other 99.99992 percent of us have to do.

Bettis is a prime example of a guy who has pulled off the double whammy.  He took his pay cuts like a man as his career wound down, and now he'll make money and retain national fame as a broadcaster -- and he's also the unofficial King of Pittsburgh.  (We think that if he plays his cards right, he could end up being the next George Foreman . . . but then again maybe that's a fate we shouldn't wish on the Bus.)

Others who know what it means to take less money to stay in one place are Giants defensive end Michael Strahan, Giants running back Tiki Barber, Rams running back Marshall Faulk, and Chiefs running back Priest Holmes, who recently restructured his deal at a time when it's clear that he's no longer the guy in K.C.  Players who didn't get it include former Patriots safety Lawyer Milloy, former Patriots corner Ty Law, former Titans running back Eddie George, former 49ers receiver Terrell Owens, and soon-to-be-former Eagles receiver Terrell Owens.

Guys who probably should be taking all of this to heart include, in our opinion, Jets quarterback Chad Pennington, Titans quarterback Steve McNair, Seahawks running back Shaun Alexander, Colts running back Edgerrin James, Patriots kicker Adam Vinatieri, and Steelers receiver Antwaan Randle El. 

The problem, as we see it, is that the players are hearing the advice of their agents when the time comes to decide where to sign or whether to take that pay cut to stay put at a time when another team has already said (hypothetically) that it would pay more.  Agents, you see, usually don't care about the 30 years of income following the pro football career (unless, of course, they're the ones lining it up and getting a fee for doing so).  Instead, the agents want their points on the biggest pie available now, without regard to whether a move to a new town screws up the potential earnings post-football in the old one.

So think about the future, guys.  It's coming.  You can't stop it, but you can plan for it.  And one way to do so is to know when to conclude that a little less now could translate into a lot more later.   

HOW ABOUT COST SHARING?

Several readers who are perplexed by the inability of 32 multi-multi-millionaires to figure out how to deal with their financial success have offered a possible solution to the revenue-sharing conundrum.

How about cost sharing, too?

This would, in theory, take into account both the disparity in money earned by some teams and, at the same time, the money spent in order to earn it.

Taking it a step farther, why not put all team profits into one large pot and split them up?

The problem with both approaches is that such a system will invite abuses and/or antitrust violations.  As to the former, teams making a ton of the money will feel justified in spending a ton of it, too.  Ranging from a $12 million salary for the head coach to gold-plated toilet seats in the bathrooms, teams that make the most money will feel compelled to whiz it all away if either their costs are going to be diluted or their profits are going to be diminished via a 32-team average.  As to the latter, a system based on cost or profit sharing might invite collusion as to the wages paid to assistant coaches and other staff.  And the next step would be an antitrust lawsuit.  

Besides, it's far too easy for skilled accountants to engineer a scenario in which there are no net profits.  Even without creative accounting, the owner could serve as team president and pay himself $25 million in annual wages, resulting in a $25 million whack against the team's profits.      

Thus, the only legitimate alternative that we see to a revenue sharing plan that at least 24 of the owners will accept is to fold all 32 teams into one large corporation and issue shares of stock to the owners based on the audited value of their franchises.  

But even though the owners would still retain voting power through their shares, much of their day-to-day power would be yielded to the CEO and/or the Board of Directors.

Bottom line -- it's revenue sharing or nothing.

PODCASTING, ANYONE?

We've realized, inadvertently, that we have the capacity to put together very easily and (more importantly) very cheaply audio files that can be listened to on a computer or downloaded to an .mp3 player.

So before we do it, we'll throw it out there for your input.  Is there any interest in an audio version of the rumor mill, either on a daily or weekly basis?  Let us know whether you'd listen before we waste even more time doing it. 

Don't stop here -- we've got the poop for March 3, 2006, March 2, 2006, March 1, 2006, the back end of February, and four years of rumor mill archives.