POSTED 8:20 p.m. EST; LAST UPDATED 9:11 p.m. EST, March 7, 2006

 

VISION OF TWO LEAGUES NOT SO CRAZY

 

We made an offhand comment earlier on Tuesday regarding the possibility, if the owners can't work out their current revenue ruckus, of two pro football leagues -- one containing teams that share all or most of the revenues generated, and one containing teams that don't.

 

Some readers thought we were crazy to even suggest it.  Maybe we are.  But sometimes it takes a little crazy to get the attention of folks who might wake up one day and find themselves playing basketball with Billy Babbit and the Chief.

 

Let's play this out.  If the owners can't get together on revenue sharing, then the NFL and the union can't get together on a new CBA.

 

So then the 2006 league year begins under the restrictive rules of the last capped year.  Lots of guys get cut, the market gets flooded with talent, and plenty of guys don't get paid very much money this year, relatively speaking.

 

So then the guys who don't get paid in 2006 are going to be even more tempted by the lure of the uncapped year, and the momentum within the union to push the thing toward the perceived gold mine of no spending limit will grow.

 

So then comes 2007, and the money doesn't flow quite as freely as the players presume it will, since in addition to no salary cap there's also no salary floor.  In the end, the 32 owners likely will devote far less money in 2007 to player salaries and benefits than they would under the terms of a new CBA.

 

After that comes the expiration of the CBA.  The union will decertify, precluding both a strike and a lockout. 

 

And that's when it gets interesting.  Because before the NFL can impose a uniform set of rules for player compensation and free agency upon the non-unionized players (which would trigger a flurry of antitrust lawsuits), 24 of the owners have to agree on those rules.

 

If they can't agree to those rules now, there's no reason to think they'll be able to agree to those rules then.

 

So if they can't agree, why continue to do business together?  The teams that want to share all revenue can form one league, and the teams that don't want to share all revenue can form another. 

 

If that idea doesn't sound particularly appetizing to the owners, then the thing to do is work it out.  Now.  Before positions harden and before folks begin to think seriously about options that should be unthinkable for the greatest sports league on the planet.

 

As we've previously said, they're not in this mess because there's not enough money to go around.  There's too much money, and everyone wants a system that favors their own selfish interests.

 

It's time for everyone to put their own interests aside and strike a deal that keeps the broader interests of the collective body in mind.  Before chaos arrives.

 

And before people start thinking again of baseball as America's pastime.

 

WHY HASN'T BARRY BONDS  BEEN BANISHED?

 

Speaking of baseball, let's make sure we understand this.  Pete Rose bets on baseball during his tenure as a manager, lies about it, and is cast out of the sport.

 

Barry Bonds takes steroids blatantly and chronically, lies about it, and is still playing the game.

 

Maybe the NFL won't fall out of the top spot, even if it tries. 

 

NEW DEAL WILL HAVE STANDARD BONUS LANGUAGE

 

A league source tells us that the new CBA, if accepted, will contain standard language regarding signing bonuses, including (most importantly) terms regarding the forfeiture of bonus money based upon retirement, suspension, holdout, or other misconduct.

 

Currently, the standard player contract is silent on such matters, leaving it to the teams and the players to put together their own terms.

 

As a result, different teams use different terms, leaving different players subject to different standards.

 

Moving forward, if the new CBA is adopted, it'll be one less thing for the player and the team to argue about when working out a deal.

 

But the CBA won't be adopted unless the owners approve the union's latest (and supposedly last) offer.  We're told that the first four hours of the meeting that convened at 3:00 p.m. EST on Tuesday were devoted to a point-by-point discussion of the proposal by Commissioner Paul Tagliabue.  It was only after the dinner break that the discussion as to whether the thing will be approved began.

 

POSTED 2:30 p.m. EST, March 7, 2006

 

SPANOS TELLS SMITH, SCHOTTENHEIMER TO SHUT UP

 

Jay Paris of The North County Times reports that Chargers owner Dean Spanos has told his pissing-and-moaning G.M. and head coach to shut up and play nice.

 

Spanos called the two of them into his office on Saturday to deliver the message.

 

Spanos recently released a statement indicating that the issue has been "dealt with, and the matter is now concluded."

 

Said Spanos:  "I had several discussions with General Manager A.J. Smith and Coach Schottenheimer.  I met with the G.M. and coach together.  I told them in no uncertain terms that I don't pay them to be friends.  I made it absolutely clear that I pay them to do their jobs.

 

"I expect nothing less than the highest level of professionalism from both the coach and general manager.  I expect both of them to pull in the same direction at all times, toward a Super Bowl for the Chargers.  The three of us left the meeting in agreement and we will now move forward, together, as an organization."

 

The problem likely originated when Jay Glazer of FOX reported earlier this year that Smith had lobbied Spanos to fire the head coach.  We'd heard that Smith was later plotting to make another run at getting Marty fired after the last vacant head coaching job was filled in the 2006 hiring cycle. 

 

Schottenheimer spoke on the matter a week ago, raising questions as to whether everyone in the organization is on the same page.  Schottenheimer suggested that he wants to keep quarterback Drew Brees, at a time when it's obvious that Smith plans to let him walk via free agency.

 

In our view, Marty is concerned that he's being set up for failure, which will make it easier for Smith to get his wish in 2007.  By speaking out now, Schottenheimer got the attention of the boss. 

 

So now the boss is watching.  So now it might be harder to Smith to make good on his obvious desire to run Schottenheimer out of town.

 

TUESDAY AFTERNOON ONE-LINERS

 

The owners will meet on Tuesday afternoon at the Dallas/Fort Worth Airport (we have a feeling that a few of them might be inclined to leave the engine running).

 

The Ravens might chase DT Sam Adams or DT Ted Washington, if they can't re-sign DT Maake Kemoeatu.

 

LB Antonio Pierce is making a big push for the Giants to sign LB LaVar Arrington.

 

Cowboys owner Jerry Jones has said the one thing on which pretty much the whole world can agree -- "I don't know if anybody cares how happy I am."

 

DT Sam Adams was scheduled to meet with the Dolphins on Tuesday.

 

The Eagles are interested in C Kevin Mawae.

 

From the "Tampering?  What the Hell is Tampering?" file, the Packers reportedly will pounce on Seahawks S Marquand Manuel.

 

POSTED 9:35 a.m. EST, March 7, 2006

 

TAGS RIDES THE FENCE

 

It's Tuesday, which means that it's time for a bunch of rich white dudes (and one rich white chick) to convene in Dallas to determine whether they can work out their differences in the interests of continued labor peace.

 

But the 59.5 percent question continues to be whether the Commish actually is endorsing the union's latest proposal, or whether he's merely delivering it.

 

Mark Maske of The Washington Post (who does tremendous work -- and that's a lot coming from us because we pretty much hate everybody) tries to get to the bottom of this key issue.

 

"Everyone wants to know if he's going to endorse it," NFLPA executive director Gene Upshaw stold Maske.  "My main issue is that he presents it.  He doesn't get a vote.  The owners have the votes.  [But] if he didn't support it, you wouldn't think he'd be presenting it."  

 

In contrast, NFL spokesman Greg Aiello told Maske that Tagliabue would merely be presenting the union's offer without a recommendation.

 

The deeper issue, as we've previously explained, is whether Tags has any remaining juice with his employers.  If he makes a recommendation and if at least 24 of them don't agree with it, he suddenly becomes football's version of Fay Vincent.  But if Tagliabue is merely the postal worker who drops off the envelope to the owners, he won't look bad if at least nine of them stamp the thing "return to sender."

 

One thing is certain -- at a minimum, Tagliabue fears that he won't muster enough support among the owners, which is prompting him to play it safe so that he won't have to quit.  It's not about ego for him, in our view.  Instead, we think he's trying to protect the owners from making a move that would render him neutered for the remainder of his tenure, which would then make it even harder for him to preside over the business of the league.  And at a time with so much friction in the ranks of the owners, a resignation by Tagliabue (no matter how tempted he is to do it) would be disastrous.

 

The bigger problem here is that, if Tagliabue can't get enough of these folks on the same page, we doubt that anyone else can, either.  So at some point (maybe now) it'll be time to start thinking about the very real possibility of the formation of two separate pro football leagues -- one in which there's full or complete revenue sharing, and one in which it's every team for itself.

 

BENSON BACK TO SETTING UP A MOVE?

 

Although Saints owner Tom Benson declared not that long ago that the Saints are in New Orleans to stay (at least for the next few years), his brand-new ticket pricing plan for the 2006 season is bound to raise concerns that he's trying to ensure that the Saints fail financially in their return to the Bayou, so that he then can move the club to San Antonio or Los Angeles.

 

According to The New Orleans Times-Picayune, the Saints have increased prices on some seats from $79 to $150.  Others jumped from $130 to $175.

 

But at the same time, some seats have gotten cheaper.  End zone seats previously priced at $64 dropped to $25, and end zone seats priced at $25 fell to $14.

 

On average, the prices increased by $4 or $5.  

 

In all, there will be 17 different pricing zones in the renovated-by-necessity Superdome, which became a house of horrors in the days after Hurricane Katrina.

 

In our view, this isn't evidence of Benson trying to lay the foundation for a move.  Instead, it's a recognition that the old model isn't working.  Even before Katrina hit, the team's season-ticket sales were languishing, so the guy needed to do something.  If he wanted to set the franchise up for failure, all he needed to do was to continue on the path that the team was already treading.

 

We like the idea of having plenty of options, since our society now has folks at every point on the earning spectrum.  The folks who happily pay $130 for prime seats probably can afford $175 or $150.  For the folks who were paying $79, $150 might be a bit of a stretch, but if they want to keep the team in town over the long haul, they'll try to make it work.  If not, someone else might be in place to step in.

 

As for the cheap seats -- it's better to get $14 bucks from a dude making minimum wage than to leave the chair empty. 

 

In the end, Benson is trying to expand revenues by taking a more pragmatic approach to the pricing structure.  It's precisely the thing that guys like Dan Snyder and Bob Kraft want these teams that aren't making as much money as other franchises to do.

 

The problem is that, given Benson's track record, fans naturally will presume that any change is a pretext for something sinister.  For once, we're inclined to give the guy the benefit of the doubt.

 

For now.   

 

GREEN DEAL GOOD FOR PACK, BAD FOR PLAYER

 

The more we think about the one-year deal signed on Sunday by Packers running back Ahman Green, the more perplexed we are by the move.

 

The base salary is only $1.8 million, we're told.  And he can earn up to $3.2 million more in incentives.  According to The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, there was a "modest" signing bonus.

 

For the Packers, it's a no-lose deal.  If Green can't recover from a serious quadriceps injury, then they can cut the cord, eating only the "modest" signing bonus.  If he does recover, the most they have to pay for a guy who could then still go out and put up a solid season is $5 million, assuming he hits all of his incentives.

 

The fact that Green still faces a potential suspension for 2005 domestic violence charges also might have played into the team's thinking.

 

For Green, why not wait to see whether the CBA gets extended before doing the deal?  Although other teams might not have been willing right now to do what the Packers did, they might have been more inclined to do something in the future, especially if $10 million in extra cap room suddenly arrives via a new CBA.  As it stands, Green has no guarantees of any kind.

 

The decision to sign him now also might have been aimed at nudging Lord Favre toward a decision on his own future.  Now that Favre knows Green is under contract for 2006, there's one less unknown for Him as He decides whether to grace us all with a return for at least one more 20-pick season.  And if Favre decides to pack it in, maybe Green gets released before his salary becomes fully guaranteed as of the team's regular-season opener.

 

Either way, the Packers got the better end of this one, by far.

 

TUESDAY MORNING ONE-LINERS

 

Speaking of Lord Farve, He has yet to indicate whether He'll be present for the team's Fan Fest this weekend; a year ago, Favre announced His decision to return for 2005 the day before the thing started. 

 

Currently, the Steelers are without the services of three of their safeties from 2005.

 

The Seahawks are celebrating the return of RB Shaun Alexander.  (But does "Hooray, the selfish asshole's back!" really constitute a celebration?)

 

The Lions, Texans, and Redskins have expressed interest in WR Isaac Bruce.

 

Meanwhile, Rams coach Scott Linehan says he'd like to re-sign Bruce (we don't think Lineham means it).

 

Former Broncos DL Trevor Pryce will visit the Browns on Tuesday.

 

The Broncos are working out a deal with DE Courtney Brown on a restructured contract.

 

The 49ers have re-signed LB Derek Smith.

 

Assault charges against Titans CB Pacman Jones were dropped on Monday at the request of the alleged victims, Robert Gaddy and Lamar Woodson;  the judge scolded them for filing the charges in search of a pay day.

 

The Eagles are interested in RB Mike Anderson.

 

Here's something else to consider regarding the current labor impasse -- without a new CBA, how in the hell will the NFL be able to make a schedule by April that features "good" teams for primetime games?

 

The Jets trimmed $9 million in cap room with QB Chad Pennington's new deal, but there's a $2 million roster bonus due in March 2007 that could push the two sides back to the table again next year.

 

Former Jets C Kevin Mawae says that the team made "a big mistake" by releasing him.  (It would be noteworthy if it was the only "big mistake" the team has made in the past three months.)