
There's been a lot of talk about the 2010 season being uncapped, in light of the recent decision by the owners to opt out of the current CBA with the NFL Players Association. I know Bills fans think this will be a disaster, with most of the teams going on wild spending sprees and scooping up all the good players. Some teams, like the Redskins and Cowboys, may take advantage by spending over the current limits. But there are some real reasons why an uncapped year isn't a great benefit to most of the players and the teams.
In an uncapped season in 2010, there are also some restrictions that limit the amount of free spending.
1. Players will now need 6 seasons, not 4, to become unrestricted free agents. That will severely limit the available players, and make those free agents much older and less appealing for big-money contracts.
2. The top eight playoff finishers from the 2009 season will only be allowed to sign free agents at the rate they lose them. So, the Patriots couldn's spend big unless they lose players.
3. Teams will now be allowed 2 franchise tags, instead of the current one.
So, you can see how these rules will restrict many teams from going on wild shopping sprees. Keep in mind, many teams in the league (like the Bills) don't spend to the cap anyway. So an uncapped year won't change their fiscal approach.
I'm going to look at some Bills contracts, and see who might be affected by these 2010 rules, if it ever gets to that. I'll include that in a later post.