Is Browner a FA after this year?

[kidhawk]

Ok, I found a copy of the previous CBA

[urltargetblank]http://images.nflplayers.com/mediaResources/files/PDFs/General/NFL%20COLLECTIVE%20BARGAINING%20AGREEMENT%202006%20-%202012.pdf[/urltargetblank]


This from page 180 of 301

Section 7. Credited Season: For purposes of calculating Credited Seasons
under this Article only, a player shall earn one Credited Season for each season
during which he was on, or should have been on, full pay status for a
total of three (3) or more regular season games, but which, irrespective of
the player’s pay status, shall not include games for which this player was
on: (i) the Exempt Commissioner Permission List; (ii) the Reserve PUP List
as a result of a non-football injury; (iii) a Club’s Practice or Developmental
Squad; or (iv) a Club’s Injured Reserve List.

His year in Denver shouldn't have counted

 

[Basis4day]

Ok, I found a copy of the previous CBA

[urltargetblank]http://images.nflplayers.com/mediaResources/files/PDFs/General/NFL%20COLLECTIVE%20BARGAINING%20AGREEMENT%202006%20-%202012.pdf[/urltargetblank]


This from page 180 of 301

Section 7. Credited Season: For purposes of calculating Credited Seasons
under this Article only, a player shall earn one Credited Season for each season
during which he was on, or should have been on, full pay status for a
total of three (3) or more regular season games, but which, irrespective of
the player’s pay status, shall not include games for which this player was
on: (i) the Exempt Commissioner Permission List; (ii) the Reserve PUP List
as a result of a non-football injury; (iii) a Club’s Practice or Developmental
Squad; or (iv) a Club’s Injured Reserve List.

His year in Denver shouldn't have counted

Assuming the CBA in 2005 had similar restrictions, i think you've explained it. Thanks.

 

[Hawkstorian]

The new CBA says:

For the purposes of calculating Accrued Seasons under this Agreement, a
player shall receive one Accrued Season for each season during which he was on, or
should have been on, full pay status for a total of six or more regular season games, but
which, irrespective of the player's pay status, shall not include games for which the player
was on: (i) the Exempt Commissioner Permission List, (ii) the Reserve PUP List as a
result of a nonfootball injury, or (iii) a Club's Practice Squad.

So IR isn't excluded. I think he's a UFA next year but I hope to be proven wrong.

 

[Basis4day]

The new CBA says:

For the purposes of calculating Accrued Seasons under this Agreement, a
player shall receive one Accrued Season for each season during which he was on, or
should have been on, full pay status for a total of six or more regular season games, but
which, irrespective of the player's pay status, shall not include games for which the player
was on: (i) the Exempt Commissioner Permission List, (ii) the Reserve PUP List as a
result of a nonfootball injury, or (iii) a Club's Practice Squad.

So IR isn't excluded. I think he's a UFA next year but I hope to be proven wrong.

Browner signed his contract on January 21, 2011 under the terms of the old CBA. That CBA didn't expire until March 11, 2011. He was allowed to sign because he was not on an NFL roster the previous year, but had been through the draft process.

 

[kidhawk]

Another older version of the CBA showing a date ammended as of 2002:

[urltargetblank]http://louridas.net/products/sports-agent-course/sports/football/nfl/CBA-OLD-FINAL.pdf[/urltargetblank]

Section 7. Credited Season: For purposes of calculating Credited Seasons under this Article only, a player shall earn one Credited Season for each season during which he was on, or should have been on, full pay status for a total of three or more regular season games, but which, irrespective of the player’s pay status, shall not include games for which this player was on: (i) the Exempt Commissioner Permission List; (ii) the Reserve PUP List as a result of a non-football injury; (iii) a Club’s Practice or Developmental Squad; or (iv) a Club’s Injured Reserve List.

So the previous two CBA both say that you don't accrue if you don't get at least three games and IR doesn't count towards accrual. I'd say that he should be a RFA.

 

[Basis4day]

Another older version of the CBA showing a date ammended as of 2002:

[urltargetblank]http://louridas.net/products/sports-agent-course/sports/football/nfl/CBA-OLD-FINAL.pdf[/urltargetblank]

Section 7. Credited Season: For purposes of calculating Credited Seasons under this Article only, a player shall earn one Credited Season for each season during which he was on, or should have been on, full pay status for a total of three or more regular season games, but which, irrespective of the player’s pay status, shall not include games for which this player was on: (i) the Exempt Commissioner Permission List; (ii) the Reserve PUP List as a result of a non-football injury; (iii) a Club’s Practice or Developmental Squad; or (iv) a Club’s Injured Reserve List.

So the previous two CBA both say that you don't accrue if you don't get at least three games and IR doesn't count towards accrual. I'd say that he should be a RFA.

Thanks for digging that up. I think it's settled. He's an RFA.

 

[kidhawk]

The new CBA says:

For the purposes of calculating Accrued Seasons under this Agreement, a
player shall receive one Accrued Season for each season during which he was on, or
should have been on, full pay status for a total of six or more regular season games, but
which, irrespective of the player's pay status, shall not include games for which the player
was on: (i) the Exempt Commissioner Permission List, (ii) the Reserve PUP List as a
result of a nonfootball injury, or (iii) a Club's Practice Squad.

So IR isn't excluded. I think he's a UFA next year but I hope to be proven wrong.

The latest CBA does exclude the the injured reserve

Here's the link:

[urltargetblank]http://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/collective-bargaining-agreement-2011-2020.pdf[/urltargetblank]

It's on page 161 of 316 and it's in Section 2

 

[Hawkstorian]

Dave, I'm clicking that link and it's giving me the same document I referred to earlier without the exclusion for IR.

The page I'm referring to is 34.

Strange.

 

[kidhawk]

Dave, I'm clicking that link and it's giving me the same document I referred to earlier without the exclusion for IR.

The page I'm referring to is 34.

Strange.

Yes, I saw the part you quoted in the earlier section, but what I quoted is in a latter section and it's pretty much the same verbage in all of the CBA's off the past decade. Honestly, it shouldn't count, but with the conflicting paragraphs, I could see it counting.

Will be interesting to see what happens if he makes it through the season without an extension. If he gets extended, we may never know.

 

[Basis4day]

Dave, I'm clicking that link and it's giving me the same document I referred to earlier without the exclusion for IR.

The page I'm referring to is 34.

Strange.

Somewhat Moot, as Browner wasn't signed under the new CBA.

 

[Hawkstorian]

Somewhat Moot, as Browner wasn't signed under the new CBA.

Well Sando says it counts and he is very diligent in his fact checking.

 

[kidhawk]

Dave, I'm clicking that link and it's giving me the same document I referred to earlier without the exclusion for IR.

The page I'm referring to is 34.

Strange.

Somewhat Moot, as Browner wasn't signed under the new CBA.

Two points on that issue, I believe when the contract gets ratified by all the players in the union, then they must all follow that CBA or leave the union. I'm no labor law expert, but I believe this to be so.

Also, the conflicting verbiage is in the older CBA as well.

 

[Basis4day]

Dave, I'm clicking that link and it's giving me the same document I referred to earlier without the exclusion for IR.

The page I'm referring to is 34.

Strange.

Somewhat Moot, as Browner wasn't signed under the new CBA.

Two points on that issue, I believe when the contract gets ratified by all the players in the union, then they must all follow that CBA or leave the union. I'm no labor law expert, but I believe this to be so.

Also, the conflicting verbiage is in the older CBA as well.

I have it figured out. The credited Season section on page 161 of the pdf (pg 146 of the document)

says "For purposes of calculating Credited Seasons under this Article only". Referring to Article 26 Regarding Salary calculation only

PDF page 49 (34 of the document) is under article 8, regarding Free Agency.

 

[Basis4day]

Somewhat Moot, as Browner wasn't signed under the new CBA.

Well Sando says it counts and he is very diligent in his fact checking.

I emailed him about it, lets see if i get a response.

 

[kidhawk]

Funny thing is that I just think that it's all going to be moot, because if we want to keep him, we'll likely sign him to an extension anyway. The question is, do we want him, or do we think we have the talent behind him to take his place. We didn't fare too poorly while he was out with his suspension, so it's not unlikely that we could be grooming a replacement. If not, it's likely he gets an extension and this whole conversation is for naught.

 

[Basis4day]

Anyone else have headache?

 

[Hawkstorian]

I see it now.

The page Kidhawk is referring to is in Article 26 and refers to SALARIES only.

The page I'm referring to is Article 8 which describes accrued seasons, which define whether a player qualifies for restricted or unrestricted free agency. In other words, a player could have a salary for a 3rd year player but earn his 4th accrued season towards free agency and pension benefits.

If this is correct, I still believe Browner is a UFA after this coming season.

 

[DavidSeven]

Funny thing is that I just think that it's all going to be moot, because if we want to keep him, we'll likely sign him to an extension anyway. The question is, do we want him, or do we think we have the talent behind him to take his place. We didn't fare too poorly while he was out with his suspension, so it's not unlikely that we could be grooming a replacement. If not, it's likely he gets an extension and this whole conversation is for naught.

It still matters for 2014 I would think. Even if they didn't want to sign him to a big extension, they could have him for one more year at a bargain salary if he's considered a RFA.

 

[kidhawk]

Funny thing is that I just think that it's all going to be moot, because if we want to keep him, we'll likely sign him to an extension anyway. The question is, do we want him, or do we think we have the talent behind him to take his place. We didn't fare too poorly while he was out with his suspension, so it's not unlikely that we could be grooming a replacement. If not, it's likely he gets an extension and this whole conversation is for naught.

It still matters for 2014 I would think. Even if they didn't want to sign him to a big extension, they could have him for one more year at a bargain salary if he's considered a RFA.

True, but if they think they have a replacement on the roster now, then they may want to give that player a chance to play now, in which case, the RFA or UFA restriction only matters if we think someone would sign him and give up a pick to get him. Also, since Browner wasn't drafted in the first place, he'd have to be tendered at the higher 1st or 2nd round dollar figures ($2 million to $3 million). That is nearly double the standard RFA offer if he'd been drafted and if he was truly just going to be a backup, it's a high price to pay for the position considering what we have to pay to keep guys like Sherm, Wilson, Thomas in the future.

I still think that this never comes to a head. If we want him, we'll extend him. If we don't, we won't. And one thing is for certain, the team has already worked out whether he's RFA or UFA and they know what they want to do about it.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

So is he or not? If so I think Tharold Simon is his possible replacement if not they have a plan of some type.