Skip to main content

Maverick Davis Defies Convention, Again

Stanford Routt received a new contract for $31 million over three years with about $10 per year over the first two years. Richard Seymour will be paid in the $12-15 million per year range for the next two years. Kamerion Wimbley will receive a one-year franchise tender around $10 million.

Throw in $8 million to John Henderson and a ham sandwich for Rock Cartwright and you have about $80 million worth of spending on players.

$80 million is a lot of money in a normal NFL off season, but it is even more considering the uncertainty surrounding the CBA.

There are still free agents to be signed too. Nnamdi Asomugha, Michael Bush, Zach Miller, Michael Huff and Robert Gallery are all potentials.

While the Routt contract would seemingly indicate the end of the Nnamdi Asomugha era, don't be surprised if Al Davis continues to open his wallet for his players, including Asomugha.

Signing players before a new CBA is signed is risky business. The market for players could completely change under terms of the new CBA.

If the labor terms change and the owners get a bigger slice of the revenue pie, the Raiders would have several contracts on the books that were detrimental moving forward. The contracts run for two or three years instead of four to six for this reason.

If however the NFLPA negotiates for a bigger slice of the revenue pie, the contracts Davis has handed out could seem like bargains.

If the NFL adopts an 18-game schedule, the contacts signed prior may be spread out over an additional two games. Two additional games would increase the season length by 12.5%.

Provided the owners were able to realize the extra games as revenue increases, the players are going to ask for some of that revenue to be as part of the cap figure.

While other teams will be forced to renegotiate under the new terms for players, the Raiders have grandfathered these contracts under the prior rules. If the contracts are structured to avoid likely new proration rules under a new CBA, the deals are could be financially sound.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Oakland Raiders Swing for the Fences in 2016 NFL Draft

[embed align="center"]http://gty.im/153039819[/embed] These aren't your daddy's Oakland Raiders or even your younger self's Raiders. If anything, these are your newborn's Raiders or your puppy's Raiders. These are the Raiders we've never seen before. Indicative of the freshness of the franchise was their 2016 NFL Draft. No longer slave to a high draft pick and desperate needs, the theme of the draft for the Raiders was upside. It's as if general manager Reggie McKenzie got so used to hitting his draft picks out of the park that he started swinging for the fences. We'll have to wait a couple of years before we know if he struck out or if he'll continue his Ruthian ways. First, McKenzie boldly went with a safety at No. 14 overall. Kyle Joseph is coming off a torn ACL and fills a major need, but safety isn't a premium position. Only a handful of safeties have been drafted in the first 14 picks in the last 15 years and include names like Ea

The Raiders aren't who we thought they were....they're better

The Oakland Raiders are tired of being the team that will be good in a year or two. The team expects to win now and it is winning now. We thought the Raiders needed more talent. We thought that being in the playoff hunt was a year away for this team, but we were wrong. This isn't the team we thought they were, they're better. On Sunday, they moved to 3-3 on Sunday with a 37-29 win over the San Diego Chargers that wasn't close until the final minute. It was also the Raiders second road win of the season. The last time the Raiders had two road wins by their sixth game was 2011. Before that, a five-year streak from 1998-2002. The Raiders went 8-8 in 1998, 1999 and 2011 and narrowly missed the playoffs each year.  They made the playoffs in 2000, 2001 and 2002. They didn't have a losing record in any of those seasons because teams that can win on the road are usually pretty good. As the season matures, there is more and more evidence that some of the "best-case scenario

2012 NFL Strength of Schedule

  Disclaimer Some strength of schedule models calculate strength of schedule based on the opponents the team has faced to date.  My model calculates strength of schedule based on all the opponents on a team's schedule.  The reason for this is because it reduces weekly fluctuations. For example, when a team plays their Week 17 game, in the traditional model their strength of schedule would change by 31 games...their Week 17 opponent's 16 games plus the additional game played by each of their prior 15 opponents.  In my model, when a team plays their Week 17 game their strength of schedule will only change by 15 games...one additional game for each of the opponents on their schedule.