hopefully the jets front office is having an easier time figuring out what these final 8 rules mean than we are. i am so confused right now i don't even want to look at the actual document to figure who is right.
In an effort to avoid being wrong about yet another thing in this thread, I'll simply post the CBA's explanation of the NFL waiver system and try to keep my eyes focused on it for 20 minutes and try to puzzle out how TJ fits into it.
i personally think IJR is right. in section 2 of the final 8 plan it calls players who have been released unrestricted free agents. it was either done on purpose or it's a loophole. either way i'm in the IJR camp until someone can show me that interpretation is wrong. i don't see anything in the waiver system rules that would change this.
Well, look at the wording of Section 2. It's not defining what an UFA is, it's listing the conditions in which they became an UFA, if that makes any sense. (a) any Unrestricted Free Agent who acquired that status as a result of the NFL waiver system - which falls under the rules of the Waiver System I quoted above, and haven't even tried to read. (b) any Unrestricted Free Agent who was under contract to such Club on the last date of the last League Year of the player’s most recent Player Contract - that's not saying that any player that is under contract with a club up until March 4 2010 is an UFA, even if they get cut - it's saying that if a player becomes a UFA after March 5, like, say, their contract expires on March 4, we are eligible to go after them, or we are eligible to replace them. (c) any Unrestricted Free Agent signed pursuant to Section 4 below - see Section 4. The Final 8 Plan isn't there to tell you what a UFA is. Just how the way they became UFAs affects the Final 8 teams.
^ you might be right but the final 8 plan's wording has done nothing to make it clear that jones won't be able to be replaced by another UFA. i really don't know for sure but i just don't see anything in any of the relevant documents that rules out the possibility of tj being considered an UFA, meaning we could then sign another player to a contract comparable to the one he will sign. until i see something that firmly rules out that possibility i think IJR is onto something.
TJ is a veteran free agent well past his 4th accrued season. The only time he can hit waivers is between the trading deadline and the end of the season. Outside of that (including now), waiving his contract immediately makes him, as stated above: Here's the definition of a UFA according to Article XIX, Section 1 of the CBA: Looks awfully similar, and IMO is why they specifically mention UFAs who earn their status through the waiver system in the F8P. If I'm a GM of a F8 team, I'm taking the fact that it mentions ANY UFA as replaceable under the F8 plan in Section 4 as my guideline. Thomas Jones and Lito Sheppard, IMO, are BOTH replaceable as they will both be gaining their UFA status on the first day of the new league year. Let's hope both sign quickly and are overpaid.
This idea of "option" or "bonus" is what is making our heads explode. I think TJ isn't a UFA that can be replaced in terms of equal salary because he had a 2010 contract with the Jets. Since the Jets terminated his 2010 contract, he's unable to be replaced by a FA with equal 1st year salary. Sheppard, however, had an Option - which means since the Club did not pick it up, meaning he has no 2010 contract, and that means he's a UFA. Therefore Lito's salary can be replaceable by the wording of the F8P. That means the Jets could actually replace Lito with another corner in FA. Someone please tell me I'm right.
If you're right, wouldn't that work in reverse as well? Any player that is released by another team would be considered UFA - which means we can only sign any player outside RFA to a 1-for-1 exchange with equivalent money? Including released players?
Some clarification this morning: Although the CBA never defines the term, as I originally thought prior to actually READING the CBA, there is a distinction between a UFA and a Released FA (a designation I can only seem to find on the NFL's own free agency page). It is indeed the distinction between a terminated and expired contract despite the similar descriptions/regulations for the two. Further, Lito is NOT a UFA. Failing to pick up the bonus did not void his contract, it simply terminated the final year. Therefore, the contract was terminated, NOT expired, and he does not count toward our replaceable free agents. Time to focus just on those Released Free Agents and RFAs (how's that for a non-confusing designation?). Here's a link for the above: http://www.thejetsblog.com/2010/03/02/salary-cap-update-lito-is-not-a-ufa/
No. The sticking point for me was that it mentioned that we could sign without restriction any UFAs who achieved their status via the waiver system. Apparently, the ONLY way to become a UFA via the waiver system is if you're waived during the season. In that situation, if no one claims your contract you become a UFA after the season. If someone claims a contract with multiple remaining years, the player can STILL opt to become a UFA. Players released after the season are not eligible to become UFAs.
these new rules are not fun. I understand they do keep parity, but they are really annoying and twice as confusing.
BUMMER DUDE. I was hoping that at least Lito would end up being replaceable. I guess we don't get to win the offseason Super Bowl.
I say we immediately start denigrating every UFA out there. I didn't want Dunta Robinson anyway. I heard he's a child molester and makes monkeys fight for money.
My cousin just texted me. He just heard from Julius Peppers' sister that Peppers has been running a homosexual interstate cockfighting ring out of a children's hospital in Oklahoma.
Can we also let Rex Ryan go cause he is too good and im afraid other teams will be suffering next season
