The Cap...good or bad for the NFL?

[ATL96Steeler]

I hate the cap in all sports.

Can't keep teams together anymore.

I say let 'er rip and if they spend themselves into oblivion so be it.

The fact they need something like a cap to save them from themselves is sad....

Spoken like a true MLB union rep...lol.

The reason I like the cap concept is it allows GB to compete on a somewhat level playing field with NYC...Being totally honest...MLB really is a major market sport...smaller market teams can creep into contention, but when it's time to pay the key young players...the big markets feast on them.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

To be honest I like seeing guys stay with their teams longer. I could easily give up crazy free agency periods.

I don't agree that it creates more parity. Poorly managed teams are still perennial losers even if the spending is somewhat equal. Look at the Browns, Jets, Raiders, Titans, Jags, etc. The NBA has a cap too and it has the least parity of any major sport. 2 teams basically own half of the titles in the league's history.

Well...there are badly run sports franchises in all sports. The cap doesn't guarantee parity, but it does encourage it.

 

[Pattersonca65]

The NBA is a soft cap at best. It's not a real cap. Teams can still spend whatever they want for 3 years with little repercussions, take a year off, then go out and again spend whatever they want for 3 mores years. Rinse & repeat.

The only thing that saves the MLB model is the fact that if you draft an 18-21 year old kid, teams basically have anywhere 7-10 years of control, depending on when the reach the majors, at minimal salaries. There is no way for the NFL to incorporate that in to the spending structure.

True, but I think the NBA repeater tax which has just come into effect in recent years has made a difference. Before the repeater tax, some of the big market teams just paid the luxury tax year after year. The repeater tax made those salary cap taxes go up substantially. Teams that never cared about the salary tax before are now trying to stay under the cap

 

[Hank Kingsley]

Careful what you wish for .... Paul Allen has more money than all the owners combined... You don't want Seattle with unlimited money to spend.... Cap makes the draft that much more important and keeps things on a level playing field .... Teams do change more every year, but you can keep your core stars, you just can't keep it stacked like before the cap ...

Like I said, spending like a drunken sailor is no guarantee you win. You can't buy them all up. And injuries happen too.

I'm AOK with no cap.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

Careful what you wish for .... Paul Allen has more money than all the owners combined... You don't want Seattle with unlimited money to spend.... Cap makes the draft that much more important and keeps things on a level playing field .... Teams do change more every year, but you can keep your core stars, you just can't keep it stacked like before the cap ...

I'm a cap guy too, but I think the owners (who control the cap) need to work more in line with revenue growth. They prefer to keep the gravy for themselves until the next CBA.

Your rookie contract players have to contribute...Very few positions you can afford to pay 2 guys market value if they are high level players...one typically has to go and the team inserts a draft pick or a lessor talented player.

 

[Hank Kingsley]

Spoken like a true MLB union rep...lol.

The reason I like the cap concept is it allows GB to compete on a somewhat level playing field with NYC...Being totally honest...MLB really is a major market sport...smaller market teams can creep into contention, but when it's time to pay the key young players...the big markets feast on them.

No. Spoken like somebody who doesn't like baseball or basketball.

However, in hockey and football it fucks teams up just as they are clicking. I like a dynasty.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

No. Spoken like somebody who doesn't like baseball or basketball.

However, in hockey and football it fucks teams up just as they are clicking. I like a dynasty.

I was a big NBA fan 70s-80s and some 90s...now I can't sit thru an entire game...but I try to keep up come playoff time...MLB...totally lost me after the strike year that cancelled the WS...as games go...the concept of baseball, I like the best, but I can't get back into it.

With the cap, we'll never see the true a dynasty again in the NFL...and that's disappointing.

 

[night]

I was a big NBA fan 70s-80s and some 90s...now I can't sit thru an entire game...but I try to keep up come playoff time...MLB...totally lost me after the strike year that cancelled the WS...as games go...the concept of baseball, I like the best, but I can't get back into it.

With the cap, we'll never see the true a dynasty again in the NFL...and that's disappointing.

Patriots and Cowboys?

 

[purguy12]

Cap is good for the NFL. Look how much press NFL is getting right now in the offseason.

 

[ducky]

To be honest I like seeing guys stay with their teams longer. I could easily give up crazy free agency periods.

I don't agree that it creates more parity. Poorly managed teams are still perennial losers even if the spending is somewhat equal. Look at the Browns, Jets, Raiders, Titans, Jags, etc. The NBA has a cap too and it has the least parity of any major sport. 2 teams basically own half of the titles in the league's history.

I can't see an argument that it doesn't create parity.

Good teams have to watch some of their better talent walk away every year. While for bad teams it is the only way they can add talent because they are so poorly run that they can't draft well.

Back in the day teams like the Cowboys and 49ers stockpiled their talent. There were probably 6 or 7 players on those dynasty teams that could have started around the league that would have helped the lesser teams and hurt SF or Dallas.

 

[ducky]

I don't agree that it creates more parity. Poorly managed teams are still perennial losers even if the spending is somewhat equal. Look at the Browns, Jets, Raiders, Titans, Jags, etc. The NBA has a cap too and it has the least parity of any major sport. 2 teams basically own half of the titles in the league's history.

The NBA isn't a relevant comparison to any of the other major sports in this discussion. There simply is not a system that can create parity in a sport's league where the virtually the only thing that matters is your top 2 or 3 players.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

Spoken like a true MLB union rep...lol.

The reason I like the cap concept is it allows GB to compete on a somewhat level playing field with NYC...Being totally honest...MLB really is a major market sport...smaller market teams can creep into contention, but when it's time to pay the key young players...the big markets feast on them.

Exactly... The entire MLB has been like a farm team for the Yankees over the last 15 years... lol Your never guaranteed a title, so it's not like they won it every year, BUT they were right there almost every dam time...

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

Like I said, spending like a drunken sailor is no guarantee you win. You can't buy them all up. And injuries happen too.

I'm AOK with no cap.

Well yeah but imagine the depth teams will have that are willing to spend the most money... Your never guaranteed a title, but certain teams willing to spend like crazy every year are gonna be right there... Also teams in smaller markets will just get run over all the time... They might nail draft picks and improve, but the teams with the most money will buy out there players every time when the $ is due ... Players always run to the money...

 

[Southieinnc]

If the NFL gets rid of the cap then it's going to become a joke like Major League Baseball where the Yankees pay some of their players more than other teams pay their entire roster.

Okay, it probably wouldn't get that bad. It's virtually impossible to have a worse model for a sports league than MLB has but it sure seems like Goodell and others have been pushing hard lately to "fix" what isn't broken.

Good post - enough said.....

 

[Clayton]

People who dont watch mlb shouldnt talk about mlb. the royals were in the ws last year

 

[night]

I can't see an argument that it doesn't create parity.

Good teams have to watch some of their better talent walk away every year. While for bad teams it is the only way they can add talent because they are so poorly run that they can't draft well.

Back in the day teams like the Cowboys and 49ers stockpiled their talent. There were probably 6 or 7 players on those dynasty teams that could have started around the league that would have helped the lesser teams and hurt SF or Dallas.

The average career for a NFL player is about 3 years and positions like QB, K, and PK drive that number up quite a bit. It's a high turnover sport by nature.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

People who dont watch mlb shouldnt talk about mlb. the royals were in the ws last year

Yeah that's true on both points, but when was the last time before that? 25 yrs maybe? The Pirates, Rays have been good lately but lets see how long they can sustain it?

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

People who dont watch mlb shouldnt talk about mlb. the royals were in the ws last year

How many times has KC made the playoff in the last 30 years ?

 

[Clayton]

How many times has KC made the playoff in the last 30 years ?

How many times has Oakland and Tampa Bay made the playoffs in the last 10 years? Spending in MLB matters but the league is not nearly as unbalanced as the NFL as of late

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

How many times has Oakland and Tampa Bay made the playoffs in the last 10 years? Spending in MLB matters but the league is not nearly as unbalanced as the NFL as of late

But it's still and even playing field with the cap... If they draft bad there product is bad .. If they make poor decisions with the cap it hurts there team... And 10 years is a helluva lot less than 30 years...