Salary Cap Could Be Gone For Good

[SaintsFanForLife]

I really would not like to see this happen. I think things are good the way they are.

[bsaza2358]

I don't think anyone wants to see this happen. The players are getting paid and are happy. Most owners have a built-in profit margin and are building their coffers significantly because they cannot spend over a certain amount. Why would ownership risk a near guaranteed profit margin? Let's face facts:

1.) The players have a good deal, and they aren't going to accept a lower percentage of revenue. It will take an extended strike before this can happen.

2.) Lower revenue franchises need the salary cap to control their own costs. Even then, they have trouble competing in terms of facilities, scouting, etc.

3.) Medium revenue franchises are petrified to risk their profit margin to compete with the high revenue owners. They would rather keep the status quo than risk it.

4.) Large revenue clubs have the most to lose here. Because they make the most money with luxury boxes, local media contracts, and apparel, they risk eating a significant portion of their own money just to potentially get an edge in competition.

5.) I don't see how the players can accept a situation where they don't have guaranteed contracts, but the owners can "spend" as much as they want. In the long run, it is possible that it will hurt player revenues.

[Bills2083]

Yes, this is completely fair to all of the small-market teams in the NFL.

[SaintsFanForLife]

Originally Posted by bsaza2358

I don't think anyone wants to see this happen. The players are getting paid and are happy. Most owners have a built-in profit margin and are building their coffers significantly because they cannot spend over a certain amount. Why would ownership risk a near guaranteed profit margin? Let's face facts:

1.) The players have a good deal, and they aren't going to accept a lower percentage of revenue. It will take an extended strike before this can happen.

2.) Lower revenue franchises need the salary cap to control their own costs. Even then, they have trouble competing in terms of facilities, scouting, etc.

3.) Medium revenue franchises are petrified to risk their profit margin to compete with the high revenue owners. They would rather keep the status quo than risk it.

4.) Large revenue clubs have the most to lose here. Because they make the most money with luxury boxes, local media contracts, and apparel, they risk eating a significant portion of their own money just to potentially get an edge in competition.

5.) I don't see how the players can accept a situation where they don't have guaranteed contracts, but the owners can "spend" as much as they want. In the long run, it is possible that it will hurt player revenues.

I agree with you 100% I really hope this does not happen

[bsaza2358]

I don't think anyone wants it to happen. However, I do think there will be a strike in the future. Every year, the cost of paying the players 60% of revenues is higher and higher. I'm not certain that revenues will grow as quickly as they have been the last 5-6 years. I'm also pretty sure that the owners are not going to let the players get much more of a piece of the pie than 60%. They do have significant operating costs, and they need to run their businesses. I foresee a big clash in the future, but not in 2008-2009. Maybe 2011-2012 or soon after.

[Im_a_Romosexual]

*Crosses Fingers*

[Flyboy]

... This would be incredibly lame if this went down.

[Addict]

Originally Posted by Im_a_Romosexual

*Crosses Fingers*

You know it's concerning how happy this makes cowboys fans... like you have zero chance of winning a SB with the cap in place. Do you really need this to happen in order to win?

[M.O.T.H.]

I'm a cowboy fan and I would hate if there wasnt a cap. It's all about a level playing field.

[bsaza2358]

Dallas cannot necessarily afford the non-cap salary base they would need to move forward. They have a gigantic stadium debt service, but that will be offset mostly by the huge revenue from the luxury boxes and gigantic stadium. Jerry Jones will always pay for players if and when he can, but why would he want to when he can still stay competitive and stay profitable? It's not necessarily a good business decision.

[princefielder28]

Originally Posted by TitleTown088

Yeah, better start buying those Packers stocks if you wanna help out.

i've got some...gonna need to buy more :)

[Im_a_Romosexual]

Originally Posted by Addict

You know it's concerning how happy this makes cowboys fans... like you have zero chance of winning a SB with the cap in place. Do you really need this to happen in order to win?

I was only half serious, I would actually prefer a cap.

We would be dominant without a cap and who doesn't want their team to be dominant?

[bsaza2358]

The Cowboys tried to buy super bowls under the cap and built some pretty awesome teams that failed to win. Others failed to even make the playoffs. For years, they were willing to spend where others weren't, and it did not help them. Their best season in 15 years came under the salary cap and after years of prudent and wise management. The restraint, patience, and quality shown by the Cowboys has come because of the salary cap. There is no reason for any fan to want a team that just had a 13 win season to shift its management philosophy or quality for any reason.

[summond822]

If the salary cap goes away, it won't be anything like baseball at first...however in about 3-5 years players would be making ridiculous money...above $25 million a year...much like MLB.

The NFL is my favorite sport to watch because it doesn't matter how much you pay for individual players...you have to stay at the same overall level as other teams...meaning you have to sacrifice something.

[Addict]

Originally Posted by Im_a_Romosexual

I was only half serious, I would actually prefer a cap.

We would be dominant without a cap and who doesn't want their team to be dominant?

well I think that dominance wouldn't be the same knowing it's obained with an unfair advantage over opponents.

Call it sportsmanship, but I prefer sucking in an honest league to dominating an unfair one.

[Twiddler]

Originally Posted by Addict

well I think that dominance wouldn't be the same knowing it's obained with an unfair advantage over opponents.

Call it sportsmanship, but I prefer sucking in an honest league to dominating an unfair one.

Exactly, a move like this would not be good for football's integrity. Or for the Packers. Or for sports in general.

[Shiver]

A lot of you are forgetting that Football was great before the salary cap. I would also like to add that if you compare a cap-less NFL to MLB then that shows how little you understand the situation. In the NFL all the teams get money from television contracts, thus the fiscal differential between teams would not be that big.

[BamaFalcon59]

For your information the Seahawks are the richest organization in the NFL. By a lot. Adding up all of the teams money from two through ten still falls a bit short of the Seahawks amount of cash.

I would hate for this to happen, even if it would benefit Atlanta. Arthur Blank is between six and eight on the list of richest owners and he wants to win, so we would be fine. But for the nature of the game it would be horrible.

[MasterShake]

Gene Upshaw is a dick! He could care less about the game/fans...

He only cares about the players and is too shortsighted to know that whats good for the game IS good for the players, i.e. SALARY CAP.

[Xiomera]

I'd like to see how many washed up veterans Matt Millen could bring in with no salary cap to hold him down . . . he might offer Barry Sanders a 100 million dollar contract.

[someone447]

Originally Posted by Shiver

A lot of you are forgetting that Football was great before the salary cap. I would also like to add that if you compare a cap-less NFL to MLB then that shows how little you understand the situation. In the NFL all the teams get money from television contracts, thus the fiscal differential between teams would not be that big.

No kidding. This would not be the end of the NFL as we know it. Revenue sharing means the teams would each make enough money to stay competitive.

[WinslowBodden]

Originally Posted by D-Unit

There corrected it for ya.

Considering that Lerner is rich and Cleveland is one of the best markets in the NFL?

[fenikz]

You know damn well that Bidwell won't be spending the extra money, might as well start downsizing the league if they do that

[BrownsTown]

Why the **** do they always change things that work just fine?

[DeathbyStat]

Well I'm looking foward to the Steelers being as awfull as the Pirates each and every year.