Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Salary Cap might not go down


Mr. Scot

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, BrianS said:

See what I mean?  It's punitive, targeted at a few teams whom it would hurt unfairly more than others.

I don't disagree that teams have been kicking a can down the road, but that's their right.  They did it based on the knowledge in the labor agreement that the salary cap would continue to grow.  I also think it will catch up to them eventually and I look forward to that day.  But both of us could be wrong!  Using a global crisis to accelerate or trigger it would be grossly unfair.

When you make decisions based on the assumption of constant neverending growth, sometimes you get surprised and take a kick in the teeth for it. That's life. A lot of people learned that lesson the hard way back in '08/'09 housing crisis. Real estate constantly increases in value, right? Oops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, BrianS said:

I'm not sure how you could actually REDUCE the salary cap in the first place.  Sure, you could keep it the same, but reducing it would be very unfair to some teams.  I know we aren't one of them, because our cap is finally looking healthy again for next season, but the fact remains that it wouldn't be competitively fair to reduce it.

You really don't understand the business aspect of the CBA do you? The cap is based on profits/revenue  and the portion that is allowed to be paid to the players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, BrianS said:

See what I mean?  It's punitive, targeted at a few teams whom it would hurt unfairly more than others.

I don't disagree that teams have been kicking a can down the road, but that's their right.  They did it based on the knowledge in the labor agreement that the salary cap would continue to grow.  I also think it will catch up to them eventually and I look forward to that day.  But both of us could be wrong!  Using a global crisis to accelerate or trigger it would be grossly unfair.

Sort of like how a regular economic crisis would work?

It isn't unfair, it is reality. If you plan like there is no tomorrow and everything will always go up, you eventually will eat poo. fug em.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Snake said:

If I was a NFL owner I would demand the cap be reduced. Most teams that will be screwed have montage their futures anyway and the majority are losing their asses with zero fans. Sometimes you have to pay the Piper. 

The NFL won't do this.  You can't have a few teams (if the cap goes down to 175 million 3 teams, Saints, Eagles & Steelers would all be 60 million plus over the cap) that have like 20 - 30 NFL players on a team and the rest of the team be UDFA from the draft.  You would have 27 NFL teams and then 3 CFL or XFL teams.  This would not only make the teams look bad it would make the NFL look bad.  The last thing the NFL wants is to appear to give teams an unfair advantage or disadvantage. 

These teams made mistakes with the cap and covid but if you punish them for it you punish there fans as well and you get bad football. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bababoey said:

The NFL won't do this.  You can't have a few teams (if the cap goes down to 175 million 3 teams, Saints, Eagles & Steelers would all be 60 million plus over the cap) that have like 20 - 30 NFL players on a team and the rest of the team be UDFA from the draft.  You would have 27 NFL teams and then 3 CFL or XFL teams.  This would not only make the teams look bad it would make the NFL look bad.  The last thing the NFL wants is to appear to give teams an unfair advantage or disadvantage. 

These teams made mistakes with the cap and covid but if you punish them for it you punish there fans as well and you get bad football. 

To bad. Sometimes you have to pay for bad cap management. So all the NFL owners have to suffer because the Steelers needed to go 10-0. That hardly seems justifiable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really do not get where this got started---surely not at the owners' meetings.  See those empty seats at games?  They used to be filled with money.  The players get a percentage of gross revenues--something around 50%. 

Half of $4 billion is much more than half of $1.4 billion.  The players will be paid accordingly.  While the owners cannot cut their contracts, they can cut the cap. 

The way I understand it, nobody told Pittsburgh, New Orleans, etc. to project a constant, upwardly-sloping cap figure.  They have been big spenders and winning has been a reward.  With reward comes risk, and this is the risk that surrounds contracts.  Sorry, but placating the top teams is like giving them profits when the stock market is booming and then covering their losses when a recession hits. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Ship said:

There’s no logical reason to let Moton walk. I don’t care what you think about Hurney. Rhule will be deciding whether we keep Moton or not. He’s not gone until he’s gone so I don’t really care about him not being signed yet.

Actually, Taylor Moton will have a large part in deciding if we keep Taylor Moton or not. Are you prepared to make him the highest paid OL in the NFL is that's what he's asking for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, trueblade said:

Actually, Taylor Moton will have a large part in deciding if we keep Taylor Moton or not. Are you prepared to make him the highest paid OL in the NFL is that's what he's asking for?

Valid but the reports are that our procrastination has caused him to not want to be here at all. Sounds familiar, that is the way our former CB(and potential 2020 All Pro) James Bradberry felt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...