Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Salary Cap? Money well spent, or wasted?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Salary Cap? Money well spent, or wasted?

    Mike Florio of Profootballtalk.com ran the team-by-team salary-cap figures on his site Sunday.

    The interesting thing to me is that the last 2 teams on the list -- Tampa Bay ($80.8 million) & Kansas City ($84.5 million) -- are 2-0, & 2 of the 4 highest-paying teams -- Dallas ($166.5 million) and Minnesota ($143.4 million) are 0-2.

    Of course, those records will change. But still, very interesting.

  • #2
    I guess it's the veterans on both teams that take up a lot of cash. KC and Tampa are two overachieving and young teams. I'm not that surprised.

    Sig by Fenikz

    I remember NFLDC
    don't tell anyone, but Charlie Casserly is a dope fiend

    Comment


    • #3
      I wrote this in another thread:

      Originally posted by yourfavestoner View Post
      That's why I don't think the cap/floor is necessary. Football rosters are so much larger than baseball ones, it'd be impossible for a team to completely outspend all the others like the Yankees do in baseball.

      Plus, the cap floor hurts small market teams more than it helps them.

      The intent of the salary cap wasn't to level the playing field, it was to curb player salaries from rising astronomically. And it failed in that purpose, since salaries rose to ridiculous levels anyways.

      It's not necessary, and football can live on without it. Parity in the league exists due to how good your QB is, and the rotating strength of schedules, not how much money you spend/don't spend.
      The salary cap system was inherently broken. People are just scared of losing it because they thought that it created parity. The salary cap/floor wasn't implemented to create parity, it was created in order to curb player salaries. And it failed magnificently in that regard.

      Parity exists in the NFL because of quarterbacks and schedules. There are more people playing football than ever before. Guys from small schools are getting more attention and getting drafted higher than ever. There is a ton of talent in this country. It's not like baseball, where a guy has to develop for 2-3 years in the minors before even getting called up to the pros. Most guys are making an impact within two years.

      Comment


      • #4
        The late 80's/90's 49ers & Cowboys beg to differ about that "salary-cap means nothing in football" theory.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by J-Mike88 View Post
          The late 80's/90's 49ers & Cowboys beg to differ about that "salary-cap means nothing in football" theory.
          The majority of talent on both of those teams was drafted and developed on the cheap. It's not like Pitt and Dallas went out and bought up all those Hall of Famers as free agents.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by yourfavestoner View Post
            The majority of talent on both of those teams was drafted and developed on the cheap. It's not like Pitt and Dallas went out and bought up all those Hall of Famers as free agents.
            Maybe so, but super-expensive guys like Deion Sanders and Charles Haley were clear difference-makers on those championship teams for Dallas & San Francisco.

            That Dallas OL would never remain in tact with a cap either, because a few of those guys could have gotten Steve Hutchinson type money from someone else but not fitting in with Dallas with a cap.

            Now we have parity in the NFL.

            Comment


            • #7
              Great point about how the salary cap isn't the be all and end all in making a team competitive. From the 1970s forward the best teams have been

              Pittsburgh Steelers who drafted Terry Bradshaw, Mean Joe Greene, Jack Ham, Jack Lambert etc

              San Francisco 49ers who drafted Joe Montana, Jerry Rice etc

              Dallas Cowboys who drafted Troy Aikman, Emmitt smith, Michael Irvin etc

              Indianapolis Colts who drafted Peyton Manning, Marvin Harrison, Dwight Freeney, Bob Sanders etc

              New England Patriots who drafted Tom Brady, Tedi Bruschi, Richard Seymour, Asante Samuel etc

              These teams' best players were all drafted by the team but most importantly the QBs were put in place through the draft. Very seldom does a truely elite QB become available on the open market so if you don't draft one then your team will find it hard to win on a consistent basis, regardless of the talent around him


              BoneKrusher killing it with the sig

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by J-Mike88 View Post
                Maybe so, but super-expensive guys like Deion Sanders and Charles Haley were clear difference-makers on those championship teams for Dallas & San Francisco.

                That Dallas OL would never remain in tact with a cap either, because a few of those guys could have gotten Steve Hutchinson type money from someone else but not fitting in with Dallas with a cap.

                Now we have parity in the NFL.
                I think the Patriots and Steelers did a pretty damn good job this past decade of crapping all over the "dynasties can't exist in the salary cap era" theory.

                It's all about the quarterback. Find a way to restrict quarterbacks from changing teams, and parity will continue to exist.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Looking over those teams mentioned above, and I don't think the Patriots are a dynasty by the way.

                  The 49ers and Cowboys were clearly the greatest teams for about an 8-year period of time, with a little bit of Washington and the NYG mixed in there here or there.

                  But how about some love for the Buffalo Bills of the early 90's?
                  Those guys made FOUR straight Super Bowls. That's incredible.

                  I think the Rams or Patriots... Steelers, Colts, the most we've seen since then is 2 in a row right?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    How can the Patriots NOT be a dynasty? Three Superbowl wins in four years, and a Superbowl loss in a season where they went 18-0.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by J-Mike88 View Post
                      Looking over those teams mentioned above, and I don't think the Patriots are a dynasty by the way.

                      The 49ers and Cowboys were clearly the greatest teams for about an 8-year period of time, with a little bit of Washington and the NYG mixed in there here or there.

                      But how about some love for the Buffalo Bills of the early 90's?
                      Those guys made FOUR straight Super Bowls.
                      That's incredible.

                      I think the Rams or Patriots... Steelers, Colts, the most we've seen since then is 2 in a row right?
                      But the point that is quite easy to make here is the Patriots won the two Superbowls in a row they were in. The Steelers won two in four years. The Bills didn't actually win one.


                      BoneKrusher killing it with the sig

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Wonder if that would change if they counted the coaches' salaries in the cap, or just the HC's salary.................

                        I think the Patriots and Steelers did a pretty damn good job this past decade of crapping all over the "dynasties can't exist in the salary cap era" theory.
                        Clearly the difference in the recent Steelers & Patriots dynasties (if there are those in pro sports anymore) were the coaches, Cowher & Bellichick had their own unique touches to their championship teams, & they commanded big raises to some of the highest paid coaches in the league once they had established themselves as consistent winners. Same for the various Parcells-coached teams that won SBs, he did that everywhere he was HC except Dallas but he had had formidable reputation when he came out of retirement for the umpteenth time to take that job & commanded like $5M/yr. when he started.

                        Belichick had such huge pay raises after his successes outcoaching other coaches in NE that when he got the $1M fine for videotaping opponents' practices I'm sure he didn't lose any sleep over it. NE is famous for winning with underpaid players who overachieve & then dumping them when they are due huge bonuses, that may be changing now though with the talent draining away from NE & showing up in the W-L rcd. last yr.

                        If the cap means anything it keeps rich teams from buying the Lombardi Trophy, if they could Snyder & the Skins would have a trophy case full. The difference IMO is formidable HCs who can win consistently.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          There are too many factors that go into making a qaulity team. The salary cap seems like a totally irrelevant number at this point in the NFL. I suppose it keeps Jerry & Dan from breaking the bank on every talented player available, but that's about it.

                          Sig img shamelessly stolen from teh interwebs

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by FlyingElvis View Post
                            There are too many factors that go into making a qaulity team. The salary cap seems like a totally irrelevant number at this point in the NFL. I suppose it keeps Jerry & Dan from breaking the bank on every talented player available, but that's about it.
                            That's enough right there!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by J-Mike88 View Post
                              I don't think the Patriots are a dynasty by the way.
                              3 SB's in four years, if that isn't a dynasty I don't know what is.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              Debug Information