Salary Cap idea that will never happen

The owners do not want the pressure and fan backlash that having unspent cap dollars would cause.
And they do not want to spend more on contracts. If they did they would change the cap formula as they wish.
But I do like trying to find a way to keep your own drafted and developed talent. The hard part is that owner money is involved.

quote:

---

You hate the system that brought Brees here?

---

hate is a strong word, but Yup


and before you start aimlessly bashing saying that I must not be a fan of Brees, read "Old Man and the Sea" first.

quote:

---

owner money is involved.

---

true, but I don't think owners would be opposed to this as much. while in a way it is raising the salary cap, it's not quite the same thing. it will only effect expiring rookie contracts, and only if you resign that player. plus the player would have to agree to sign with you, since he is still a free agent. this year for us, it would mainly effect Graham since he is the only big money rookie that is involved. I think that for one or two players, the owners would be on board.

quote:

---

I think that for one or two players, the owners would be on board.

---

Perhaps a limit each year with possible carry over to the next year for unused options would sweetin the deal.

quote:

---

not really applicable here since they never signed him to the next contract. They picked up Rivers and franchised him

---

Exactly. Brees was hot and cold with the Chargers, so they got their QB of the future and basically let Brees walk. Totally different than a team picking up someone, developing them and then watching them go to some absolute crap team that can pay them twice as much

quote:

---

Regarding JG and any other rookie contract ending FA:

I started thinking just now of how shitty it is for a team to draft a player, train that player, strike gold with him and then have him leave and bring that team's hard work into making him a great player to another team so that they can reap the benefits. It's really a stupid system. I do like free agency, but this brings me back to my memories of the strike that ultimately lead to FA and what the owners were afraid of. They were right.

Here's what I think ought to happen. I believe that contracts should count against the cap just as they do. However, I think that when a player's rookie contract expires, if the team that drafted him (and ONLY that team) signs him to a second contract then it's salary cap hit should be half the contract (or some other percentage, but not the full 100%). This will allow players to get paid their due as well as allow the team to reap their rewards for their smart drafting and hard work of teaching. Once that second contract is over, then this expires and any contract counts the full cost.

Thoughts?

---

It's pretty much impossible to argue that free agency and the salary cap hasn't been very good for the NFL.

The playing field is as level as possible, and bad teams can turn it around in a single year.

You are blinded by one situation.

quote:

---

It's pretty much impossible to argue that free agency and the salary cap has been very good for the NFL.

---

i think you worded this incorrectly

quote:

---

i think you worded this incorrectly

---

Nothing like totally making the opposite point you were trying to make. Thanks, I fixed it.

quote:

---

You, on the other hand, did not offer any rejection to my contention nor did you even address my stance. You make a blanket statement that FA and SC have been good for the NFL. I stated the same thing in my original post. I agree with this, but that doesn't mean it has been perfect. This is a glaring issue that needs to be addressed.

---

I don't think it is a glaring issue. This isn't the NBA where markets play a large part in where the free agents go. Teams that lose free agents lose them because they CHOOSE to not pay the market rate for the player.

That's either because they have already decided to spend the money elsewhere (balanced team salaries is good for the league), have made poor decisions from a cap standpoint, or would prefer to spend their money on a different free agent.

Plus, your solution basically takes some of the teeth away from the salary cap. Not only do owners not want this for obvious reasons, but depending on the percentage (50% is absurd), some teams could theoretically choose to pay 50% more than the market value for a player. That causes all kinds of ripple effects as it relates to players salaries.

If you had to do something, I don't think you do, just give the owners right of first refusal for any FA contract signed by a player coming off his rookie deal. Guess what though, just like the owners aren't going for increased salary, the players aren't going for that either.

Basically, you are trying to solve a problem that's not really a problem and in doing so would require a pretty significant restructuring of the collective bargaining agreement.

quote:

---

something could be done. The need is to provide some incentive for keeping players while not inhibiting the freeness of the market for them.

Here's another-
For each year a player is under contract to the same team (consecutively) beyond five years, that team gets an amount of cap credit. Let's say $1mil per yr.

Jahri Evans as an example-
This will be his 9th year. That would be 4 years credit. Add $4mil to the Saints cap

---

You've just incentivized/forced the Saints to pay Evans 4M more than the market rate OR you have given an advantage to teams that resign their free agents. Neither of those things are good for the NFL, IMO.

The NFL has it right.