PDA

View Full Version : Salary cap is talent redistribution -- it's BS and I'm sick of it



JJC7301
03-10-2012, 02:13 AM
I understand that the cap is in place so that smaller market teams can compete with bigger markets, and also to protect themselves from going to crazy on spending their own money.

But it's also talent redistribution and I'm sick of it. Teams like the Giants, Steelers, GB, and NE who build through the draft have to lose out on their own talented guys (MM, BJ) to teams that haven't necessarily managed their cap well, but rather can't draft well.

The 'skins, Jets, 'boys, Eagles -- these teams draft like crap and have cap space because they let their own crappy players walk. When do these teams ever lose out on one of their own good or solid players because of cap reasons? They have maybe a handful of players that other teams would actually spend money on.

Other teams could have drafted Nicks, but chose Heward-Bay and Crabtree. They don't have to worry too much about clearing cap space for that crap. Nor do any of the 15 teams that passed on JPP (like the Eagle trading up to take Ben Graham ahead of JPP) have to worry about clearing cap space because of their own stupid mistake of not drafting the guy to begin with.

Get rid of the cap or tweak it somehow because it's crap. Sorry if this is sour grapes, but I am upset that BJ is gone and that we're going to have a tough few years clearing space to keep JPP, Cruz, and Nicks.

Axels15
03-10-2012, 02:17 AM
I like it.

Much fairer than baseball.

Spizi
03-10-2012, 02:21 AM
liberalism at its finest.

JJC7301
03-10-2012, 02:21 AM
I like it.

Much fairer than baseball.
I want the smaller teams to be competitive in terms of retaining their own talent, but when the heck do they ever draft well? That's my point.

The Jags are crap, 'phins aren't very good (Miami's not exactly small market either), Panthers stink except for their QB.

Most other teams don't seem to have to worry about losing their own productive players because they never draft enough of them to begin with. That's my point.

It's not like the Giants are the Yankees who sign every other teams stars. Just sucks that we can't keep our own players because we have a lot of talent, while other teams can't draft for crap.

JJC7301
03-10-2012, 02:24 AM
liberalism at its finest.
Ha! +1. I consider myself a capitalist, but the NFL has done a great job of making itself the # 1 sport in the US and the cap has done a good job in at least giving smaller markets a chance to compete.

But my point is that plenty of other teams suck the blood of the Giants, Steelers, GB, and NE because they can't draft worth crap. What stud have the Jets, Eagles, 'skins, or Cowboys ever lost over the past 10 years? Meanwhile, we've got a plethera of talent (JPP, Nicks, and Cruz) who we are going to have to get so damn creative in our cap for in order to keep.

JJC7301
03-10-2012, 02:26 AM
I like it.

Much fairer than baseball.
Baseball does not even have a hard cap -- all you do is pay more money if you go over. Yeah, it is better than baseball's, but my point is losing our own talent teams of losers who can't develop their own. It just sucks.

PRFan
03-10-2012, 02:33 AM
The cap is a big part of that #1 sport in America. Baseball is going to hell and basketball needs a francise tag.

Flip Empty
03-10-2012, 02:37 AM
I like it. Without a cap the Cowboys would win every year.

JJC7301
03-10-2012, 02:38 AM
The cap is a big part of that #1 sport in America. Baseball is going to hell and basketball needs a francise tag.
I recognize that, but I also believe that it's a talent cap as much as salary cap.

There seem to be a whhhooooolllleee bunch of teams that never seem to have salary cap issues because they open the door to their stables of crappy players that they've drafted and loot someone else's players to try to make up for the empty spot that was their original mistake.

I'm just ranting because we lost BJ and we're going to be through cap contortionist tricks in order to keep our own guys.

Osi will probably be gone next year to a team that never thinks to draft DEs, doesn't scout well enough, or doesn't know how to develop them.

JJC7301
03-10-2012, 02:41 AM
I like it. Without a cap the Cowboys would win every year.
That organization just sucks.

For his own good Jerry is lucky that a cap is in place, otherwise he'd be the Wilpons of the NFL -- spending boat loads of money on crappy talent trying to make up for the fact that you never develop any of your own.

Flip Empty
03-10-2012, 02:41 AM
The cap is a big part of that #1 sport in America. Baseball is going to hell and basketball needs a francise tag.
I recognize that, but I also believe that it's a talent cap as much as salary cap.

There seem to be a whhhooooolllleee bunch of teams that never seem to have salary cap issues because they open the door to their stables of crappy players that they've drafted and loot someone else's players to try to make up for the empty spot that was their original mistake.

I'm just ranting because we lost BJ and we're going to be through cap contortionist tricks in order to keep our own guys.

Osi will probably be gone next year to a team that never thinks to draft DEs, doesn't scout well enough, or doesn't know how to develop them.
Cap-less leagues are farcical. They're about who had the richest owner rather than who drafts the best talent. In that world you'd have loaded teams poaching good players rather than the opposite. Not good.

giantsfan420
03-10-2012, 02:42 AM
well they have a system in place for what ur talking about which u raise a great point.

the RFA tag...meaning if other teams somehow sign a JPP/Nicks/Cruz we will almost assuredly get their 1rst round pick. So for a team like us who drafts amazingly, we'll just have to restart the process.

The only thing about it is the UFA like MM where we will just get a compensation pick, but for MM it could be as high as a 3rd round pick, which is the round we drafted him in.

I am unsure the rules for issuing tenders, like was Wallace from Pitt always tendered a RFA worth a 1rst or was Pitt able to apply that at any given time? If theirs improvement to be made, it shouldn't be the cap being removed, it should be when teams like us constantly develop the talent other teams go crazy for, we should be able to tender them RFA worth a 1rst and for cases where we'd have two guys we developed who are all-pro caliber, it shouldn't deter it from granting us 2 first round tenders we get in addition to our own 1rst round pick...get what I'm saying?

but so far I think that system in place with comp. picks and tendered RFA is about a good a way to level the cap issue as any sport has...

edit- i am unsure the rules about tenders and RFA and UFA, but that could be the potential answer to this issue. teams should be able to tender their star players whom the cap will prevent from signing so that way the team doesn't get penalized for drafting amazingly and developing players just as well.

Landshark
03-10-2012, 02:56 AM
liberalism at its finest.
Ha! +1. I consider myself a capitalist, but the NFL has done a great job of making itself the # 1 sport in the US and the cap has done a good job in at least giving smaller markets a chance to compete.

But my point is that plenty of other teams suck the blood of the Giants, Steelers, GB, and NE because they can't draft worth crap. What stud have the Jets, Eagles, 'skins, or Cowboys ever lost over the past 10 years? Meanwhile, we've got a plethera of talent (JPP, Nicks, and Cruz) who we are going to have to get so damn creative in our cap for in order to keep.

And we've won two superbowls in that span...

The salary cap does exactly as intended and it's what makes football exciting and interesting EVERY year.

Stick the political non-sense. This is a football forum...

swimeasy
03-10-2012, 10:17 AM
well they have a system in place for what ur talking about which u raise a great point.

the RFA tag...meaning if other teams somehow sign a JPP/Nicks/Cruz we will almost assuredly get their 1rst round pick. So for a team like us who drafts amazingly, we'll just have to restart the process.

The only thing about it is the UFA like MM where we will just get a compensation pick, but for MM it could be as high as a 3rd round pick, which is the round we drafted him in.

I am unsure the rules for issuing tenders, like was Wallace from Pitt always tendered a RFA worth a 1rst or was Pitt able to apply that at any given time? If theirs improvement to be made, it shouldn't be the cap being removed, it should be when teams like us constantly develop the talent other teams go crazy for, we should be able to tender them RFA worth a 1rst and for cases where we'd have two guys we developed who are all-pro caliber, it shouldn't deter it from granting us 2 first round tenders we get in addition to our own 1rst round pick...get what I'm saying?

but so far I think that system in place with comp. picks and tendered RFA is about a good a way to level the cap issue as any sport has...

edit- i am unsure the rules about tenders and RFA and UFA, but that could be the potential answer to this issue. teams should be able to tender their star players whom the cap will prevent from signing so that way the team doesn't get penalized for drafting amazingly and developing players just as well.

The OP makes a very good point. My take is the situation is brought about more by the intersection of the cap with free agency than the cap in and of itself. If the goal of parity were extended to players, that would eliminate the whole debate of players wanting to be paid what they think they are worth and therefore go to the highest bidding teams. It would also eliminate the need for a cap- problem solved. On the other hand, what would that do to the quality of play in the NFL at large if players are looking at standard salaries by position? It would be the demise of the sport that we know and love imo.

giantsfan, I was also wondering about the impact of expansion of the use of tags as well, and the UFA tag in particular. At least this would provide a mechanism for players who would not be inclined to allow the Giants to match another team's offer before it is finalized rather than relying on good faith alone which was the cause for angst in the Steve Smith situation.

bLuereverie
03-10-2012, 10:35 AM
I guess there is the idea of salary cap exemptions, for players drafted by their respective teams, but I don't see that in the works any time soon..

MikeIsaGiant
03-10-2012, 10:54 AM
I like it. One reason why I love football

Meanhothead
03-10-2012, 11:20 AM
What you 'dislike' is why the NFL is great . . .

TooEasy
03-10-2012, 11:25 AM
It works though because those bad teams still suck, and teams like the Giants are always competitive.

If the Giants stay in the hunt year in and year out like they have been, who cares which players stay and go? This organization wins. Period.

LT_was_good
03-10-2012, 11:37 AM
The four teams you named who build through the draft have all won Super Bowls in the past 10 years. In Fact, they've won a combined 8 of the past 11 Super Bowls. Meanwhile, the last time one of the latter 4 teams you named won a Super Bowl was 1995-96. So I think build-through-the-draft teams are doing just fine.

Harlem2va
03-10-2012, 11:47 AM
While your argument could have some merit and you present some valid information; you overlooked one big piece from the cap argument. Yes, the cap numbers for teams should be a little higher and winning teams who spend money should be allowed a higher number to retain their own players. The biggest problem with the cap to me is QB salaries; the average QB salary can take anywhere from 10-20% of a team cap and you have to use the rest for the other 50 plus players. That means when you slice the pie precision is the key to success.

RoanokeFan
03-10-2012, 12:04 PM
I understand that the cap is in place so that smaller market teams can compete with bigger markets, and also to protect themselves from going to crazy on spending their own money.

But it's also talent redistribution and I'm sick of it. Teams like the Giants, Steelers, GB, and NE who build through the draft have to lose out on their own talented guys (MM, BJ) to teams that haven't necessarily managed their cap well, but rather can't draft well.

The 'skins, Jets, 'boys, Eagles -- these teams draft like crap and have cap space because they let their own crappy players walk. When do these teams ever lose out on one of their own good or solid players because of cap reasons? They have maybe a handful of players that other teams would actually spend money on.

Other teams could have drafted Nicks, but chose Heward-Bay and Crabtree. They don't have to worry too much about clearing cap space for that crap. Nor do any of the 15 teams that passed on JPP (like the Eagle trading up to take Ben Graham ahead of JPP) have to worry about clearing cap space because of their own stupid mistake of not drafting the guy to begin with.

Get rid of the cap or tweak it somehow because it's crap. Sorry if this is sour grapes, but I am upset that BJ is gone and that we're going to have a tough few years clearing space to keep JPP, Cruz, and Nicks.

The CAP isn't what balances out the various media markets, that's what revenue sharing does. What the CAP does is level, literally, the playing field so that we don't have the Steinbrenner Effect where just because he has all the money he gets all the best players.

The new CBA, unlike the old CBA, make teams spend their CAP money. We were ahead of the curve and that will even out over time.

ashaddyt2269
03-10-2012, 01:22 PM
This makes no sense. I would agree if we the Giants did not sigh free agents but we do the same as everyone else we do well with d-line and receivers, who else? Our best safety is from the Cards, or starting d tackle is from the Cowturds, our o-line sucks our corners are ok at best with webster on the down slope, linebackers are sad we could not draft one for the life of us. Anyway the cap is great and it makes the game what it is not just a oh yea that team or those 2 or 3 teams win every year. nuf said

Bumm
03-10-2012, 01:49 PM
The 'skins, Jets, 'boys, Eagles -- these teams draft like crap and have cap space because they let their own crappy players walk.

But another thing to remember is that it's the cap that keeps the Dan Snyders and Jerry Jones in check. Without a cap they could buy themselves championships. With the cap they're limited on how much they can dip into FA to make up for their horrible drafting.

FresnoGiant
03-10-2012, 02:10 PM
While I understand where the OP is coming from, I think we can all agree the cap is here to stay. It is what makes the NFL the most exciting sport to watch. Without it, the league would resemble college ball where small programs stand no chance against powerhouse teams.

I do think however, a new cap system might help with the issue this OP has. It has been suggested in the past that a split cap be implemented. I love this idea. Where a seperate cap for drafted players is independent from a second one for free agent acquisitions. It could allow for teams to keep more of their home-grown talent, while also preventing teams from buying a bunch of star free agents. It would also encourage teams to place more stock in their draft selections since the draft-cap would be the bulk of available money.

swimeasy
03-10-2012, 02:38 PM
While I understand where the OP is coming from, I think we can all agree the cap is here to stay. It is what makes the NFL the most exciting sport to watch. Without it, the league would resemble college ball where small programs stand no chance against powerhouse teams.

I do think however, a new cap system might help with the issue this OP has. It has been suggested in the past that a split cap be implemented. I love this idea. Where a seperate cap for drafted players is independent from a second one for free agent acquisitions. It could allow for teams to keep more of their home-grown talent, while also preventing teams from buying a bunch of star free agents. It would also encourage teams to place more stock in their draft selections since the draft-cap would be the bulk of available money.

Fresno, sounds like a very interesting idea. If I am understanding your comments correctly, it would then allow for added cap cushion for drafted players and each team's bottom line cap limit is different depending on the number of drafted players they retain? Is that correct? I could see that potentially encouraging player development as well.

Has this been seriously considered in any fashion by the league?

RagTime Blue
03-10-2012, 02:56 PM
The 'skins, Jets, 'boys, Eagles -- these teams draft like crap and have cap space because they let their own crappy players walk.

But another thing to remember is that it's <font size="6">the cap that keeps the Dan Snyders and Jerry Jones in check.</font> Without a cap they could buy themselves championships. With the cap they're limited on how much they can dip into FA to make up for their horrible drafting.

Yep. Those guys have an awful lot of "Non-Football" money to spend.

I think we're starting to see the cap as a hindrance because we signed our players under the old CBA, won the Championship, and now have to recruit those same guys under the new CBA. Just bad timing to win a SB (if there's such a thing).

My adjustment to the system would be more subtle. Maybe add a couple more rounds to the draft, and start compensatory picks sandwiched between the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

In other words, give good-drafting teams a bit more reward.

Manning2Niks
03-10-2012, 03:32 PM
I didn't read through everything, but why not keep the cap how it is but as an added exception give teams a total of like 5 players they drafted in the first 2, maybe 3, rounds that you can have a soft cap against alla MLB.

So like a player like Osi you can place as a "draftee" and any money you give him that goes over the cap gets taxed and then that money goes into a revenue pot that all teams share? That way teams are still rewarded for drafting well and small market teams still aren't left to pasture.

Just an idea, but I think it could work.

And yes, I did extend it to the 3rd round so we could keep Manningham haha

GiantsFanMan
03-10-2012, 04:00 PM
I understand that the cap is in place so that smaller market teams can compete with bigger markets, and also to protect themselves from going to crazy on spending their own money.

But it's also talent redistribution and I'm sick of it. Teams like the Giants, Steelers, GB, and NE who build through the draft have to lose out on their own talented guys (MM, BJ) to teams that haven't necessarily managed their cap well, but rather can't draft well.

The 'skins, Jets, 'boys, Eagles -- these teams draft like crap and have cap space because they let their own crappy players walk. When do these teams ever lose out on one of their own good or solid players because of cap reasons? They have maybe a handful of players that other teams would actually spend money on.

Other teams could have drafted Nicks, but chose Heward-Bay and Crabtree. They don't have to worry too much about clearing cap space for that crap. Nor do any of the 15 teams that passed on JPP (like the Eagle trading up to take Ben Graham ahead of JPP) have to worry about clearing cap space because of their own stupid mistake of not drafting the guy to begin with.

Get rid of the cap or tweak it somehow because it's crap. Sorry if this is sour grapes, but I am upset that BJ is gone and that we're going to have a tough few years clearing space to keep JPP, Cruz, and Nicks.

The CAP isn't what balances out the various media markets, that's what revenue sharing does.* What the CAP does is level, literally, the playing field so that we don't have the Steinbrenner Effect where just because he has all the money he gets all the best players.

The new CBA, unlike the old CBA, make teams spend their CAP money.* We were ahead of the curve and that will even out over time.
good point and very true. Its not the Giants that would gain from having no cap. Its the jerry jones of the world that would love it.

Harooni
03-10-2012, 04:49 PM
I like it.

Much fairer than baseball.

agreed. not only more fair , contracts will then be out of hand like baseball.

Redeyejedi
03-10-2012, 05:09 PM
I guess there is the idea of salary cap exemptions, for players drafted by their respective teams, but I don't see that in the works any time soon.. Cap exempts would be sweet

RoanokeFan
03-10-2012, 05:54 PM
I understand that the cap is in place so that smaller market teams can compete with bigger markets, and also to protect themselves from going to crazy on spending their own money.

But it's also talent redistribution and I'm sick of it. Teams like the Giants, Steelers, GB, and NE who build through the draft have to lose out on their own talented guys (MM, BJ) to teams that haven't necessarily managed their cap well, but rather can't draft well.

The 'skins, Jets, 'boys, Eagles -- these teams draft like crap and have cap space because they let their own crappy players walk. When do these teams ever lose out on one of their own good or solid players because of cap reasons? They have maybe a handful of players that other teams would actually spend money on.

Other teams could have drafted Nicks, but chose Heward-Bay and Crabtree. They don't have to worry too much about clearing cap space for that crap. Nor do any of the 15 teams that passed on JPP (like the Eagle trading up to take Ben Graham ahead of JPP) have to worry about clearing cap space because of their own stupid mistake of not drafting the guy to begin with.

Get rid of the cap or tweak it somehow because it's crap. Sorry if this is sour grapes, but I am upset that BJ is gone and that we're going to have a tough few years clearing space to keep JPP, Cruz, and Nicks.

The CAP isn't what balances out the various media markets, that's what revenue sharing does. What the CAP does is level, literally, the playing field so that we don't have the Steinbrenner Effect where just because he has all the money he gets all the best players.

The new CBA, unlike the old CBA, make teams spend their CAP money. We were ahead of the curve and that will even out over time.
good point and very true. Its not the Giants that would gain from having no cap. Its the jerry jones of the world that would love it.

That's exactly right, we really have an America's Team and that would kill me lol

Delicreep
03-10-2012, 06:06 PM
The funny thing is, you kinda make a good case for the cap!

Name the last team that doesn't draft well to win the SB.
Better yet, tell me the last team to buy a SB.

Heck...teams that don't trade well don't win titles.

You are a lucky fan-you have a organization that does all of it ( and more) very, very well.

Imagine a league with no cap. A guy like Cruz/Nicks/Brees would be a fool to talk new contract extension, knowing that there are owners out there that will write massive checks to get them.

Think of our draft ability being Jerry Jones shopping list, and we have no ability to stop him.

Harooni
03-10-2012, 06:17 PM
well said D creep

also i would add that i would like to see a rookie cap, no need for a first round pick to have a 50mill contract before his first snap.