Salary Cap numbers..................... (1 Viewer)

[SweetT]

I withdraw my “meh” lol

but, if you think about it, generally speaking, starters play more snaps and should get paid more, their body takes more punishment. Also, people don’t come to see Bobby Noname, they pay to see the big names and they deserve more.

I feel like it might seem like I’m contradicting myself but, I think a player should be able to get more for being better, not just cuz he’s feeling a roster spot.

Having said that, I do think there should be a cap % limit so there is more money for the rest of the players on the team to try to get a piece of instead of it all going to the QB and crumbs for players 11 thru 53

Yes, it would be up to the team to disburse the money how they deem fit. After Mahomes’ contract, that kinda reset the market for QBs. So, if a team wants to spend $50 million a year on a QB, then it would still allow them to possibly keep a roster intact. Now I don’t anticipate any other QB getting that kind of contract in the next few years, but just in case. The guaranteed portion of my post, would allow to have the lower paid players to have some assurance during the season. That $250 million cap number would definitely be enough for all players for the foreseeable future. Just my $.02

 

[SweetT]

Wasn't that our own Charles Grant?

Wasn't that our own Charles Grant?

It’s quite possible it was. I can’t remember honestly.

 

[Trey W.]

Absolutely I agree with you 100%. The “go hungry or provide for their families” was tongue and cheek regarding that one football player awhile back that made that comment. Forgot what his name was. I just feel that setting the salary cap that high, leaving it at that amount, a team can properly disburse the money all around throughout the team. Even STs and 2nd/3rd stringers.

I do get what your saying but unless the NFL & NFLPA agree on position caps (which will never happen) player greed will always drive contract prices and salary cap to the Max. Teams will pay more to out bid another team for a player in FA, someone will get butt hurt because another player makes more than they do so they want to be the “highest paid player at their position” for a year until the next season when someone else does the same thing. It doesn’t matter how high you set the salary cap, players are just going to push for more money. Position caps would be the only way to keep Teams even but I doubt the NFLPA & Players would ever agree to it.

 

[SweetT]

I do get what your saying but unless the NFL & NFLPA agree on position caps (which will never happen) player greed will always drive contract prices and salary cap to the Max. Teams will pay more to out bid another team for a player in FA, someone will get butt hurt because another player makes more than they do so they want to be the “highest paid player at their position” for a year until the next season when someone else does the same thing. It doesn’t matter how high you set the salary cap, players are just going to push for more money. Position caps would be the only way to keep Teams even but I doubt the NFLPA & Players would ever agree to it.

Position caps would be ideal and you are 100% correct, player greed will always be a thing unfortunately.

 

[onanygivensunday]

I don't see it as "player greed" at all. The several decades the NFLPA has done a stellar job in ensuring that the players get their fair share of the HUGE pie that is total NFL revenue. And don't forget, it was the NFLPA that advocated for an end to the ridiculous situation that was the original Sam Bradford contract. Thank goodness for the slotted salary concept for rookie contracts.

If you want lower players' salaries, stop watching NFL games, buying NFL merchandise and going to games. It's really that simple. I know that nobody will really do that for that reason but you have to let the market decide what is fair and equitable. Unlike most every job 99.999% of us have, NFL players' salaries are based on a free market for the most part (setting aside transition tag situations). If a team want to spend $40M/year on their QB (or the NFL DPOY), that's their prerogative.

 

[Trey W.]

I don't see it as "player greed" at all. The several decades the NFLPA has done a stellar job in ensuring that the players get their fair share of the HUGE pie that is total NFL revenue. And don't forget, it was the NFLPA that advocated for an end to the ridiculous situation that was the original Sam Bradford contract. Thank goodness for the slotted salary concept for rookie contracts.

If you want lower players' salaries, stop watching NFL games, buying NFL merchandise and going to games. It's really that simple. I know that nobody will really do that for that reason but you have to let the market decide what is fair and equitable. Unlike most every job 99.999% of us have, NFL players' salaries are based on a free market for the most part (setting aside transition tag situations). If a team want to spend $40M/year on their QB (or the NFL DPOY), that's their prerogative.

It is “greed” though. When you have 1 player alone taking up 20-25% or more of a set salary cap, then maybe 5 or so taking up another 20-25% that doesn’t leave much for the other 45 or so players which will push some good player out to FA and possibly jobless. There are a lot of good players not on teams, not because they aren’t good but because teams can’t afford them. Just like our situation this year, we are way over the cap which will lead to losing some
good players not because we don’t want them but because we can’t afford them leading to them maybe not having a job next season.

 

[superchuck500]

 

[mr.t]

Not looking good for the home team.

 

[Saintcd]

Looks like a cut bait on everybody, pay the piper for pushing the money can down the road and take the hit this year. Yes, there will be a reckoning soon for the saints, time to reboot and suck for a year. The bad contracts and pushing the Brees money down the road is staring right back at us now. Fire sale.

 

[J.T.]

That puts the Jags in the best position and Saints probably in the worst position. Who wins more games in 2021, 2022 and 2023?

 

[Judge_Smails]

I do get what your saying but unless the NFL & NFLPA agree on position caps (which will never happen) player greed will always drive contract prices and salary cap to the Max. Teams will pay more to out bid another team for a player in FA, someone will get butt hurt because another player makes more than they do so they want to be the “highest paid player at their position” for a year until the next season when someone else does the same thing. It doesn’t matter how high you set the salary cap, players are just going to push for more money. Position caps would be the only way to keep Teams even but I doubt the NFLPA & Players would ever agree to it.

Player greed? You think people watch the NFL to see Gayle Benson and Jerry Jones talk shop? The NFL is entertainment and the players do the most to make the product that people love.

 

[SweetT]

I don't see it as "player greed" at all. The several decades the NFLPA has done a stellar job in ensuring that the players get their fair share of the HUGE pie that is total NFL revenue. And don't forget, it was the NFLPA that advocated for an end to the ridiculous situation that was the original Sam Bradford contract. Thank goodness for the slotted salary concept for rookie contracts.

If you want lower players' salaries, stop watching NFL games, buying NFL merchandise and going to games. It's really that simple. I know that nobody will really do that for that reason but you have to let the market decide what is fair and equitable. Unlike most every job 99.999% of us have, NFL players' salaries are based on a free market for the most part (setting aside transition tag situations). If a team want to spend $40M/year on their QB (or the NFL DPOY), that's their prerogative.

There’s different levels of player greed. If a player has outperformed his contract and is considered one of the best at his position, then by all means, pay the man. However, there has been cases where a player puts together one semi decent season and wants a huge contract. I’m all for players getting money, but if you can’t perform consistently and at a high level, then a team shouldn’t bow to their demands. Therefore crippling their salary cap. Some of these guys think they are better than they really are.

 

[Reddog2]

It is “greed” though. When you have 1 player alone taking up 20-25% or more of a set salary cap, then maybe 5 or so taking up another 20-25% that doesn’t leave much for the other 45 or so players which will push some good player out to FA and possibly jobless. There are a lot of good players not on teams, not because they aren’t good but because teams can’t afford them. Just like our situation this year, we are way over the cap which will lead to losing some
good players not because we don’t want them but because we can’t afford them leading to them maybe not having a job next season.

The NFLPA has actually done a good job in making sure a player is not pushed out of the league simply because of salary. A veteran with 4 or more years of service credit can be signed to a veteran minimum contract for one year and not cost the club more than a second year player. The cash and cap cost is the minimum contract required for a second year player plus whatever bonus is given. The max bonus to qualify for the benefit is $137500 for 2021. The difference in the minimum salary of the player's experience and a 2 year player minimum is paid by the league and credited against the pool for player benefits.

 

[onanygivensunday]

It is “greed” though. When you have 1 player alone taking up 20-25% or more of a set salary cap, then maybe 5 or so taking up another 20-25% that doesn’t leave much for the other 45 or so players which will push some good player out to FA and possibly jobless. There are a lot of good players not on teams, not because they aren’t good but because teams can’t afford them. Just like our situation this year, we are way over the cap which will lead to losing some
good players not because we don’t want them but because we can’t afford them leading to them maybe not having a job next season.

The situation you describe is the responsibility/fault of the team's GM (and owner to a degree). They have put together a team that they cannot afford to keep. Sure, they may afford it for a year or two by introducing voidable years after the player leaves the team... or they may have made some terrible player personnel decisions to vastly overpay volatile players who later implode and are a cancer to the team. The latter are typically cut and the team has to eat the dead money... or they are traded but the team has to eat the prorated signing bonus as dead money anyways.

Players want to be paid but it's up to the teams GMs to manage their salary cap.

 

[Trey W.]

There’s different levels of player greed. If a player has outperformed his contract and is considered one of the best at his position, then by all means, pay the man. However, there has been cases where a player puts together one semi decent season and wants a huge contract. I’m all for players getting money, but if you can’t perform consistently and at a high level, then a team shouldn’t bow to their demands. Therefore crippling their salary cap. Some of these guys think they are better than they really are.

Which is why I wish player contracts were more incentive based than guaranteed money. I've brought this up before in other threads and people say "that will just lead to players going rouge for their own stats." It may be true but if you don't think players do that already then you're kidding yourself. I'm not a fan of heavily guaranteed contracts because as we've seen many times before when players do get that big contract they either don't live up to it or coast until that contract is over and they play all out in hopes of another one.