REAL FOOTBALL Thread

chop2chip said:
The NFL won't do it because it's transfers money from the owners to the players. In fact, I don't ever foresee the players union being strong enough to collectively bargain something substantially different from the current model.
Click to expand...

I know it wouldn't happen and that is the reason, I just think the reasons for the cap are clearly busted at this point. NFL needs to just say we do the cap to make money haha.
 
chop2chip said:
It depends. Every team converts these bonuses so I doubt it moves the needle. And I'm not entirely sure how Junior is hurt by doing that.

But I think there is something to be said about accelerating the rebuild to this year. I don't see much upside in the Saints moving forward unless they hit a grand slam in this draft. That team is going to be atrocious once Brees retires/gets hurt/regresses
Click to expand...

Eh, they have some good pieces.

OL, Cooks, Colston (depending on his cap situation), Jimmy, Stills.

But its mainly the cap stuff, i dont know how much better they get by cutting/getting rid of some of those players and not replacing them adequately.
 
zitothebrave said:
But does it really keep it competitive?

Super bowl teams since 2000

Rams twice

Titans

Ravens

GIants 3 times

Pats 5 times

Panthers

Eagles

Steelers 3 times

Seahawks 3 times

Colts twice

Bears

Cardinals

Saints

Packers

49ers

Broncos

so in 16 superbowls there were 16 distinct teams.

Same thing with the world series

Yankees 4 times

Mets

Diamondbacks

Angels

Giants 4 times

Marlins

Redsox 3 times

Cardinals 4 times

White Sox

Astros

Tigers 2 times

Rockies

Phillies 2 times

Rays 1 time

Rangers 2 times

Royals

So in 30 possible pairings. You have 16 distinct teams. It doesn't really indicate to me that the cap is working .There are still NFL dynasties. they just fall faster because of the NFL player playinv career being much shorter than MLB.

For much more in depth research, read this stark blog post

http://espn.go.com/blog/jayson-star...-has-greater-parity-than-mlb-well-think-again
Click to expand...

I think this has more to do with baseball being a substantially more random sport by nature and the NFL being dictated by quarterbacks. I think the cap does a good job equalizing talent across the league.
 
chop2chip said:
I think this has more to do with baseball being a substantially more random sport by nature and the NFL being dictated by quarterbacks. I think the cap does a good job equalizing talent across the league.
Click to expand...

But does it? Aside from the **** teams (Jags, Bucs, etc.) most teams could financially be competitive with each other. It's just the owners are cheap.
 
And given the sample size of baseball, 162 games, 4 playoff series, 1 head to head win, 1 best of five 2 best of 7s. Vs NFL 16 games, then 4 head to head post season games. So a sample of a minimum of 172 games to sort out the best vs a sample of a maximum of 20 games. I would think the randomness in the NFL would be much higher, I think what happens in baseball is that though there are some cheap teams, they invest money in different ways to stay competitive. Not everyone has to do it via FA.
 
BTW fun fact, there are only 3 teams with a 10 season or longer PS draught in MLB, Jays (21) Mariners (13) and Marlins (11) There are 4 teams in the NFL at 10 seasons or longer, Bills (15), Raiders (12) Browns (12) and Rams (10)

NFL doesn't have more parity than MLB and I don't think the cap swings things one way or another.
 
zitothebrave said:
And given the sample size of baseball, 162 games, 4 playoff series, 1 head to head win, 1 best of five 2 best of 7s. Vs NFL 16 games, then 4 head to head post season games. So a sample of a minimum of 172 games to sort out the best vs a sample of a maximum of 20 games. I would think the randomness in the NFL would be much higher, I think what happens in baseball is that though there are some cheap teams, they invest money in different ways to stay competitive. Not everyone has to do it via FA.
Click to expand...

Sure. I think the regular season if baseball is more reflective than the NFL, but I think the postseason is less random in the NFL.

But I think the primary reason the NFL has less variation in year to year winners is the importance of the quarterback. Chances are that if you have a good quarterback you are going to win a lot of games and the NFL definitely caters to a system where any team can keep their quarterback if they want to.
 
chop2chip said:
Sure. I think the regular season if baseball is more reflective than the NFL, but I think the postseason is less random in the NFL.

But I think the primary reason the NFL has less variation in year to year winners is the importance of the quarterback. Chances are that if you have a good quarterback you are going to win a lot of games and the NFL definitely caters to a system where any team can keep their quarterback if they want to.
Click to expand...

So in other words, things really wouldn't change with or without a cap :YDS:
 
zitothebrave said:
THey can do that, but you think that will endear themselves to big name FAs if they did that? Like cajun is hinting at? I get hanging on while you have Brees, he doesn't have too much longer, no reason to rebuild with him. But maybe they'd be better off seeing what happens this year and trading Brees off to another team after this year.
Click to expand...

Theres a difference between restructuring and a pay cut. What the Saints are doing is taking a roster bonus and base salary and converting that to a guaranteed bonus. They get the same money, just earlier. There is no reason for any player to turn that down. Gallete is a little up in the air because he got arrested for beating up a stripper but the plan was always to convert his roster bonus into a guaranteed bonus. He will probably be suspended 6 games, maybe more just for being a Saint if Roger has his way, but that will save some cap space. Byrd's roster bonus was always intended to be converted too. Guarantee bonuses can only be stretched over 5 years and he signed a 6 year contract, that was on purpose. If they dont pick it up its because they intend to cut him after next season because he went BJ Upton on us.

As for Brees, I wouldnt mind trading him if it gives him a chance to win super bowls. He deserves it. I would want something like Clevelands entire draft to do it though. In all likelyhood the Saints will probably lose for another 40 years after Brees is gone so I think I would rather keep him until he cant walk anymore. You never know what can happen. The Saints all time worst defense in 2012 was pretty good in 2013. The Cowboys were just as bad in 2013 and improved significantly on defense without any major additions.

Heyward said:
I can see maybe Brees sign an extension to lower his cap hit, and a few guys take paycuts/bonuses, etc.

One or both of the guards, and cut the likes of Hawthorne, Bunkley, maybe Colston.

But guys like Byrd, Graham arent gonna restructure after signing deals last year.

They can get to the cap limit but signing 2 OL, a CB, and other spots with their situation is pretty wishful thinking.
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure if given the chance they will take their money up front rather than wait a few months for it. It does the most good when they have long contracts because its spread over more years. The center position is probably wishful thinking but I guarantee you they will sign a starting caliber CB.
 
zitothebrave said:
So in other words, things really wouldn't change with or without a cap :YDS:
Click to expand...

What I think you would see happen is quarterbacks, like Andrew Luck and Russell Wilson, playing their rookie scale contracts out with their teams then leaving for larger markets. Would parity increase? Perhaps. But I think The likeliest scenario is that the same teams that win every year would be the large market teams that can afford the elite quarterbacks while the smaller market teams will struggle to retain their elite players.

I'm not suggesting this is the worst idea either. Soccer is the ultimate league if the "have's and have not's". I guess it just depends on what your preference is.
 
Buffalo was never a big market,and they kept Jim Kelly for all those years.

After you get past Dallas and their 500+M a year revenue, most teams are close enough to each other. THey're all in the 250-350 range. The parity in spending would be between the greedy owners and the ones who want to win.

NFL wouldn't have the issue MLB does because it's TV rights are universal. Dallas gets as much TV revenue as any other team.
 
49ers are a disaster right now. What a damn shame. They had everything working for them to be a perennial contender but an overzealous owner is ruining that.
 
They didn't screw their search up at all because there was no search to begin with. After week 15 Tomsula and the front office knew who was becoming the head coach. The interview process was all formalities and they waited to announce Tomsula to make it look they actually tried to find someone else. This franchise is a disaster and easily the biggest joke in the league though.
 
Atlanta expected to go after Maxwell at CB, and J Thomas at TE per Rotoworld.

I would be very cautious of a Julius Thomas overpay, but hard to argue we don't need a solution there. Not much in the draft there either..... Hoping Ryan can get a lot of use out of Thomas ala Pey Pey, but I wouldn't hold my breath if they bring him in...
 
Shan Shariff @1053SS
Follow
Mike Florio says there is league-wide chatter that a Dez Bryant video tape MAY exist that would have a "Ray Rice level impact" @1053thefan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top