Will Parity be Enhanced with the New CBA? - New England Patriots Forums

patriot lifer · 07-15-2011, 02:30 PM

As we've seen in previous seasons, some teams would max out the respective years' salary cap while other teams did not. Big market teams such as Dallas, New England, and Washington would freely spend more than teams who were more miserly in spending habits due to simple economics. With the salary cap reigned in, it can make salary cap maximization more reachable. Granted salary cap optimization will always be an art and science that some front offices artfully manipulate while others flounder.

In addition, players in the first round may have greater mobility to move from team to team as they exit their rookie contracts sooner. The free flow of player capital via free agency may compound this effect of increased parity and contention of more NFL teams.

This all being said, a monumental and tidal change in parity is unlikely, but some effect is a possibility. It has happened that teams have transformed from "worst-to-first" in the past, but perhaps bad teams won't be so mired in mediocrity for long spans of time. High revenue teams can't exploit a high ceiling in the salary cap, plus more teams will find top draft picks obtainable sooner, which will all-in-all feed into a diffusion of NFL talent more evenly between teams.

What insights and musings does everyone have? Does anyone see it play out this way, or even the opposite? Or no change at all?

***sbpatfan*** · 07-15-2011, 02:36 PM

The contract max length change doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things. It affects (EDIT) 32 players. I don't understand why people are making a big deal about it (actually, one one person is - but still).

patriot lifer · 07-15-2011, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sbpatfan

The contract max length change doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things. It affects about 16 players. I don't understand why people are making a big deal about it (actually, one one person is - but still).

Yeah, the primary difference would definitely be with the salary cap reduction. Obviously not having 6-year rookie contracts will have some impact but not nearly as much.

***MoLewisrocks*** · 07-15-2011, 02:42 PM

I think it's a little early to assess the far reaching effects of a CBA we don't know all the details on yet. That said, a salary cap is a natural enhancement to potential parity but what seperates the men from the boys consistently is savvy ownership and management who understand how to work within whatever system the CBA ultimately dictates.

And I don't really think you will see anything more from the rookie cap than a reduction in wasted salary (40-55% estimated) that hopefully leads to better compensation not for the superstars but for the heart and soul veterans during and after their careers. Few 6 rookie year deals which had already been limited to top 16 draftees have been signed in the last couple of years as it is.

***Sciz*** · 07-15-2011, 02:50 PM

If anything, I think it will separate the teams that can manage their cap well from the teams that can't even more.

patriot lifer · 07-15-2011, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoLewisrocks

I think it's a little early to assess the far reaching effects of a CBA we don't know all the details on yet. That said, a salary cap is a natural enhancement to potential parity but what seperates the men from the boys consistently is savvy ownership and management who understand how to work within whatever system the CBA ultimately dictates.

And I don't really think you will see anything more from the rookie cap than a reduction in wasted salary (40-55% estimated) that hopefully leads to better compensation not for the superstars but for the heart and soul veterans during and after their careers. Few 6 rookie year deals which had already been limited to top 16 draftees have been signed in the last couple of years as it is.

Definitely true. We won't have JaMarcus Russells running around collecting tons of cash that should be going to those deserving. It's much more meritocratic.

***AndyJohnson*** · 07-15-2011, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patriot lifer

As we've seen in previous seasons, some teams would max out the respective years' salary cap while other teams did not. Big market teams such as Dallas, New England, and Washington would freely spend more than teams who were more miserly in spending habits due to simple economics. With the salary cap reigned in, it can make salary cap maximization more reachable. Granted salary cap optimization will always be an art and science that some front offices artfully manipulate while others flounder.

In addition, players in the first round may have greater mobility to move from team to team as they exit their rookie contracts sooner. The free flow of player capital via free agency may compound this effect of increased parity and contention of more NFL teams.

This all being said, a monumental and tidal change in parity is unlikely, but some effect is a possibility. It has happened that teams have transformed from "worst-to-first" in the past, but perhaps bad teams won't be so mired in mediocrity for long spans of time. High revenue teams can't exploit a high ceiling in the salary cap, plus more teams will find top draft picks obtainable sooner, which will all-in-all feed into a diffusion of NFL talent more evenly between teams.

What insights and musings does everyone have? Does anyone see it play out this way, or even the opposite? Or no change at all?

I dont know if it is possible to have more parity.

***Deus Irae*** · 07-15-2011, 05:35 PM

Unless it's set up in such a way that the best QBs start swapping teams or teams legitimately can't keep top players, I doubt parity will be impacted much. I doubt either of those will be the case in the longterm.

lamafist · 07-17-2011, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyJohnson

I dont know if it is possible to have more parity.

Really?

I'd say that not having the Colts, Patriots or Steelers representing the AFC in 9 of the next 10 Super Bowls would be a start.

(Not that I'm complaining about the Patriots part.)

***DaBruinz*** · 07-17-2011, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lamafist

Really?

I'd say that not having the Colts, Patriots or Steelers representing the AFC in 9 of the next 10 Super Bowls would be a start.

(Not that I'm complaining about the Patriots part.)

That is a result of team management. Can you really fault those teams for having excellent management that has put together amazing teams under the salary cap system?

What we will see is several teams forces to spend more money in the short term than they have recently. Teams like Tampa, Philly, Cincy. That will take some talent away from teams like the Pats, Steelers and Colts. But, in the long run, it's been proven that spending money doesn't guarantee anything (Thank you, Dan Snyder).