An Uncapped World?

[Ring 6]

What you say Andy has a lot of merit. What I see that could happen is the haves being able to offer ridiculous amounts of money to a couple of select players such as Ware and/or Fitzpatrick.

Let's roll the cameras for a bit longer and assume in 2012 we have a league with few or no rules. This is when marketing pros like Kraft and Jones can really go nuts knowing all of their profits will not be going anywhere except their own interests. These moneys can be spent on any number of things like stadium facilities, player facilities, player bribes?? What about collusion? Will it run rampant among players and owners alike? It's starting to sound like every man for himself. Before we know it some oil rich Kuwaiti sheik is buying the Bengals and building a 65,000 seat domed air conditioned stadium because he can. What's next? The Oakland Sonys? CHAOS!

Well I don't think it will ever get that far. The NFL controlling factions are too smart. At least they'd better be.

You are assuming 2 thigns that are far from certain.
1) In the absence of the current rules there are no rules
2) In the absence of rules owners will do exactly what is in their own worst interest

Under a capped system, there is a limit to the loss a team can take by trying to buy a winner and failing. It costs a TON more money to fill your cap with amortized signing bonusses than with salary under the current system. Up until now the system limits how much money you can spend on a bad idea (the idea that signing lots of expensive free agents will result in winning). If it becomes uncapped, how many years multi million dollar losses by signing players who didn't produce a championship will an owner put up with.
Lets apply it to the past. The Jets would have paid Favre $50,000,000 last year to buy a Championship, which they thought they were doing. With that 50mill down the tube, how much do you think they would throw at the next quick fix?

No doubt richer owners will have an advantage. So. The idea that the NFL is better with parity is not something I agree with anyway.

By the way, the majority of the revenue to each owner are the TV contracts which are shared equally. That keeps the separation from rich and poor apart.
The Yankees don't spend more because Steinbrenner has it sitting in a vault, or because of gate receipts. They spend more because they have the most lucrative TV contract in existence. That results from big market, but if the TV reveneues were shared, the Royals and Yankees would be close to even.

 

[jmt57]

Didnt they not win another playoff game after that until this year? Hard to call that a success.

Very true; both you and I would not consider that success.

I was looking at it as Baltimore trying (and succeeding) to "buy" a single championship that season. It seems like they went after free agents in an attempt to win this year, knowing they would have no chance of winning in the near future due to the cap situation they put themselves in with some of those contracts (e.g., Sam Adams.)

I think there are fans of many teams around the NFL that would trade a Super Bowl victory for several years of mediocrity. The problem with this approach is that the Ravens were the rare exception and not the rule.

 

[alamo]

I think that the Draft itself is in danger. While the present CBA runs through 2012, and even has an uncapped provision for 2010 and 2011 and 2011 and 2012. Then it runs out entirely.

If it is wide open, 2013 and beyond, than the NFLPA could and would sue to end the draft.

No, the CBA does NOT run through 2012. Not any more. Originally 2012 was scheduled to be uncapped and 2011 "the last capped year". But the owners exercised their option to end the CBA two years early, meaning it's over after 2010 (the 2011 draft actually) and that's why this year is the "last capped year".

The 2011 season is the first time a strike and/or lockout could happen, too, since the CBA prohibits them.

But there is a lot that can happen before we get there. Who the NFLPA chooses as head will make a difference, if the status quo candidate in Tom Condon's pocket wins then the cap will go and not be back, the majority players will have been sold a bill of goods. Expect the NFLPA to decertify and attempt to remove the NFL's antitrust exemption, expect the owners to lock out the players. Expect Judge Doty to be the one really inc charge.

 

[Ring 6]

Very true; both you and I would not consider that success.

I was looking at it as Baltimore trying (and succeeding) to "buy" a single championship that season. It seems like they went after free agents in an attempt to win this year, knowing they would have no chance of winning in the near future due to the cap situation they put themselves in with some of those contracts (e.g., Sam Adams.)

I think there are fans of many teams around the NFL that would trade a Super Bowl victory for several years of mediocrity. The problem with this approach is that the Ravens were the rare exception and not the rule.

But that was far from a one shot run. Remember they had no QB. If they were loading up for a title, they wouldn't haveneglected the QB spot. Remember Dilfer was their 3rd string QB who was picked up off the scrap heap as a total failure in Tampa. One of the players he was behind was Tony Banks, a total failure to date.
They signed a couple of free agents but certainly werent build through free agency, or used fa to mortgage the future,.

 

[AzPatsFan]

After the 2012 season, the draft would also go.

What you have argued (and I believe successfully) is that, UNDER THE CURRENT SYSTEM, franchise teams have been great at the draft and have not built their teams through free agency. So??? That is because free agency money is limited. If money is unlimited, are you really saying that some billionaire will not be able to build a team more from free agency than from the draft? There are lots of strategies with an unlimited free agency budget that would change the game. Small markets need no apply.

BOTTOM LINE
If there are 10 potential franchises over the next five years, and seven were given minimal free agent budgets and three were given unlimited free agent budgets, who would you expect to win? Why on earth wouldn't I sign Haynworth at $20M a year if that is what it took, if I had an unlimited budget?

Now, some would say that this means that many teams would lose money or be non-competitive. I would agree. Parity would be all but gone.

Looking for a Team tha won with Free Agency/trades, look at the George Allen's Washington Redskins. That was in the uncapped and partially free agency era. He never had a losing season or a first day draft pick either. Geoerge was always in the Tournament and Won sometimes.

The owner Jack Kent Cooke said "I gave him an unlimited budget, and he exceeded it the first year. And went up from there". With real free agency and no draft Allen would never have lost.

 

[Ring 6]

Looking for a Team tha won with Free Agency/trades, look at the George Allen's Washington Redskins. That was in the uncapped and partially free agency era. He never had a losing season or a first day draft pick either. Geoerge was always in the Tournament and Won sometimes.

The owner Jack Kent Cooke said "I gave him an unlimited budget, and he exceeded it the first year. And went up from there". With real free agency and no draft Allen would never have lost.

Umm, he never WON. 0 Championships. Allen didn't get close because he traded picks for veterans, he got close because he was a ver good coach.
But, if you have to go back that far, you've made my point. And, the line about the budget wasnt about the cost of players it was about facilities, assistant coaches, equipemnt, etc.