As we watch the familiar specter of great, well-loved players who have contributed so much to the team forced or choosing to leave because of the salary cap, I am surprised that more hasn't been made about one of the greatest unfairnesses of the salary cap: Pats players have to play in a lot more games - uncompensated - than non-Pats players.
Brady, for example, has played in almost two full regular seasons worth of postseason games (29) over his career. Wilfork has played in over a season's worth (20). These games were completely uncompensated beyond a minimal league bonus.
Yet the Pats players still have to take the full risk of season-ending injury - indeed of career-ending injury. Other quarterbacks flame out early in the playoffs every year - but the way the salary cap works, they don't get penalized for it at all. It just doesn't seem right somehow. Our guys work more, play more unselfishly, put their bodies out there at great risk, and don't get anything out of it unless they switch teams.
Not because fans, Belichick and Kraft don't recognize and love their contributions. But because of the perverse salary cap incentives to play bad.
I think it would be much more fair for a team to allow any player to take a bonus based on the round of playoffs the team reached, so long as that bonus is not more, as a proportion of base salary, than the number of rounds reached or byed divided by 16. This bonus shouldn't count against the salary cap. Why should Manning be paid the same for 17 games that Brady gets for 20, year after year?
Brady, for example, has played in almost two full regular seasons worth of postseason games (29) over his career. Wilfork has played in over a season's worth (20). These games were completely uncompensated beyond a minimal league bonus.
Yet the Pats players still have to take the full risk of season-ending injury - indeed of career-ending injury. Other quarterbacks flame out early in the playoffs every year - but the way the salary cap works, they don't get penalized for it at all. It just doesn't seem right somehow. Our guys work more, play more unselfishly, put their bodies out there at great risk, and don't get anything out of it unless they switch teams.
Not because fans, Belichick and Kraft don't recognize and love their contributions. But because of the perverse salary cap incentives to play bad.
I think it would be much more fair for a team to allow any player to take a bonus based on the round of playoffs the team reached, so long as that bonus is not more, as a proportion of base salary, than the number of rounds reached or byed divided by 16. This bonus shouldn't count against the salary cap. Why should Manning be paid the same for 17 games that Brady gets for 20, year after year?