NFL Owners want a QB Salary Cap

[Ian]

Interesting from Tom Pelissero - and one would have to believe that receiver would also be on their radar at some point, given where those numbers are heading, and would likely have a residual effect there:

NFL owners want a QB salary cap?

The NFL quarterback market has climbed at a remarkable rate in recent years, and some team owners are reportedly concerned about how high the figures are getting.

www.yardbarker.com

 

[Pape]

There is no doubt that QB costs are escalating at a dramatic pace...

But really, who is to blame? The owners. They are the only ones making these deals, overpaying for guys...

Players should keep on keeping on...leave it to the front offices to hash it out without making it look like collusion... Good luck with that

 

[Hammer of Thor]

There is no doubt that QB costs are escalating at a dramatic pace...

But really, who is to blame? The owners. They are the only ones making these deals, overpaying for guys...

Players should keep on keeping on...leave it to the front offices to hash it out without making it look like collusion... Good luck with that

Right - they want to put it in the CBA and the union agrees, go right ahead. Anything else and it’s a huge collusion lawsuit.

 

[jlu52]

Right - they want to put it in the CBA and the union agrees, go right ahead. Anything else and it’s a huge collusion lawsuit.

They need protection from their own greed, fine upstanding group

 

[Brotherblues]

Right - they want to put it in the CBA and the union agrees, go right ahead. Anything else and it’s a huge collusion lawsuit.

Union actually benefits. More cap available to distribute among non-QBs.

 

[gobesmug]

Right - they want to put it in the CBA and the union agrees, go right ahead. Anything else and it’s a huge collusion lawsuit.

I could see the union passing it, as most players are non QBs and this would theoretically improve their income potential

 

[Pape]

Union actually benefits. More cap available to distribute among non-QBs.

Its not a separate cap for quarterbacks... Its a restriction on what they can earn under the existing cap

 

[jboston19]

Its not a separate cap for quarterbacks... Its a restriction on what they can earn under the existing cap

But the less spent on QBs means more available for the other players.

Between this new development and the owners desire for an 18 game schedule, I’m sure the next CBA will be loads of fun.

 

[maust]

Thirty years ago trhe NFL needed a salary cap to save the owners from themselves. 30 years later they now need a position by position cap to... wait for it... save the owners from themselves.

"History never repeats itself but it does often rhyme"

The owners shouldn't have any issue getting the players to go along in the next CBA though, of the @ 2400 voting members of the NFLPA @ 2200 aren't QB's or WR's.

 

[FCB02062]

last year around this time it was running backs and their media promoters pushing the narrative that there should be a running back "floor"....and now we have owners wanting a quarterback ceiling. I have a solution - no salary cap. Cap is crap anyway. No salary cap would sort out the cheap ass owners (Kraft) who hide behind the salary cap to disguise their greed.

 

[Pape]

But the less spent on QBs means more available for the other players.

Between this new development and the owners desire for an 18 game schedule, I’m sure the next CBA will be loads of fun.

you do realize that the union doesn't care about that, right? its actually the opposite ... when the bigger, more splashier deals hit the press releases, it makes them look good ... "see! look what we did for you!!!" ... boils down to as long as the money is there in the cap for salaries, it doesn't matter who gets it...

and just remember a certain qb who used to get chided for taking less...

 

[jboston19]

you do realize that the union doesn't care about that, right? its actually the opposite ... when the bigger, more splashier deals hit the press releases, it makes them look good ... "see! look what we did for you!!!" ... boils down to as long as the money is there in the cap for salaries, it doesn't matter who gets it...

and just remember a certain qb who used to get chided for taking less...

Oh, yes, I was merely clarifying that was the logic.

The union does want bigger contracts. The one reason this may stand a chance is, as stated, there’s a ton more players not in line for top contracts that may happily accept the cap in return for generous concessions elsewhere.

 

[VrabelJr]

Nah keep it the way it is so the NFL can have its 2004 Detroit Pistons moment where a T-E-A-M team completely dismantles everyone’s darling.

 

[jmt57]

How about the NFLPA do something next in regards to the rookie contracts for running backs, as part of the negotiation?

Their careers are so short in comparison to other players, because eleven opponents are attempting to hit them as hard as possible every time they touch the ball. They don't get the protection rules that WRs get, and of course nothing at all like QB penalties.

Rather than being bound to their original team that drafted them for 4/5 years, let them become a free agent a year earlier. So many RBs never see a decent free agent contract because their bodies are already toast by that time.

 

[Ross12]

Doesn't really make sense. As @Pape said, the teams themselves are making these deals - no one has forced them. So they want to protect themselves from themselves?

In general I think having a "max contract value" makes some level of sense but it shouldn't be tied to QBs only, it should be all players. And it should probably be a figure that adjusts every 3-year-window or something like that to keep up with the cap increasing. However, I think the other side of that coin means that more players (like star WRs, DTs/OLBs, etc) will demand higher deals because more cap money will be available since QBs will be taking up less. So at the end of the day will anything necessarily be gained?

 

[203Pat]

So a team with an elite QB gets to benefit and the rest get hosed?

 

[Fuzz]

Nah keep it the way it is so the NFL can have its 2024 Boston Celtics moment where a T-E-A-M team completely dismantles everyone’s darling.

FYP

 

[XLIX]

How about the NFLPA do something next in regards to the rookie contracts for running backs, as part of the negotiation?

Their careers are so short in comparison to other players, because eleven opponents are attempting to hit them as hard as possible every time they touch the ball. They don't get the protection rules that WRs get, and of course nothing at all like QB penalties.

Rather than being bound to their original team that drafted them for 4/5 years, let them become a free agent a year earlier. So many RBs never see a decent free agent contract because their bodies are already toast by that time.

It'll never happen because in order to gain something, the Union would have to give up something..... and being that most Union members are not RB's, you'd essentially be asking the majority to sacrifice something to help a minority.

 

[XLIX]

Interesting from Tom Pelissero - and one would have to believe that receiver would also be on their radar at some point, given where those numbers are heading, and would likely have a residual effect there:

NFL owners want a QB salary cap?

The NFL quarterback market has climbed at a remarkable rate in recent years, and some team owners are reportedly concerned about how high the figures are getting.

www.yardbarker.com

I don't think this will ever happen. It actually works against the NFL's goal of parity to set a maximum amount for QB's.

 

[mgteich]

So a team with an elite QB gets to benefit and the rest get hosed?

You ARE describing the current situation.

This is an easy change which should be acceptable to the union in the context of contract negotiations. A percentage of cap seems more likely that a hard number.

After all, everyone wins but maybe a dozen top quarterbacks. They will end up making up for the loss in incentive money, as it should be anyway.