NFL Owners want a QB Salary Cap

[203Pat]

Setting aside that's not how trickle down economics works, either in theory or in practice...

Given the current structure of the NFL, paying QBs less does indeed result in more money for everyone else. If they change the structure of the League, then that statement certainly may not necessarily hold true. But as things are currently constituted, paying QBs less would result in more for others.

There is a cap.

Every team pays out all the cap money, or carries it over and pays it out in the next year or two,

So, yes, if the top QB were capped at $40M per year AAV or an equivalent percentage of cap, teams who would sign a contract for $50M would now spend the $10M on other players.

My main thing is cap vs cash spending is different. You can maneuver and manipulate the cap in tons of different ways and not every dollar of that is a real actual US dollar where as cash spending is actual real live money. Quarterbacks generally get more of that actual money because they get a higher percentage of their contracts guaranteed. So they are actually getting the owners money and not just theoretical cap dollars and void years and all that.

 

[maust]

The issue is whether it is in the best interest of owners and players to have a cap on QB salaries, within the same cap structure as with no cap.

Outside of a handful of QB's and their agents it's hard to envision anyone in the equation, be it owners, players or fans who would not be benefitted.

 

[XLIX]

I don't fault your cynical view of ownership, it's a widely shared sentiment and there is good reason for it. I think, in part because of my poor explanation, what's missing in your calculation is the key points of any collectivelly bargained agreement would be the firm floor provisions. Just as with the rookie wage scale, the money 'saved' on QB contracts would still be required to be spent elsewhere

+1 +1

When the rookie wage scale went into place, the owners didn't just pocket the money. IIRC, Matt Stafford was the last of the big rookie contracts when he took $72 million from the Lions. By contrast, Caleb Williams will receive around $40 million.

The owners aren't just pocketing the extra money. They are simply spending it elsewhere.

 

[203Pat]

I don't fault your cynical view of ownership, it's a widely shared sentiment and there is good reason for it. I think, in part because of my poor explanation, what's missing in your calculation is the key points of any collectivelly bargained agreement would be the firm floor provisions. Just as with the rookie wage scale, the money 'saved' on QB contracts would still be required to be spent elsewhere

I just don't trust the NFLPA enough to actually navigate it correctly. Unless all the players started getting more guaranteed money I don't know how this would benefit anyone but the owners.

 

[mgteich]

OK, let's deal with the real question. After all, the owners need the agreement of the players' union for any deal.

WHAT WOULD BE THE EFFECT OF CAPPING QB COMPENSATION AT $50B AAV (or the equivalent percentage of the cap)?
==========
I suspect that there would also be a cap on non-QB's, perhaps even a cap by position.

 

[XLIX]

Outside of a handful of QB's and their agents it's hard to envision anyone in the equation, be it owners, players or fans who would not be benefitted.

IMHO a QB cap would hurt the NFL's parity which, by extension, hurts the fans (or, perhaps I should say, hurts fans who support the idea of parity).

 

[maust]

+1 +1

When the rookie wage scale went into place, the owners didn't just pocket the money. IIRC, Matt Stafford was the last of the big rookie contracts when he took $72 million from the Lions. By contrast, Caleb Williams will receive around $40 million.

The owners aren't just pocketing the extra money. They are simply spending it elsewhere.

Yep, as was the intent when the players collectively bargained the agreement.

 

[mgteich]

I just don't trust the NFLPA enough to actually navigate it correctly. Unless all the players started getting more guaranteed money I don't know how this would benefit anyone but the owners.

YOU don't trust the owners?

Why not let the players and the players' union decide what is best for them?

IMO, taking reducing future QB compensation to $50B AAV and keeping the cap calculation the same can only help players who are not in the 20 QB's,

The only way that this change hurts the players is if the media choose to pay less in their next contracts because of the change.

 

[maust]

I just don't trust the NFLPA enough to actually navigate it correctly. Unless all the players started getting more guaranteed money I don't know how this would benefit anyone but the owners.

I'm sorry I am doing such a poor job of explaining it. The best example I can think of to give you is the good that was wrought across the board when the rookie wage scale went into effect. Provided the language of any agreement on the cash floor provisions remains as strong everyone but the QB's and agents would benefit in the same way. Certainly you can't tell me you see Kirk Cousins making all all that he has at the expense of the rest of the roster was a good thing for anyone other than Kirk Cousins. Not that I blame him, he bet on himself and won so good on him but the system that produced those contracts is inherently inequitable to the other players on his team. Also kind of a **** deal for Washington and Minnesota fans too that their front offices misread the tea leaves so badly

 

[203Pat]

I'm sorry I am doing such a poor job of explaining it. The best example I can think of to give you is the good that was wrought across the board when the rookie wage scale went into effect. Provided the language of any agreement on the cash floor provisions remains as strong everyone but the QB's and agents would benefit in the same way. Certainly you can't tell me you see Kirk Cousins making all all that he has at the expense of the rest of the roster was a good thing for anyone other than Kirk Cousins. Not that I blame him, he bet on himself and won so good on him but the system that produced those contracts is inherently inequitable to the other players on his team. Also kind of a **** deal for Washington and Minnesota fans too that their front offices misread the tea leaves so badly

If it is implemented the way the rookie wage scale is I get it is best for the team and the rest of the roster. I just don't get how the quarterbacks are going to sign up for that? If Mahomes were a free agent right now on the open market he could command his price. He could ask for a deal that takes up 50% of the cap and I bet there would be teams lined up to pay it. I don't know why he would want to limit his ability to get every dollar. Maybe the quarterbacks get outvoted in the NFLPA and they have to deal with it but to me that would open up a door for a rival league to poach quarterbacks if they ever had an owner with deep enough pockets.

YOU don't trust the owners?

Why not let the players and the players' union decide what is best for them?

IMO, taking reducing future QB compensation to $50B AAV and keeping the cap calculation the same can only help players who are not in the 20 QB's,

The only way that this change hurts the players is if the media choose to pay less in their next contracts because of the change.

I can't do anything about it one way or the other but the players have shown time and time again they will vote against their own self interests instead of holding out for a better deal.

 

[mgteich]

If it is implemented the way the rookie wage scale is I get it is best for the team and the rest of the roster. I just don't get how the quarterbacks are going to sign up for that? If Mahomes were a free agent right now on the open market he could command his price. He could ask for a deal that takes up 50% of the cap and I bet there would be teams lined up to pay it. I don't know why he would want to limit his ability to get every dollar. Maybe the quarterbacks get outvoted in the NFLPA and they have to deal with it but to me that would open up a door for a rival league to poach quarterbacks if they ever had an owner with deep enough pockets.


I can't do anything about it one way or the other but the players have shown time and time again they will vote against their own self interests instead of holding out for a better deal.

Yup, the NFL and the union can limit the top QB's to only $50M or so.

So, the risk is a rival league which would MIGHT pay the top 5 QB's more. Well, more until the league folded. The revenue stream to the NFL owners and players makes any competition extremely problematical. Could a rival league really get enough high quality players to make their league games better than the NFL? Of course not.

 

[maust]

If it is implemented the way the rookie wage scale is I get it is best for the team and the rest of the roster. I just don't get how the quarterbacks are going to sign up for that?

There are @ 2400 active voting players. As a group the top 20 QB's wouldn't make up even one percent of the vote.

 

[203Pat]

Yup, the NFL and the union can limit the top QB's to only $50M or so.

So, the risk is a rival league which would MIGHT pay the top 5 QB's more. Well, more until the league folded. The revenue stream to the NFL owners and players makes any competition extremely problematical. Could a rival league really get enough high quality players to make their league games better than the NFL? Of course not.

I fully admit a rival league ponying up what it would take to land an elite NFL QB right now is nearly impossible but 10 years from now who knows? Rocket Ismail was thought to be the #1 pick back in the early 90's and ended up signing with the CFL and made more per year than anyone in the NFL. Messi just signed with the MLS and is getting paid on every subscriber to Apple's MLS streaming package. If you pair the never ending streaming wars, endorsements, NIL money in college, with a capped earning potential in the NFL for superstar quarterbacks who knows what could happen down the road.

 

[mgteich]

I fully admit a rival league ponying up what it would take to land an elite NFL QB right now is nearly impossible but 10 years from now who knows? Rocket Ismail was thought to be the #1 pick back in the early 90's and ended up signing with the CFL and made more per year than anyone in the NFL. Messi just signed with the MLS and is getting paid on every subscriber to Apple's MLS streaming package. If you pair the never ending streaming wars, endorsements, NIL money in college, with a capped earning potential in the NFL for superstar quarterbacks who knows what could happen down the road.

I agree that a few top players might get more from a new league.

The best deal for the vast majority of players to continue playing for NFL teams.

 

[Huckleberry1]

You don't seem to understand that if QB's are paid more, the rest of the team is paid less.

Whose fault is that?

 

[XLIX]

If it is implemented the way the rookie wage scale is I get it is best for the team and the rest of the roster. I just don't get how the quarterbacks are going to sign up for that? If Mahomes were a free agent right now on the open market he could command his price. He could ask for a deal that takes up 50% of the cap and I bet there would be teams lined up to pay it. I don't know why he would want to limit his ability to get every dollar. Maybe the quarterbacks get outvoted in the NFLPA and they have to deal with it but to me that would open up a door for a rival league to poach quarterbacks if they ever had an owner with deep enough pockets.

Rival leagues paying players in the same range as the NFL are not even remotely a possibility in this day and age, so let's do away with that silliness. No one is going to sacrifice tens of millions of dollars just to spite the NFL.

The thing no one here has mentioned is that if this ever came to fruition, the NFL wouldn't implement a QB salary cap. They would simply implement a max contract situation. Of course, in the real world, QBs are the only ones who would qualify for a max contract but that's their problem.

I fully admit a rival league ponying up what it would take to land an elite NFL QB right now is nearly impossible but 10 years from now who knows? Rocket Ismail was thought to be the #1 pick back in the early 90's and ended up signing with the CFL and made more per year than anyone in the NFL.

That was 30+ years ago and worked out so poorly for Toronto that they let him out of his deal 2 years early. Here in the 21st Century, it just isn't a realistic alternative

 

[mgteich]

Whose fault is that?

You are responsible for your own understanding of the situation.
===========
If you mean who is responsible for the salary cap and requiring teams to pay out a certain of revenue, the fault is that of the owners and players who both benefit from the current situation.

This has been the case since before the merger. The players have benefited from having the union, and the negotiated benefits and limits, since the beginning. Once television money started to be available in the 50's, the only real issue for owners and players was how to splits the profits from the media contracts. Of course, there have been other issues involving pensions and safety.

 

[203Pat]

Rival leagues paying players in the same range as the NFL are not even remotely a possibility in this day and age, so let's do away with that silliness. No one is going to sacrifice tens of millions of dollars just to spite the NFL.

The thing no one here has mentioned is that if this ever came to fruition, the NFL wouldn't implement a QB salary cap. They would simply implement a max contract situation. Of course, in the real world, QBs are the only ones who would qualify for a max contract but that's their problem.

That was 30+ years ago and worked out so poorly for Toronto that they let him out of his deal 2 years early. Here in the 21st Century, it just isn't a realistic alternative

I agree that right now there is no chance but 10 years from now who knows? The media landscape is changing rapidly and there may be even more streaming/VR/gambling money to actually compete elsewhere.

Either way I don't know how they can make this work right now without the old "slippery slope" situation. Would there be a clause the max is always highest for the quarterback then all the other positions slot in behind that wherever or would there eventually be a cap for cornerbacks, pass rushers, left tackles, etc?

 

[mgteich]

I agree that right now there is no chance but 10 years from now who knows? The media landscape is changing rapidly and there may be even more streaming/VR/gambling money to actually compete elsewhere.

Either way I don't know how they can make this work right now without the old "slippery slope" situation. Would there be a clause the max is always highest for the quarterback then all the other positions slot in behind that wherever or would there eventually be a cap for cornerbacks, pass rushers, left tackles, etc?

The simplest rule would be to have a max percentage of cap would affect all contracts.

Of course, now only QB's would be affected. However, depending on the amount of percentage, the limit could affect the top players in other positions over the next few years. Coonsider the situation if a cap were in the last contract. i suspect that it would now apply to players of several positions. That is why a percentage of cap is the right way to go.

That being said, the other extreme is to how caps by position as is the case for franchise tags. I suspect that this would be proposed by the union but would be much harder to agree upon.
==========
I suspect that union might consider the simpler rule, even between contracts, since it benefits all but a very few players. Of course, the limit would be set higher than any current contract.

 

[Huckleberry1]

You are responsible for your own understanding of the situation.
===========
If you mean who is responsible for the salary cap and requiring teams to pay out a certain of revenue, the fault is that of the owners and players who both benefit from the current situation.

This has been the case since before the merger. The players have benefited from having the union, and the negotiated benefits and limits, since the beginning. Once television money started to be available in the 50's, the only real issue for owners and players was how to splits the profits from the media contracts. Of course, there have been other issues involving pensions and safety.

You know better.

The owners write the checks, the owners are responsible for overpaying anyone. I have zero empathy for the poor poor owners. If their inability to control themselves is an issue then it’s easily resolved. Exempt quarterbacks from the cap. The owners can pay them as much as they want, the other players get more money, and there is no impact against the cap. Problem solved. If the owners don’t like it they can go drown themselves in their champagne fed waterfalls in their living rooms. Poor babies.