Salary Cap doesn't equal parity

[everlong]

Since 2000 only 6 AFC teams and 12 NFC teams have made the SB. Only 5 AFC teams and 6 NFC teams have won the SB. Overall the AFC is 12-7. Of the teams below 8 comprised the 12 playoff participants from this past season. Had Pittsburgh not imploded (play laugh track), Denver not lost Sanders and Harris for the stretch run it could have been higher.

From the rest of the league are there any teams who can break the monopoly? Minnesota, Dallas, Cleveland and especially KC will be the hot teams in the prediction threads but if one from each conference breaks through that would make 12/32 different winners in 20 years. Granted NE's domination has titled the numbers some what.

Baltimore 2 2
NE 9 6
Denver 2 1
Indy 2 1
Pitt 3 2
Oakland 1 0

NYG 3 2
Seattle 3 1
Carolina 2 0
Philly 2 1
TB 1 1
Rams 2 0
Arizona 1 0
Chicago 1 0
NO 1 1
GB 1 1
SF 1 0
Atlanta 1 0

Team wins Makes it even more glaring. 6 teams have over 100 less wins than NE and 1 has over 100 less than Pitt.

NWE 225
PIT 197
IND 190
GNB 184
PHI 181
BAL 176
DEN 175
SEA 171
NOR 170
DAL 160
SDG / LAC 157
ATL 157
MIN 155
NYG 154
KAN 154
CAR 152
TEN 151
CHI 149
MIA 144
CIN 143
NYJ 141
STL / LAR 135
SFO 135
ARI 132
TAM 131
WAS 129
BUF 127
HOU 121
JAX 121
OAK 118
DET 111
CLE 93

Playoff wins, NE has as many as #2+3 combined but from Minnesota to to the 4 teams not shown because they don't have a playoff win that equal 15 teams and they have equal to the Patriots 30 wins. You know it's skewd when the NYJs have more playoff wins than the bottom 7 franchises combined. This is all with giving Oakland and TB credit when neither has been relevant since 2002 which you can see by both being in the bottom quarter of season win total.

NWE 30
BAL 15
PIT 15
PHI 14
IND 13
SEA 13
GNB 12
NYG 10
NOR 9
CAR 8
DEN 7
ATL 6
SFO 6
NYJ 6
ARI 5
STL / LAR 5
SDG / LAC 5
MIN 4
OAK 4
DAL 3
TEN 3
TAM 3
CHI 3
JAX 3
HOU 3
KAN 2
MIA 1
WAS 1

Good franchises who have the salary cap figure out, breed a good culture where winning comes first are always going to rise to the top. When Bill and Tom finally leave I know we won't be winning at the clip of the past 20 years but I bet the Krafts make the right hires to right the ship. Yes you need the QB but they'll figure that out too. Maybe they end up with a middle of the road guy but I don't see them going through Ponder after Losman after Leaf either.

 

[borg]

75% of NFC teams reaching the SB in 19 years is definitely a display of parity.
NE's success (9 in 19) is the outlier

Having a quality QB on a rookie contract is a huge advantage (2001-4)
Having a great QB take 60 cents on the dollar is a huge advantage.
Knowing an AFCE title is your floor every year and the real season begins in January is a huge advantage.
Having a HC/GM with an economics degree is a huge advantage
Having 2 decades of HC/QB continuity is a huge advantage
etc

Parity exists....NE just ignores it

 

[Sicilian]

As Borg said, NE is an outlier. Parity doesn't mean everyone gets a turn winning, just that rules are set to make it harder to continue winning without a reset at some point.

 

[borg]

As Borg said, NE is an outlier. Parity doesn't mean everyone gets a turn winning, just that rules are set to make it harder to continue winning without a reset at some point.

The Rams had the finest ingredients but the chef burnt the meal.
BB prepared his famous Shepherd's Pie and the team feasted

 

[Simpelton]

Parity doesn't mean what some people think it does.

What Parity means, and what it absolutely SHOULD mean, is that the thing that separates the haves from the have-nots is competence rather than money. Incompetent teams will still surf the basement, supercompetent teams will still dominate the league.

The meaning of Parity is that you can't simply Steinbrenner your way to success. And the NFL is actually doing a pretty good job of that kind of parity. Even terrible teams can pay their players, and even excellent teams have to carefully weigh the pros and cons of bringing in additional talent.

That said there is absolutely no way to enforce any kind of competence parity without a system of relegation. Which as we all know is something that is simply never going to happen. At the very least, the salary cap is doing a great job of letting the smartest teams in the league dominate and giving very poor teams a chance to get lucky if they play their cards right.

For the record I would be all for creating a 12 team "shadow league" based in relatively open markets, that would allow you to relegate perennial underperformers to the shadow league and promote other, hungrier teams into their place... but that'd never get through the ownership. You could probably come up with a list of 12 towns to host NFL2 teams easily enough.

 

[turkeyneck]

The salary cap imposes complexity. Some organizations handle complexity better than others. In a complex environment, those most "complexity agile" will have a competitive advantage. The Pats are the masters of complexity in the NFL. Ironically, a mechanism imposed in order to equalize teams has handed a competitive advantage to the team that the NYJFL* most wants regressed to the mean.

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

That said there is absolutely no way to enforce any kind of competence parity without a system of relegation. Which as we all know is something that is simply never going to happen. At the very least, the salary cap is doing a great job of letting the smartest teams in the league dominate and giving very poor teams a chance to get lucky if they play their cards right.

Theoretically, if you had a draft every year of all players, you might achieve competence parity - or closer to it. But that would be too crazy and not allow fans to have any type of bond with a team.

Still great coaches would have the advantage as they always will.

 

[ALP]

As has been posted, I think the end result, or equality of outcome that is sought, is mostly achieved, but depends largely on one factor:

If your quarterback is any good: the teams since 2001 w good quarterbacks have won SBs, the ones without good QBs have not

We just happen to have the GOAT, so we take what a good qb team would do (day Pitt), and take it a step further

Then you add not just a great coach to it, which also helps, but the GOAT as well, so we tilt things even more

A great qb (or one that plays great in at least some stretches) and great coach will prob get you 1-2 SBs in 10 years

 

[Simpelton]

Theoretically, if you had a draft every year of all players, you might achieve competence parity - or closer to it. But that would be too crazy and not allow fans to have any type of bond with a team.

Still great coaches would have the advantage as they always will.

And they always should. The salary cap allows competence to be the thing that separates great teams from terrible ones and we should all be 100% all for that.

Our organization just happens to be absolutely insanely competent right now.

 

[XLIX]

“Parity” simply means teams have equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.

 

[1960Pats]

I have a solution (other than banning the Pats) and that's to have a salary cap scale. The top team each year starts at a certain figure and for each draft position drop you add 1.5 million. The #32 team picking would have a 46.5 million higher cap than #1.

 

[BlueThunder]

For some reason, that scaled salary cap would only give the Patriots an even bigger advantage....LOL

 

[Triumph]

“Parity” simply means teams have equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.

Bingo.

Just like in the USA.

 

[Urgent]

Theoretically, if you had a draft every year of all players, you might achieve competence parity - or closer to it. But that would be too crazy and not allow fans to have any type of bond with a team.

Still great coaches would have the advantage as they always will.

His’n and your’n my friend.
You are right.
I’d still bet on Belichick.

 

[Jimke]

The Patriots win despite little salary cap room and poor draft position simply because
they are smarter than everybody else.

 

[patsfanincleveland]

The Patriots win despite little salary cap room and poor draft position simply because
they are smarter than everybody else.

....and have the smartest, best looking fan base.

 

[maust]

The cap, rookie wage scale draft, FA and scheduling are all designed to defeat what New England has done. That New England has stayed on top simply proves something we've always known, at the end of the day the smartest guy in the room is still the smartest guy in the room. Oh, you also can't fix stupid...not even with duct tape.

 

[patsfanincleveland]

“Parity” simply means teams have equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.

If equality of outcome was desired, the league is going in the wrong direction because in today's league teams either have (or don't have) a franchise QB.

The rules would have to mitigate not magnify that condition.

 

[IllegalContact]

I've been talking about this for years........the same thing that intends to equalize the league prevents teams from doing anything about an instance such as a coach/QB combination....they're just going to have to wait it out and hope that coach doesn't find another QB

 

[tasmlab]

My quick guess is that quality of coach, GM, staff and owner are completely independent from the salary cap, scheduling, and other parity-seeking actions. And probably completely more important and bigger advantages.

IMO, it makes football more interesting and the salary cap a great idea. In one of the most physical, violent sports with the biggest number athletes, brains and decision making still rules the roost.