NFL players happy with their cap

[thinkwild]

Only problem I see with this is you had 5 (6?) guys complaining, yet during football season I see with my own eyes thousands upon thousands of fans apparently very, very happy with the state of the game. I think most people just don't care about the system that's in place, as long as their team has a chance to win some games and they have a chance to watch some games. I really don't think most fans care one bit about how the dollars they put into the system are distributed, so long as they're happy with the return. There are a lot of happy fans out there in NFL land.

I think this feeling is far more widespread than simply the views of a few people. Hockey playoffs were sold out too. Most fans were pretty happy. Doesnt seem like there is anything wrong with hockey either. There were a lot of happy fans out there in NHL land.

I think they raise some interesting points about the NFL we should consider.

The new reality in the NFL has made teams much more even, but that redistribution of wealth has killed much of the drama.

Agents determine winning and losing teams more than coaches in this day and age.

No more great teams. Mediocrity rules the day

Empires rise and fall in the space of one off-season.
Every team has holes, and true upsets have disappeared.

The great teams no longer exist - only a series of one-year wonders. Players change teams so quickly that you need an enrollment book to keep up.

There will never be another team like the Joe Montana 49ers. Greedy agents, greedy players and greedy executives will make sure nobody gets too good.
A whole new generation of football fans is growing up judging the quality of teams by their performance in video games. The new generation does not know any better, it knows nothing about how a real team, a team that sticks together through years of ups and downs, operates

Sunday's two Super Bowl contestants, the St. Louis Rams and the Tennessee Titans, took the money and ran. The Rams and the Titans, once called the Oilers, jilted loyal fan bases in Los Angeles and Houston for a quick buck in a football-hungry locale.

I imagine some here can say St Louis Rams and it doesnt sound funny. How can the teachers pet of sports had so many teams moving, when it is used as a model that will prevent that?

 

[Jag68Sid87]

What's with all this talk of the NFL no longer fielding "great" teams? Name me one team in North American pro sports on a better roll than the New England Patriots?

And yeah, they had to make a few changes from their Super Bowl winning team of a year ago, but if anything they ADDED more big names than they lost in the off-season (i.e. Corey Dillon). And EVERY championship team, no matter the system, has to make a few changes that affect the roster. It's what sports is all about.

As for the question of parity vs. dynasty, well greatness and mediocrity is in the eye of the beholder. I didn't have a problem with the Yankees when they started their run of World Series championships, because the nucleus of that team was homegrown and they built themselves up to become a great team over time. However, when you have to buy other teams' stars to try to maintain a standard of excellence, it's no longer a dynasty in my estimation...and today's Yankees, I have a real problem with. And they do what they do, only because they CAN.

Mike Ilitch, or whomever truly owns the Maple Leafs would do the same thing if the hard cap turned soft. And really, all it takes is one person to go over the luxury tax to both dissuade rival teams from competing with that owner dollar for dollar, and for salaries to rise for everybody (via artificial means such as the arbitration process).

 

[John Flyers Fan]

What's with all this talk of the NFL no longer fielding "great" teams? Name me one team in North American pro sports on a better roll than the New England Patriots?

Yes, but they're great compared to the current NFL.

The Pats are not as good as the great Steelers, 49ers or Cowboys teams of years gone by. Not a knock onthe Pats, because you couldn't afford teams that good with a salary cap.

 

[thinkwild]

As for the question of parity vs. dynasty, well greatness and mediocrity is in the eye of the beholder. I didn't have a problem with the Yankees when they started their run of World Series championships, because the nucleus of that team was homegrown and they built themselves up to become a great team over time. However, when you have to buy other teams' stars to try to maintain a standard of excellence, it's no longer a dynasty in my estimation...and today's Yankees, I have a real problem with. And they do what they do, only because they CAN.

I would agree. And if it were similarly possible in Hockey to reload your core through UFA purchases, I would also find the system very unfair. But for all the Rangers money, the system in hockey prevents them from doing what the system in baseball would allow them to do.

Even with the Yankees, there is still improving parity in baseball. But more importantly, they extended the contract of their commisioner and owners are not claiming the dire straights they were before the settlement. I would guess the nominal luxury tax they imposed either solved their problems, or they were doing some creative fibbing.

 

[Jag68Sid87]

To John Flyers Fan,

And the 2004 Yankees aren't anywhere near as good as the 1927 Yankees, or the 1960 Yankees, or heck even the 1996 Yankees, despite the fact they have a payroll that could probably field 20-25 previous GREAT Yankee teams.

What's your point?

 

[thinkwild]

The point is the great teams were more exciting, and that many people within NFL football itself are complaining about the mediocrity of the league now. NOt just us envious hockey fans.

 

[Jag68Sid87]

Even with the Yankees, there is still improving parity in baseball. But more importantly, they extended the contract of their commisioner and owners are not claiming the dire straights they were before the settlement. I would guess the nominal luxury tax they imposed either solved their problems, or they were doing some creative fibbing.

I think this improved parity in baseball is a myth, no disrespect intended. Yes, different teams are winning it all, but I think the important thing in the NFL that just doesn't exist in MLB is the perception by fans that their team (EVERY TEAM) has a shot. Fans in TB KNOW their team can win the Super Bowl, it's been done. How do they feel about their chances of winning the NL East? In Wisconsin, the Pack is a part of football legend. The Brewers? They have Bernie Brewer and sausage races. Heck, even the Lions are closer to the playoffs than Mike Ilitch's own historic Tigers.

I believe the salary cap is a great marketing tool in the PERCEPTION of parity, which greatly enhances the league. Baseball's attendance spikes are irrelevant, because baseball is an institution and a beautiful game and it will never go away...not even Bud Selig can kill it. But if you don't feel for the long-suffering fans in Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, Kansas City, and of course my beloved Montreal Expos, then you don't have a heart. Were they poorly run? Well, naturally. But just because the Florida's and Oakland's have won the lottery and found a way to swim upstream in a downstream current doesn't change the fact that the baseball system works only for the well to do.

 

[Jag68Sid87]

The NFL's problems are sooooo far down the list of meaningful sports industry problems, it's scary. In fact, one might even argue that the NFL's problems of greatness/mediocrity is merely cyclical. And the only reason why the Patriots don't get more pub is because they don't have a lot of guys that like to run their mouths, and their stars (aside from the QB) are on the defensive side of the ball, which isn't nearly as sexy.

 

[thinkwild]

I think this improved parity in baseball is a myth,

They are suggesting its improved. I see your point though. But the more importantpart I was saying is that they are no longer complaining about financial problems. The owners are financially happy under this system where some teams have no chance.

I still think the main difference between baseball and hockey, is that the Yankees can buy players in their prime. This is the huge difference. If we use our UFA rules and their luxury tax, fans and owners should be happy.

I believe the salary cap is a great marketing tool in the PERCEPTION of parity, which greatly enhances the league. Baseball's attendance spikes are irrelevant, because baseball is an institution and a beautiful game and it will never go away...not even Bud Selig can kill it. But if you don't feel for the long-suffering fans in Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, Kansas City, and of course my beloved Montreal Expos, then you don't have a heart. Were they poorly run? Well, naturally. But just because the Florida's and Oakland's have won the lottery and found a way to swim upstream in a downstream current doesn't change the fact that the baseball system works only for the well to do.

I agree, it is great at appealing to perception. My argument is that they fans could equally be sold a different perception if they tried. The cap turns sports greatness into a lottery to me. The perception is that that is a good thing. I think it makes a mockery of team building.

Im a Spo's fan. I feel for them. I dont know the reasons, but they just werent a baseball market. Maybe I should have gone to more baseball than hockey games. You dont lower the leagues standards to allow them to survive if they arent a market. You find a market for them. Thats they way it works in all sports leagues. Most often in the NFL.

 

[mr gib]

They are suggesting its improved. I see your point though. But the more importantpart I was saying is that they are no longer complaining about financial problems. The owners are financially happy under this system where some teams have no chance.

I still think the main difference between baseball and hockey, is that the Yankees can buy players in their prime. This is the huge difference. If we use our UFA rules and their luxury tax, fans and owners should be happy.



I agree, it is great at appealing to perception. My argument is that they fans could equally be sold a different perception if they tried. The cap turns sports greatness into a lottery to me. The perception is that that is a good thing. I think it makes a mockery of team building.

Im a Spo's fan. I feel for them. I dont know the reasons, but they just werent a baseball market. Maybe I should have gone to more baseball than hockey games. You dont lower the leagues standards to allow them to survive if they arent a market. You find a market for them. Thats they way it works in all sports leagues. Most often in the NFL.

i saw the gazette writer guy in montreal say - after the strike in 94 - the private / corporate / and the fan - sector's - said that if selig was still the commish after the strike - it was - no mas - and that was correct - the expos supporters in montreal - checked out -