PDaDdy Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 Something just occurred to me today as we have all become much more interested in what coaches are out there. In the interest of parity a salary cap was instituted to help level the playing field of talent across all teams. To an extent this has worked in that there is much more parity but savvy GMs and talent evaluators can still get something of an upper hand. Given that the talent level is considerably more even across the board in a way the REAL difference comes down to your scouts and GMs being able to get impact rookies at rookie salaries and coaching that can get the most out of your talent by way of player development and scheme. Scouts, GMs and coaches that are good at their job command BIG salaries. In this era of for the most part "player talent" parity why don't we address the issue of front office and coaching parity as it is often the true difference maker between a successful team, a consistently mediocre team and a bad team? I don't know if this concept has ever come up before but I wonder if their would be any support for including coaches and GMs salaries into the salary cap? It could give smaller market teams like Buffalo a chance to compete with the big boys. If you want to pay Belicheat or whoever big bucks to get the most out of your talent it should take away from how much money you have left to spend on that actual talent. The current system basically allows the wealthier franchises in large markets with good weather to get the best coaching and front office people. We need parity in the front office and coaching!
PDaDdy Posted November 20, 2009 Author Posted November 20, 2009 Oh and yes I want Cower as our next coach but I don't think that Ralphie is going to change his spots at this point and stop thinking with his wallet. He might figure this is his last chance and actually break the piggy bank but the logical side of me doubts he will put up the cash for a Cower or Shannahan.
Recommended Posts