Terrible News for NFL?

[Rob's House]

What monster are you talking about? If a player such as the CB for Oakland sets the standard for highest paid CB then why shouldn't a player with comparable ability and performances not get paid at a similar level. How else would you pay a player? Paying a player at a level he is ranked is more than fair. Darrell Revis is one of the best, if not the best, CBs in the leauge. With single coverage he usually shuts down the best receiver on the opposing team. His ability to do that certainly has a positive impact on the defense. There is no doubt that opposing offenses scheme away from him. There are not many truly impact players on any team or in the league in general. He certainly falls into that elite category.

 

The league has a cap. Each team can decide how to apportion their allowable cap money any way they want. Organizations are very well aware that when they give out a premium salary to a particular player it will affect how they apportion the rest of their cap money to the other players on the roster.

 

When Peyton Manning's contract is negotiated he is going to get the most money of any qb. Why shouldn't he get it? He is arguably the best qb in the league. When Tom Brady's next contract is negotiated he is going to be in the same compensation range as PM because he is in the same elite category. Again, by paying a Brady and Manning top tier dollar the front office is going to have to adjust (downward) how they pay the other position players.

 

As long as teams stay within the cap (as they are required) then I have no concern who gets what amount. That is a front office issue which all organizations contend with. It is the nature of the business.

 

So Al Davis sets the standard? I mean if someone else is willing to pay Revis > $15 million then by all means he's more than welcome to go for it, but seeing as how he's got 3 yrs left on his contract making peanuts (relatively speaking) I'd say he's damn lucky they're offering $12 million/yr + bonus.

[BuffaloBill]

Bonus money does count against the cap - it just gets prorated aver the course of the contract.

 

 

Actuallyt teams can handle the way you suggest or they can take the hit all at once (cast to cap). The Bills and other teams have elected not to spread bonuses as the down side is that you can carry "dead cap" doallars in the fure if the player is separated from your roster for one reason or another.

[CountDorkula]

What monster are you talking about?

 

Got_Wood states my main concerns ver well.

I think you're right. Regardless of the people that say "he's the best CB in the league, he should get paid like one", or "what's wrong with a guy wanting to get paid what he's worth?". It will be a bad thing if it happens.

 

The league needs to step up and keep a salary cap in place that is enforceable. If Goodell wants to maintain level competition, he needs to do this. We don't need the NFL to become the MLB or NBA. The Yankees and Red Sox have a ridiculous advantage over other teams with the salaries they can pay players. They have team salaries of $208 million and $162 million respectively, while teams like the Pirates ($34 million), Padres ($37 million), A's ($51 million), and etc have to suffer. In the NBA, the Lakers ($91 million) and Celtics ($87 million) have the highest team salaries. SURPRISE!!! They were in the finals.

 

And don't tell me team salaries don't matter. Teams with low salaries that win regularly are an ANOMOLY. Teams that constantly buy the best players have a chance every year.

 

WE DON'T WANT THE NFL TO BECOME LIKE THIS. Once even competition goes out the window, so do the ratings. The NFL is great because teams like Green Bay, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Minnesota, New Orleans, and Arizona can win. And yes, even Buffalo once we've got a capable coach.

 

It's not the players fault. If their peers are making big money, they deserve it too. But the league needs to set a salary cap, and make the penalty for going over it harsh. Without the small market teams, football isn't the same sport to me.

 

 

Plus you can kiss the franchise tag goodbye. Every year a player will come out and say he is the best at his position, and want to be paid like it, and he will be, raising the % that the franchise tag will have to pay out year after year.

 

Who knows if the slary cap comes back, if not team will eventually out price themselves from the average fan,(see Yankess, New York) competition will drop and the same teams year after year will sign all the "Big name players" while leaving little or no room for the smaller market teams.

[....lybob]

People scream market forces unless they don't like where the market forces are taking things- I understand that, what I don't quite understand is the player hating over ridiculous salaries but no owner hating over their ridiculous profits- but if you really hate it there is something you can do, stop going and stop watching.

[Rob's House]

People scream market forces unless they don't like where the market forces are taking things- I understand that, what I don't quite understand is the player hating over ridiculous salaries but no owner hating over their ridiculous profits- but if you really hate it there is something you can do, stop going and stop watching.

 

You're confusing the issue. There's not much hating over any of it. Most people are concerned about the cost inflating the price of tickets, or pricing the Bills (small market team) out of contention.

 

And seeing as how the players collective salaries exceed the owner's profits those salaries have a much greater impact on ticket prices.

[Sabre Bill]

There IS hating when taxpayers are told it's their role to fund new stadia in which the multi-millionaires play their game.

[shoretalk]

I say set the cap at a lower place than it is now and fix it there for 5 years. I would also cap what each position can make, its what all other unions do. If you go to American Airlines you can see in a book what a mechanic with X amount of years makes. When they start doing that, then this **** will get under control.

AGREE ....

 

The players want the best of all worlds ... well set up a rookie salary structure for the first four years in the league.

 

Then, position by position create base salaries that can be increased by playing on winning teams and individual accomplishments.

 

If they want to be self employed contractors let them take on their own health care costs, pensions, etc..

 

All of us are hurting ... frankly we need to see some price controls on tickets with reductions matching the reductions in the cap.

 

Maybe we are the ones who should strike but we never ever will ...

[JohnC]

Not right now.

 

The league doesn't have a cap right now because the owners decided to opt out of CBA. This is a temporary situation. That still doesn't mean that most teams aren't abiding by the cap or their own self imposed cap.

[H2o]

I say set the cap at a lower place than it is now and fix it there for 5 years. I would also cap what each position can make, its what all other unions do. If you go to American Airlines you can see in a book what a mechanic with X amount of years makes. When they start doing that, then this **** will get under control.

It won't fly. They will never group player's pay scales like that, except for the league minimums of course. Guys will continue to get paid based on their "talent level". I agree with the cap conditions though.

[Dante]

There IS hating when taxpayers are told it's their role to fund new stadia in which the multi-millionaires play their game.

Exactly. This is what I can't get out of my mind. If owners can afford to pay these guys this much they can certainly afford to build their own stadium. By publicly funding stadiums we are subsidizing the players. If owners threaten to move if a stadium is not built let them go.

[JohnC]

So Al Davis sets the standard? I mean if someone else is willing to pay Revis > $15 million then by all means he's more than welcome to go for it, but seeing as how he's got 3 yrs left on his contract making peanuts (relatively speaking) I'd say he's damn lucky they're offering $12 million/yr + bonus.

 

If the Jets think he is worth top CB money they will pay it. If the don't think he is worth top CB money they won't pay it. Because of the cap (I'm aware this year it doesn't apply) if you get too generous with a position you will have to tap down on spending for another position.

 

The salary structure for the NFL is beyond being irrational. If you are a high first round pick you are slotted at a high salary and bonus for what is usually a six year deal. That doesn't make sense. What happens if the high pick is a bust? The money is already payed out. If a lower round pick with a two or three year deal turns out to be an all-star he is in position to sooner get a high ranking payment at the level of the highest paid payers at his position. However, if you are a lower first round pick and turn out to be one of the best players at your position, such as RB CharlesJohnson for the Titans, you are stuck with a lower salary and locked in for six years. What makes his situation even more unfair is that the RB position is a "short life" position. Thus when your contract expires the team can draft a younger back at a cheaper price.

 

The salary structure needs to be reworked. No one is disputing that. It is going to take a lot of hard bargaining by the owners and the labor representatives for the league to come up with a more sensible system.

[CountDorkula]

The league doesn't have a cap right now because the owners decided to opt out of CBA. This is a temporary situation. That still doesn't mean that most teams aren't abiding by the cap or their own self imposed cap.

 

Yes but that "self imposed cap" is going to be a hell of a lot higher in Dallas, washington, NY, then it will be in places like, Cleveland, Buffalo, Jacksonville etc. . . In turn pricing the smaller market teams out of a competition for players and success.

[JohnC]

Yes but that "self imposed cap" is going to be a hell of a lot higher in Dallas, washington, NY, then it will be in places like, Cleveland, Buffalo, Jacksonville etc. . . In turn pricing the smaller market teams out of a competition for players and success.

 

When Dan Snyder and Jerry Jones see Ralph Wilson pocketing a good chunk of the money they share with the smaller market teams you can understand why they are becoming more reluctant to share their proceeds, especially when they have to pay the bonds off of stadiums they have built.

 

There is no doubt that a Dan Snyder type owner would prefer seeing a smaller market franchise such as Buffalo or Jacksonville moved to a richer and larger market such as LA. In their view franchises such as Jacksonville and Buffalo are a drag on their own self financed businesses.

 

A lot of people like to talk about the free market. When it goes against one's self interest then it becomes a different story.

[NewHampshireBillsFan]

When Dan Snyder and Jerry Jones see Ralph Wilson pocketing a good chunk of the money they share with the smaller market teams you can understand why they are becoming more reluctant to share their proceeds, especially when they have to pay the bonds off of stadiums they have built.

 

There is no doubt that a Dan Snyder type owner would prefer seeing a smaller market franchise such as Buffalo or Jacksonville moved to a richer and larger market such as LA. In their view franchises such as Jacksonville and Buffalo are a drag on their own self financed businesses.

 

A lot of people like to talk about the free market. When it goes against one's self interest then it becomes a different story.

 

The free market argument has to be handled carefully. The NFL is one entity that has a number of franchises. The individual franchises are not designed to compete economically with each other any more than two McDonald's franchises are meant to compete with each other. The whole goal of the NFL is to make as much money as possible for the owners of the franchises. The league might make more money if smaller market teams moved to bigger cities but that has nothing to do with a free market. Its like a company closing one branch office and opening a different one. But there is a potential problem for the league if say the Bills moved to LA. It makes people realize the NFL is nothing but a way to make money for the owners and tradition and fan support don't really mean anything. Once that starts to happen the overall value of all the franchises will plummet. Look at the NBA. The league and the refs try to do everything they can to make sure the Lakers make the finals most years. People can see through it at this point and its hard to take the league seriously. Of course my support ended for the NBA when the Braves left so I haven't wasted any time on the stupidity that is the NBA since then.

 

On the Jets I'm just happy they will be forced to overpay for one position so heavily.

[Got_Wood]

The free market argument has to be handled carefully. The NFL is one entity that has a number of franchises. The individual franchises are not designed to compete economically with each other any more than two McDonald's franchises are meant to compete with each other. The whole goal of the NFL is to make as much money as possible for the owners of the franchises. The league might make more money if smaller market teams moved to bigger cities but that has nothing to do with a free market. Its like a company closing one branch office and opening a different one. But there is a potential problem for the league if say the Bills moved to LA. It makes people realize the NFL is nothing but a way to make money for the owners and tradition and fan support don't really mean anything. Once that starts to happen the overall value of all the franchises will plummet. Look at the NBA. The league and the refs try to do everything they can to make sure the Lakers make the finals most years. People can see through it at this point and its hard to take the league seriously. Of course my support ended for the NBA when the Braves left so I haven't wasted any time on the stupidity that is the NBA since then.

 

On the Jets I'm just happy they will be forced to overpay for one position so heavily.

 

Thank you. It makes me feel better that there are sane individuals on this message board.

[judman]

The palace that Jerry Jones built in Dallas was like 1.2 billion, right?

 

12 Revis style contracts could build that place.

[JohnC]

It makes people realize the NFL is nothing but a way to make money for the owners and tradition and fan support don't really mean anything. Once that starts to happen the overall value of all the franchises will plummet.

 

Maybe you aren't aware of it but I have known for a very long time that the owners are in it for the money. Of course there are some old guard owners (Rooney family) who take a more group perspective than individual perspective. What is apparent is that trend line is moving toward the newer and more aggressive owners who are looking for new revenue streams to pay the bonds of the stadiums they are mostly building on their own. To them maximizing revenue and increasing the profit margin is what it is all about. Tradition and fan support are important until it interferes with their profit margin.

 

People can see through it at this point and its hard to take the league seriously. Of course my support ended for the NBA when the Braves left so I haven't wasted any time on the stupidity that is the NBA since then.

 

The person who sold the Braves and sold out the area was Paul Snyder, a local businessman. He stripped the team of players for cash and then sold the team to make a tidy profit and kill professional basketball forever in the region. In hindsight if the greedy owner would have held on for a little longer he could have made even more money. Shortly thereafter, Magic and Bird came into the league and dramatically increased interest in the NBA and the value of the franchises.

 

On the Jets I'm just happy they will be forced to overpay for one position so heavily.

 

How organizations handle contracts is as important as the talent level on the team. If a team miscalculates the value of a particular player that can handcuff them in acquiring additional talent or keeping their talent.

[Chandler#81]

The guy is great. Seems to be a true shut-down corner.

 

Salary aside, how will the Bills attack this secondary, considering Evans will be worthless for both these games?

[BillsPhan]

The guy is great. Seems to be a true shut-down corner.

 

Salary aside, how will the Bills attack this secondary, considering Evans will be worthless for both these games?

 

There is only one way to "attack" a great secondary. Run the ball down their throats for big gains on first and second down, forcing them to play up on third down. The problem with that strategy, is you have to have an offensive line big and strong and talented enough to be able to do that. Chan is saying the same things Dick used to say, which were the same things Mike used to say, which were the same things Gregg used to say. We will be a run first offense. Now Chan is known for being a good offensive coach, who can mix up plays and find weaknesses in defenses. But what he has not done differently then the losers before him over the past 11 years now, is trade for or draft any proven talented offensive linemen yet. So regardless of whether Evans may or may not be worthless for both the Jets' games up against Revis, this offensive line I see starting in September doesn't seem to be good enough to knock the Jets' front 7 off the line either.

 

And then Chan will end up doing the same thing the others were forced to do, tell his QB to take 7 step drops on 2nd and 3rd and long to have time to find someone open past the first down marker, and end up getting sacked all over the place.

 

But that's just my humble opinion.

[agardin]

There is only one way to "attack" a great secondary. Run the ball down their throats for big gains on first and second down, forcing them to play up on third down. The problem with that strategy, is you have to have an offensive line big and strong and talented enough to be able to do that. Chan is saying the same things Dick used to say, which were the same things Mike used to say, which were the same things Gregg used to say. We will be a run first offense. Now Chan is known for being a good offensive coach, who can mix up plays and find weaknesses in defenses. But what he has not done differently then the losers before him over the past 11 years now, is trade for or draft any proven talented offensive linemen yet. So regardless of whether Evans may or may not be worthless for both the Jets' games up against Revis, this offensive line I see starting in September doesn't seem to be good enough to knock the Jets' front 7 off the line either.

 

And then Chan will end up doing the same thing the others were forced to do, tell his QB to take 7 step drops on 2nd and 3rd and long to have time to find someone open past the first down marker, and end up getting sacked all over the place.

 

But that's just my humble opinion.

 

If Kris Jenkins is back and healthy, running the ball against the Jets will not be a great option either. I remember the Bills going for it on 4 and inches and running right at Jenkins. A 2 or 3 yard loss later I knew that Jauron was not the reincarnation of Walsh.