I hope the NFL doesn’t lose its salary cap.
I can’t say I’ve been following the CBA negotiations especially closely, and that’s good, because with all the delays, the suspense would be killing me at this point.
Anyway, I hope the cap stays. I’m a Broncos fan and no cap would actually be pretty good for my favorite team. The Broncos make a lot of money, have pretty smart management, and feature an owner who is probably willing to outspend most of his colleagues. I imagine that with no cap, the Broncos would be able to move into the elite (if we’re not there already) and stay there for a long time. I don’t think we’d have to wait very long for the next Super Bowl win.
But victories would always feel cheap. What do Yankees fans say to themselves when their team wins a World Series? (Or what did they used to tell themselves last millennium when they actually won the Series?) I’d always know the Broncos weren’t really playing the same game everyone else was. Of course, I’d still watch, but it wouldn’t be the same.
Some, like Peter King of Sports Illustrated, point out that football wouldn’t turn into baseball. Which is true, at least right away. As King wrote,
That’s all true, but I think King is basing his predictions for the league’s future too much on current market conditions. I think forecasts of doom become a self-fulfilling prophecy in a lot of ways.
Look at it this way: regardless of the amount of talent or number of franchises, professional sports leagues will always have some teams with losing records. (Since (nearly) every game has a winner and a loser, everyone’s record should add up to .500-yet, bizarrely, sometimes the mere existence of losing teams is presented as evidence of the need for contraction.) Not only that, odds are that some teams are going to lose for a few years in a row, regardless of how fair the player-procurement system is.
Let’s go worst-case scenario here. (Okay, the worst-case is a strike or lockout; technically, I’m talking second-worst.) Let’s say the league eliminates sharing of local revenues and the salary cap. While TV money is still split up, there will definitely be relative haves and have-nots in the league as some teams get to keep more money.
Let us also go on a limb and suggest that for the first few years in which there is no cap, the Arizona Cardinals are bad each year (I know, I am stretching my last remaining shreds of credibility here.).
Does anyone expect cheapskate Cardinals owner Bill Bidwell to do anything but call the system unfair and pocket as much money as he can, like “poor” baseball owners do now? (Sure, he can make even more money by spending his cash on a successful team, but there’s more risk, too.)
Look at the Colorado Rockies. While Denver hasn’t lost population over the years, they used to make enough money to spend alongside clubs from some of the biggest markets. But once they started to falter and attendance dropped, the owners lost their nerve and now they don’t spend a dime they don’t have to. And since they don’t care enough to still try and compete through innovation or player development, like the A’s or Twins, they’re just going to be bad for a really long time.
Teams like the Washington Redskins, Dallas Cowboys and, yes, the Broncos, will drive up salaries of the best players so high that some of the smaller-market teams will become either unable or unwilling to compete. It’ll be fun to watch the Redskins throw good money after bad and fulfill their true destiny as the Texas Rangers or Baltimore Orioles of just a few years past-a team with an enormous payroll and bite-sized results.
But it won’t be as fun as the system we have now.
I can’t say I’ve been following the CBA negotiations especially closely, and that’s good, because with all the delays, the suspense would be killing me at this point.
Anyway, I hope the cap stays. I’m a Broncos fan and no cap would actually be pretty good for my favorite team. The Broncos make a lot of money, have pretty smart management, and feature an owner who is probably willing to outspend most of his colleagues. I imagine that with no cap, the Broncos would be able to move into the elite (if we’re not there already) and stay there for a long time. I don’t think we’d have to wait very long for the next Super Bowl win.
But victories would always feel cheap. What do Yankees fans say to themselves when their team wins a World Series? (Or what did they used to tell themselves last millennium when they actually won the Series?) I’d always know the Broncos weren’t really playing the same game everyone else was. Of course, I’d still watch, but it wouldn’t be the same.
Some, like Peter King of Sports Illustrated, point out that football wouldn’t turn into baseball. Which is true, at least right away. As King wrote,
My thought: The sky hasn't fallen. It isn't falling. Football would be different without a salary cap. Different, and definitely not better. But we all need to get a grip. I've heard for the past week how dire a situation it would be if the game lost the cap and the ability to control player costs. I've read in papers and on Web sites, and heard on talk shows how the lack of a cap would be the baseball-ization of the NFL. And I say: Pshaw.
To say that no salary cap would turn the NFL into a league of Yankees (Redskins, Patriots, Cowboys) and Devil Rays (Jaguars, Saints, Bengals) is preposterous. First of all, the Yankees spent $208 million on players last year and the Devil Rays $29 million. In the NFL, a lower-revenue team like Jacksonville is going to take in probably $170 million this year, with the Redskins raking in maybe $310 million. To think Jacksonville would spend $50 million on players and the Redskins $190 million is just idiocy. Won't happen.
That’s all true, but I think King is basing his predictions for the league’s future too much on current market conditions. I think forecasts of doom become a self-fulfilling prophecy in a lot of ways.
Look at it this way: regardless of the amount of talent or number of franchises, professional sports leagues will always have some teams with losing records. (Since (nearly) every game has a winner and a loser, everyone’s record should add up to .500-yet, bizarrely, sometimes the mere existence of losing teams is presented as evidence of the need for contraction.) Not only that, odds are that some teams are going to lose for a few years in a row, regardless of how fair the player-procurement system is.
Let’s go worst-case scenario here. (Okay, the worst-case is a strike or lockout; technically, I’m talking second-worst.) Let’s say the league eliminates sharing of local revenues and the salary cap. While TV money is still split up, there will definitely be relative haves and have-nots in the league as some teams get to keep more money.
Let us also go on a limb and suggest that for the first few years in which there is no cap, the Arizona Cardinals are bad each year (I know, I am stretching my last remaining shreds of credibility here.).
Does anyone expect cheapskate Cardinals owner Bill Bidwell to do anything but call the system unfair and pocket as much money as he can, like “poor” baseball owners do now? (Sure, he can make even more money by spending his cash on a successful team, but there’s more risk, too.)
Look at the Colorado Rockies. While Denver hasn’t lost population over the years, they used to make enough money to spend alongside clubs from some of the biggest markets. But once they started to falter and attendance dropped, the owners lost their nerve and now they don’t spend a dime they don’t have to. And since they don’t care enough to still try and compete through innovation or player development, like the A’s or Twins, they’re just going to be bad for a really long time.
Teams like the Washington Redskins, Dallas Cowboys and, yes, the Broncos, will drive up salaries of the best players so high that some of the smaller-market teams will become either unable or unwilling to compete. It’ll be fun to watch the Redskins throw good money after bad and fulfill their true destiny as the Texas Rangers or Baltimore Orioles of just a few years past-a team with an enormous payroll and bite-sized results.
But it won’t be as fun as the system we have now.
Comments