No Salary Cap After 2006

Hogfather · Post by **Hogfather** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:07 pm

This one has been touched on already, check it out:)
No Salary Cap After 2006

skinsRin · Post by **skinsRin** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:14 pm

Oh, Sorry guys I didn't see that post. I am a BIG yankees fan so when I saw sportscenter, I thought it was worth mentioning. Sorry for the repost.

Hogfather · Post by **Hogfather** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:22 pm

Hey no problem, these things happen:)

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 9:26 pm

Hogfather wrote:Hey no problem, these things happen:)

and they can be remedied!

Redskin in Canada · Post by **Redskin in Canada** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:16 pm

Hogfather wrote:Just for the record the Montreal Canadiens have 24 Stanley Cup Championships!

And they have had a GREAT record while NOT overpaying players! :shock:

In fact the oppsite is true, Canadian hockey teams in general are at a great disadvantage these days because mostif not all are SMALL market teams.

You can spend ANY amount of money but if you donot do it wisely, you will lose season after season. Does anybody remember the lesson taught by the L.A. Kings?

Do they exist anymore? :hmm:

Redskin in Canada · Post by **Redskin in Canada** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:17 pm

DEHog wrote:Am I the only one that is worried about DS with no spending limit??

NOPE!!!

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:08 pm

No salary cap would really hurt the NFL...

I hope maybe they reorganize the financial structure, but never give a huge benefit to the big market teams like that...

You know something? EA might have something to do with this...

Now that the NFLPA sold their exclusive rights to EA and Madden they probably have a little money and a little more power now...

I hope this all works out.

skinsRin · Post by **skinsRin** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:14 pm

We would become a dominate force without a salary cap, now that dosen't mean superbowls evey year but we would become a regular playoff team, yearly like the Yanks. And evey time you make the playoffs you have shot for the superbowl. It would sux for small market teams like the Cardinals, Saints but whatever, I'll take it.

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:26 pm

Without a cap I think salaries would then become guaranteed (like MLB) and we'd be exactly like the Yankees, old, overpaid, and with a very dim future (the Red Sox and Blue Jays have a lot of (young) talent and MUCH better farm systems than New York (who is practically barren), the Orioles have some guys who could make them into a contender (it's a longshot) and the Devil Rays FINALLY have some good management to go with their bevy of prospects.

The Yankees will be basement dwellers before too long, and will need a full rebuild to ever approach dynasty status again (like the late 80's early 90's where they were awful.)

I do NOT want Snyder losing his mind and spending on every free agent that catches his fancy. Even with a huge budget you need to be financially responsible... you need to still keep an eye out for potential talent that can play cheap (Ryan Clark, Chris Cool

ey etc.) and you need to build AROUND young players and not with veteran free agents.

I am highly in favor of some type of cap with maybe some tweaking, but getting rid of it? No thanks.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:38 pm

Some people here are determined to show how totally ignorant they are about this.

This situation will not be allowed to happen by either side in this dispute. This has been pointed out very well here by a number of THN people who are far more knowledgeable than I.

Also, Gibbs (not Snyder) is in charge here and I do not think that our organisation is going to behave in any way like some fans here are claiming. There are some here who just cannot open their mouths wide enough to insert both feet but they are trying. :roll:

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:44 pm

1.) Lots of people are SPECULATING that this won't be allowed to happen (and I hope they are right) but, stranger things have happened in sports. It's a distinct possibility.

2.) IF Joe Gibbs is in charge it's because Dan Snyder LETS him be. This is still Dan Snyder's team, he writes the checks that Joe Gibbs takes to the bank.

Yeah, Gibbs has president and GM like duties now, but Dan Snyder has the final say on anything the Redskins do, because as we have established, he is the one who PAYS THE PLAYERS AND COACHES.

3.) Your kind of attitude is usually reserved for Talking Smack SJ, maybe you should lighten up or start making your posts there for a while.

Brandon777 · Post by **Brandon777** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 1:01 am

I think the cap sucks. It's socialism. If Danny wants to have Shaun Alexander backing up Portis or a WR depth chart that consists of Steve Smith, Santana Moss, Reggie Wayne, Torry Holt, Randy Moss..... it's fine with me.

skinsRin · Post by **skinsRin** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 2:39 am

If there is no cap then just like mlb there will be revenue sharing and rich teams like the Skins will have to pay luxury taxes to small market teams, and thats fine by me. The top fortune 500 Co. don't have caps, they can hire any and as may top level executives thay want and pay whatever they want. It really should be the same in all business, and prosports are just bussiness also NFL, NBA, NHL etc... If you think about it. It is socialism.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 10:44 am

Skinsfan55 wrote: 1.) Lots of people are SPECULATING that this won't be allowed to happen .. but, ... It's a distinct possibility.

I totally disagree - I would be very surprised if the people involved on both sides of this issue do not get this sorted out. The ramifications are too important and all indications are that while it is not a given it is more likely to be be resolved than not.

2.) IF Joe Gibbs is in charge it's because Dan Snyder LETS him be.

Now you are showing everyone that you really do not understand what is going on.

and then this!

maybe you should lighten up or start making your posts (in TS) for a while.

My bad

I just had to do it. Some people just get me to do the wrong thing. I will abide by the rules (in future) but especially for those whose opinions I respect.
But, you know what? I was hoping that you knew who the post was directed at.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 11:14 am

I hope they get this situated. I love how Gibbs has brought some order and respect to this franchise. I love how he's placed coaching prowness over player ability, we had that backwards for too long.

I'd hate to see all of this torn down when he leaves. I dont want a superbowl trophy at the expense of the game I love. I hate baseball for the very reason we're running into. Baseball sucks because there is NO HOPE for a team like the Orioles. Sure if you're a yankees fan everything is great.

I'd rather have a team have to build itself up and have a chance every year and a league with parity than a BORE FEST LIKE MLB.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 11:34 am

I agree CLL! But from everything that I have read about this it seems that despite the posturing by the deep pocket teams (Redskins, Pukes, Patsies and Texans) the consensus is the owners and players are going to get this done because the overall majority of the owners (and the players' assoc.) really do not want to get to that stage. That scenario is not going to be allowed to happen.

By the way - where is the squawks owner? why is that stupid bunch not mentioned, when discussing successful franchises?

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 11:36 am

Would the disintegration of the salary cap be the strangest thing you've ever heard of?

In MLB a few years ago the league minimum salary was 300,000 and people thought it was astronomical!

It COULD happen, I hope it doesn't I like the cap.

But why would the players WANT to work it out? Sure, they play fewer games and have larger rosters than any other sport, but they work damn hard... they probably hate the cap...

gibbsfan · Post by **gibbsfan** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 12:05 pm

the redskins womn three superbowls without a salary cap and if and i say if the nfl withdrwals the cap then the skins won,t be limited like they are now.they can go after player like the good ole days but the nfl will have a cap i promise.it will be another potentail strike in the latest CBA to keep a cap in place.

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 12:10 pm

I would rather the Redskins win one Superbowl on a level playing field and the cap then I would have them win 3 buy vastly outspending other teams and turning the league into a farce.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:37 pm

Skinsfan55 wrote:I would rather the Redskins win one Superbowl on a level playing field and the cap then I would have them win 3 buy vastly outspending other teams and turning the league into a farce.

Exactly. The Lombardi trophy would lose value if all it took was deep pockets to get one.

I dont understand how any true fan of the sport wants the CAP to go away. You're basically saying that the Skins can't do it like NE, PITT, TAMPA AND DALLAS have so we'll just go the easy route. No thanks.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:56 pm

In a nutshell - everybody benefits from the current situation. Unfortunately the CBA expires soon and in reality a few owners are trying to protect their asses and make as much as they can while the poorer teams want to share all the revenues from all sources! The players on the other hand want a greater share of the revenues and want it to include certain revenues that those few owners now do not share with all the others.

There are a lot more players (past & present) that benefit from the CBA than would without it and the players association represents them all, not just the good ones. The owners are bright enough to know that they need to come to an agreement on their side too.

The NFL is a very big business with a huge amount of dollars (billions) that needs to be split up but these guys do not want to kill the goose that's been laying golden eggs for everybody.

hkHog · Post by **hkHog** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 10:28 pm

SkinsJock wrote:In a nutshell - everybody benefits from the current situation.

I don't know, the players don't do that well. Despite the fact that they benefit from the league being exciting due to the parity they don't get the guaranteed contracts or the same kind of money that MLB and NBA players get despite the fact that they have much shorter careers. And the salary cap certainly doesn't allow for arbitration so guys either have to cause a huge fuss and holdout or remain underpaid if they outperform their contracts.

I have two suggestions:

1. Figure out a way to guarantee contracts to some extent. Maybe you could make a rule that if players are cut then their signing bonuses accelerate like they do now BUT they are still guaranteed to be paid a percentage of the remaining SALARY that they are due even without it counting against a team's cap figure. This will keep all the current salary cap rules the same but it will offer the players some guarantees that their contracts really mean something.

2. Go to a soft cap like the NBA. How about you can go over the cap but if you do you must pay a LARGE amount of money to the other teams. For example, if the cap is $100 million and your cap figure is $105 million you must pay all the other owners for that $5 mil extra. Let's say you triple the difference. In this case, this extra $5 mil would cost Danny boy ANOTHER $15 million which would be split among the remaining owners, each getting another $500,000 each. This not only makes it VERY expensive for an owner to go over the cap, thus reducing the incentive to do so considerably even if you are a guy like Dan Snyder but it also would make the other owners happy (they get more money) and the players happy (they get more money) and it allows a guy like Snyder a little extra manueverability. To make the cap even "harder" you could increase the penalties. If you multiplied the difference by 6, going $5 mil over wouold cost you $30 mil and then all the other owners get $1 million each! At those sorts of levels even Dan Snyder would start to think twice about assembling a dream team because that is big bucks even to him.

GibbSkins11 · Post by **GibbSkins11** » Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:31 am

Their will be a salary cap , no way the NFL lets the players screw their league up. Also id rather the Redskins win with a salary cap ,and not Snyder and his 837 million dollar a year teams. ROTFALMAO

redskinz4ever · Post by **redskinz4ever** » Thu Feb 09, 2006 8:42 am

so would this mean a lockout if a deal doesn't get done soon ???

skinsRin · Post by **skinsRin** » Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:10 am

IMO, there will be a good chance of a lockout between contracts, the question is for how long before they will see eye to eye.