Inflation in Contract Money

[Smashin222]

I wanted to ask the folks who know a lot more about this than me.

To what extent is inflation playing a significant role in contract negotiations?

What i'm thinking is that obviously the salary cap is increasing, but also that now teams are required to spend 80%? 90%? of the salary cap, that means that the cost of players should start to steadily increase.

So while 8.8 might make Spencer one of the highest paid players, and 6 million a year might be a lot for scandrick, is there any evidence that other players of similar stature aren't going to fetch the same price in the future? Perhaps its that these guys are the first to benefit from an inflationary bump trend in salaries

I obviously know that inflation is a constant, I'm wondering if perhaps post-lockout costs are going to go up.

This would put in context signing Nicks to a "huge" deal ,Williams etc...
perhaps now is the time to strike

 

[Wood]

I think it goes hand and hand with what teams we are talking about. Teams who typically do not have playoff success usually over-pay on the "wrong players". So there will be other teams beside Dallas who make bad decisions and would Scandrick, Spears, Spencer same amount money. You just won't see the good teams doing it.

 

[cowboysooner]

Generally inflation is real in contracts, but because the cap was flat to down 2010 vs. 2009 there really should not be. The required spending that goes into effect in 2013 is only going to change the required payroll for the Bucs, Bengals and Chiefs who are very young teams. Those teams will naturally spend money in the future unless they don't sign their young players.

The required spending is denominated in different cost buckets than the cap dollars which only include salary, incentives and prorated bonus. The required spending includes healthcare costs, pension funding and other items in addition to salary and bonus. It is an apples and oranges comparison.