I doubt that it was the NFL's purpose to design a system in which a player can get paid over 50 times more than another on a team. At the very least, it contradicts the entire concept of a team sport.
I doubt that the NFL envisioned one player getting paid a fifth of a salary cap.
Perhaps it is true that they wanted a more fluid group of teams each year competing in the playoffs. They didn't want the same 5-6 teams every year in the conference championships, so they made it difficult for great teams to maintain that greatness. Successful teams couldn't keep all the players that made the team great. Teams are forced to constantly find replacements for about 20% to 25% of their teams each year. Rebuilding is something every team does every season to some degree.
As a result, consistency is a constant challenge. Successful teams are deliberately handicapped in a way that seems more severe than their position in the draft. That's because successful teams have players that believe they contributed to that success, rightfully so. However, the degree to which they contributed compared to salary demands is what drives them away from that team.
Should success be handicapped to this degree? Is parity the answer to a better NFL? There should be some effort to balance the talent pool in the NFL but I don't think it should deprive teams of the fruits of their labor. They should be able to hold on to their teams a little longer.
I am in favor of a softer salary cap in which teams can pay a penalty for going over the cap amount with the penalty being equally distributed among the remaining teams. I would say something to the effect that, for every million over the cap, they must pay an equal amount to be distributed among the other teams. This is somewhat similar to the NBA but without the severe penalties.
I also think there should be a stipulation where no player counts more than 10% of the current cap. This should distribute the salaries more evenly among the team, particularly, the starters. That QB didn't walk onto that field alone. There were over 50 others that made sure he had the opportunity to play at an elite level.
I also toyed with the idea that teams get a break when they resign their own players. I even thought about the salary cap only applying to players that didn't get drafted by that team. players can still look to other teams, but their original team will be in the position, overall, to offer better deals.
I also think that the drafting order should be based on a weighed lottery based on their final won/loss ranking. In other words, the worst team wouldn't automatically draft first, but they would have the highest probability of drafting first. I think this would eliminate any concept relating to "tanking" the season. This would also make the draft equally exciting to all fans.
Some of these ideas might be good, bad, awful or even "Please don't post any more!" That's fine....just remember the rules....you can imply it......just don't call me that outright.
