NFL fans don't cheer for business.

[superpunk]

Demarcus Ware... ridiculously overpaid... soon to be more ridiculously overpaid.

Pat McQuistan... ridiculously overpaid.

There is no insult in making them both equally ridiculously overpaid. In fact the fans would know that the only reason a player stays with a team is that he actually likes the guys he works with, and the city he lives in. That would be really good for the fans. That's what's really important in my mind, and all the players are millionaires twice over, every year.

Hey, and imagine this, a large bonus can be had for every player that makes the Pro-Bowl. That will continue to make players strive to be the best they can be. The system can still reward talent without destroying loyalty.

Joseph Stalin hated capitalism, too.

You should stab Ware in the ear with an icepick. It worked with Leon Trotsky.

 

[nathanlt]

Joseph Stalin hated capitalism, too.

You should stab Ware in the ear with an icepick. It worked with Leon Trotsky.

I don't hate capitalism. I am not a fan of communism, but giving 2 million + to each player is hardly oppression.

As for stabbing Ware with an icepick, stop trying to be inflammatory. I'm serious, loyalty needs to make a comeback. Maybe there's a better plan like signing career contracts based on a percentage of the salary cap. To me, the equal pay seems the best.

 

[superpunk]

I don't hate capitalism. I am not a fan of communism, but giving 2 million + to each player is hardly oppression.

As for stabbing Ware with an icepick, stop trying to be inflammatory. I'm serious, loyalty needs to make a comeback. Maybe there's a better plan like signing career contracts based on a percentage of the salary cap. To me, the equal pay seems the best.

equal pay actually encourages people to not attempt to excel. I'm not being inflammatory, just sarcastic.

career contracts make nice for fans, because they get to see a guy stay forever, but what happens when suddenly that player gets much better? doesn't he deserve the opportunity to be compensated accordingly?

the process by which free agency takes place is one of the things that has made American economics so successful. If you're better than someone else, you deserve to be compensated better than those other people, or at least get the chance. The size of the contracts is inconsequential - it's in line with the players' worth to the owners, just like every business in America. Just because they get money on a different scale than we do, doesn't make it wrong, or make them any more greedy than any of us are. Because at the end of the day, you have to do what's best for you and your family. They aren't any different.

 

[nathanlt]

equal pay actually encourages people to not attempt to excel. I'm not being inflammatory, just sarcastic.

career contracts make nice for fans, because they get to see a guy stay forever, but what happens when suddenly that player gets much better? doesn't he deserve the opportunity to be compensated accordingly?

the process by which free agency takes place is one of the things that has made American economics so successful. If you're better than someone else, you deserve to be compensated better than those other people, or at least get the chance. The size of the contracts is inconsequential - it's in line with the players' worth to the owners, just like every business in America. Just because they get money on a different scale than we do, doesn't make it wrong, or make them any more greedy than any of us are. Because at the end of the day, you have to do what's best for you and your family. They aren't any different.

The Pro-Bowl can still reward talent with large bonuses. That's good.

American economics can remain untouched, with this small group of NFL millionaires. At the end of the day, the NFL should be concerned with making the NFL product better as a team.

I appreciate your post.

 

[superpunk]

The Pro-Bowl can still reward talent with large bonuses. That's good.

American economics can remain untouched, with this small group of NFL millionaires. At the end of the day, the NFL should be concerned with making the NFL product better as a team.

I appreciate your post.

Granted, it probably wouldn't tear down American economics, but why should NFL players be denied the same right to fair wages that every other American has a right to? I don't understand that thinking.

 

[Doomsday101]

I'm not for 1 set salary for all players but I do not like FA. I liked the NFL better when there was no FA and teams were built for the long haul instead of constantly replacing x amount of players every single year. Funny thing is many of the teams who were bad under the old system are still bad teams under the new. I don’t see the Cards or the Lions doing anything with FA

 

[Hostile]

Demarcus Ware... ridiculously overpaid... soon to be more ridiculously overpaid.

Pat McQuistan... ridiculously overpaid.

There is no insult in making them both equally ridiculously overpaid. In fact the fans would know that the only reason a player stays with a team is that he actually likes the guys he works with, and the city he lives in. That would be really good for the fans. That's what's really important in my mind, and all the players are millionaires twice over, every year.

Hey, and imagine this, a large bonus can be had for every player that makes the Pro-Bowl. That will continue to make players strive to be the best they can be. The system can still reward talent without destroying loyalty.

It is a shame that you would seek to destroy the greatest game in the world. Clearly you have no grasp of strategies or competition and would rather live in a vanilla world where there is no flavor.

The others are right, enjoy Communism.

 

[TNCowboy]

Demarcus Ware... ridiculously overpaid... soon to be more ridiculously overpaid.

Pat McQuistan... ridiculously overpaid.

There is no insult in making them both equally ridiculously overpaid. In fact the fans would know that the only reason a player stays with a team is that he actually likes the guys he works with, and the city he lives in. That would be really good for the fans. That's what's really important in my mind, and all the players are millionaires twice over, every year.

Hey, and imagine this, a large bonus can be had for every player that makes the Pro-Bowl. That will continue to make players strive to be the best they can be. The system can still reward talent without destroying loyalty.

How are they overpaid? Demarcus Ware can play football at a level only a handful of people on the planet can duplicate. Therefore, he makes (or will make) a boatload of cash.

Why is he worth it? Because we're willing to pay the $ to see him play, the $ to buy his jersey, or to sit in front of the TV religiously when he's on. We're demanding football, and he provides it. Were we to lose interest, the revenue available to pay him would decrease, and eventually salaries would follow suit. Why you think that isn't the right system is beyond me.

 

[5Stars]

I'm sure nathanlt would like it if he were making, say, $25.00 per hour at his job and some Jr. College transfer got hired and started to make the same money right away without knowing anything about the job!

nathanlt would get mad and want to go get another job, but guess what? His other job would only pay him $25.00 per hour, nothing more.

nathanlt would now get mad, start slacking off on his job and then get fired (cut) because he did not perform. The company would start losing business (fans) because the product is not longer acceptable, the company would crumble because now the company does not have any motivated employees to do a better job because they are all getting paid the same, so why should they work harder?

No, the world does not work that way...you need to go back to school and learn the principles of Micro and Macro Economics as they are both needed to insure a stable business economy.

You go to school, get smart, work hard, produce and make a profit for your company, you get paid accordingly. If then another company recoginizes your talent and offers you more to transfer to them, you go there if you want...

I can understand some of what nathanlt wants, but, the world goes around and around and you can never get that last rotation of the earth back...that's just the way it is...

 

[nathanlt]

It is a shame that you would seek to destroy the greatest game in the world. Clearly you have no grasp of strategies or competition and would rather live in a vanilla world where there is no flavor.

The others are right, enjoy Communism.

Why does wanting player loyalty back in the NFL equal somehow equal "seeking to destroy the greatest game in the world"

Aren't you being a little bit dramatic with that comparison?

 

[nathanlt]

I'm sure nathanlt would like it if he were making, say, $25.00 per hour at his job and some Jr. College transfer got hired and started to make the same money right away without knowing anything about the job!

nathanlt would get mad and want to go get another job, but guess what? His other job would only pay him $25.00 per hour, nothing more.

nathanlt would now get mad, start slacking off on his job and then get fired (cut) because he did not perform. The company would start losing business (fans) because the product is not longer acceptable, the company would crumble because now the company does not have any motivated employees to do a better job because they are all getting paid the same, so why should they work harder?

No, the world does not work that way...you need to go back to school and learn the principles of Micro and Macro Economics as they are both needed to insure a stable business economy.

You go to school, get smart, work hard, produce and make a profit for your company, you get paid accordingly. If then another company recoginizes your talent and offers you more to transfer to them, you go there if you want...

I can understand some of what nathanlt wants, but, the world goes around and around and you can never get that last rotation of the earth back...that's just the way it is...

I understand the larger principles of micro and macroeconomics, supply and demand. What I'm saying is that the closed and exclusive system of NFL player salaries can and should be manipulated to increase player loyalty to their team. The game would be better for it.

The current momentum of rapidly increasing player swapouts every year will continue out of control until NFL team rosters change noticeably from week to week, even within the season. At that point, the players run through the turnstyle so fast, teams and players are practically faceless, and unidentifiable. The system as it is seems good, but is headed for the punishment that overexposure, fickleness, and impatience will bring. Defense will no longer win championships, stability will ultimately win them and will be a precious and scarce commodity.

 

[Hostile]

Why does wanting player loyalty back in the NFL equal somehow equal "seeking to destroy the greatest game in the world"

Aren't you being a little bit dramatic with that comparison?

No, I'm not. I detest the ideas you have put forth. There's no chance of any of them happening. It's the greatest game in the world. It has flaws, but your ideas will not fix those flaws. They would take away too much from the game. If you're that unhappy with the game take up online poker.

 

[peplaw06]

I understand the larger principles of micro and macroeconomics, supply and demand. What I'm saying is that the closed and exclusive system of NFL player salaries can and should be manipulated to increase player loyalty to their team. The game would be better for it.

The current momentum of rapidly increasing player swapouts every year will continue out of control until NFL team rosters change noticeably from week to week, even within the season. At that point, the players run through the turnstyle so fast, teams and players are practically faceless, and unidentifiable. The system as it is seems good, but is headed for the punishment that overexposure, fickleness, and impatience will bring. Defense will no longer win championships, stability will ultimately win them and will be a precious and scarce commodity.

Sorry, but controlling how much money an employee can and can't make based on "equality" is not a way to build employee loyalty.

I understand you are trying to make the game "better" by giving fans consistency in who to root for, but you're going about it the wrong way.

Do you really think if DeMarcus Ware is making the same amount as, to continue the comparison, Pat McQuistan, that he's not going to see it as a slap in the face? Ware is risking his health and well-being 60 plays a game, while McQ rarely sees the field. Then if you say, we'll scale it for starters and backups... well do the starters from the best team in the league deserve to be paid the same amount as starters from the worst? Does Peyton Manning = Aaron Brooks? Just like theogt said... "slippery slope to serfdom"

If you're stuck on this player loyalty thing, you have to look at other suggestions in this thread... i.e. giving cap relief to teams to resign home-gorwn players. THAT could be done. Not your "equality for all," because we all know things are never equal.

 

[StanleySpadowski]

The basic premise that the NFL suffers massive roster turnover is a bogus argument to begin with. Compared to the other major sports, football rosters are actually the most stable.

If the season started today, Dallas would have two players on the roster who were on other team's rosters last season in Davis and Johnson and only Davis was a true free agent that nathanlt's so vehemently against.

Dallas has lost two backups in A. Johnson and Coleman.

Oh the humanity, how can a team hope to succeed with such a violent 4% roster turnover.

 

[nathanlt]

Sorry, but controlling how much money an employee can and can't make based on "equality" is not a way to build employee loyalty.

I understand you are trying to make the game "better" by giving fans consistency in who to root for, but you're going about it the wrong way.

Do you really think if DeMarcus Ware is making the same amount as, to continue the comparison, Pat McQuistan, that he's not going to see it as a slap in the face? Ware is risking his health and well-being 60 plays a game, while McQ rarely sees the field. Then if you say, we'll scale it for starters and backups... well do the starters from the best team in the league deserve to be paid the same amount as starters from the worst? Does Peyton Manning = Aaron Brooks? Just like theogt said... "slippery slope to serfdom"

If you're stuck on this player loyalty thing, you have to look at other suggestions in this thread... i.e. giving cap relief to teams to resign home-gorwn players. THAT could be done. Not your "equality for all," because we all know things are never equal.

My plan doesn't have to be "the plan", but doing something for player loyalty is all I want, whatever works. If it were homegrown players only, then the Jags and Dolphins and Cowboys and Texans would always be in the playoffs. Florida has the best athletes in my opinion, followed closely by Texas. I wouldn't mind it though.

Equality isn't the only solution, I just want the financial incentive to change teams to be done away with. The money and greed part of the game built into the system is hurting it. It does nothing for the game, and more often than not, stifles player development because they're switching from system to system, not becoming great at playing in one system. Players can still switch teams, because they like the system, the team, or the city itself. Fans would be thrilled to have players come to their team because of personal preference.

There could be two standard salaries, a backup salary and a starter salary, but with multiple formations on offense, there would be ambiguity as to who is a starter and who is not. They could have 22 starter salaries, and the rest backup salaries, something could be figured out.

To sum up, I don't care how it's done, but loyalty needs to be encouraged in the system itself.

 

[nathanlt]

The basic premise that the NFL suffers massive roster turnover is a bogus argument to begin with. Compared to the other major sports, football rosters are actually the most stable.

If the season started today, Dallas would have two players on the roster who were on other team's rosters last season in Davis and Johnson and only Davis was a true free agent that nathanlt's so vehemently against.

Dallas has lost two backups in A. Johnson and Coleman.

Oh the humanity, how can a team hope to succeed with such a violent 4% roster turnover.

Yeah, why don't you look at the swapout from 2000 to 2005, over 95%. And this offseason isn't over by any means, so stay tuned.

 

[StanleySpadowski]

Yeah, why don't you look at the swapout from 2000 to 2005, over 95%. And this offseason isn't over by any means, so stay tuned.

So you're advocating that a team with crappy players like the 2000 Cowboys keep all those crappy players instead of improving personnel???? Just so you can know their names????

 

[nathanlt]

So you're advocating that a team with crappy players like the 2000 Cowboys keep all those crappy players instead of improving personnel???? Just so you can know their names????

Even though the roster was not good, 95% turnover is excessive. Some players have developed into good players. Losing players because they don't play well is fine, but losing good players because you have to make a salary cap is not right.

 

[StanleySpadowski]

Even though the roster was not good, 95% turnover is excessive. Some players have developed into good players. Losing players because they don't play well is fine, but losing good players because you have to make a salary cap is not right.

What good player did Dallas lose because of the cap in that timeframe?

 

[nathanlt]

What good player did Dallas lose because of the cap in that timeframe?

Emmitt Smith, Larry Allen, Dexter Coakley, Ebenezer Ekuban, Michael Myers,
Joey Galloway, Rocket Ismail, Tim Seder, Peppi Zellner, La Roi Glover.

And the reason Dallas got to the point that they needed to jettison so many bad players is that free agency had robbed them of the best roster of Pro-Bowlers ever assembled.

Don't get me wrong, I like many of the replacements over that team, and they are light years ahead in terms of talent, but the cap forced a lot of budget decisions that drove those risky talent selections, like Wiley, the DE we got. The system brought our team to that point, and that was not fun at all. Don't stand with a free agency system that penalizes developing talent into a great roster, by pushing away players that have developed into starters.

It's a bad system.