CFZ NFL Salary Cap Solution

[TwoDeep3]

Perhaps the NBA has a legitimate solution to the salary cap era of the NFL.

As it stands there is a soft cap for the NBA. Teams can pay up to that cap without any financial penalty.

There is what is called the Larry Byrd rule, which allows a team to pay a player who is currently on the team a salary which pushes the franchise over the cap.

Finally there is a two tiered system wherein the team over the cap may continue to pay higher salaries, and the two tiers are essentially two distinct penalties factored in a dollar amount. The first is 1.50 and the second is 4.75 above the cap at a per dollar cost. The money gleaned from these penalties is distributed to the other owners and players who stay under the cap.

The NBA salary cap, as of last year was 123.665 million.

If I understand this it works this way.

Let's say the cap with the NFL is 190 million. Teams can safely stay under that dollar amount.

The Byrd rule, which surely would be called something else - I prefer The Goodell Is An Egg Sucking Dog Rule - would allow teams to pay up to 224.8 million, which allows them to pay a QB without penalty.

Finally, teams can exceed the 224.8 million at a penalty price.

Let's say Team A has exceeded the soft cap of 190 million, then added another 34.8 million to retain their QB. This puts them at the 224.8 million threshold. They have heavily played the free agent market and spent an extra amount which surpasses that amount and is paying 250 million in salary.

The extra 25.2 million would be taxed at 1.75 dollars to the tune of another 44.1 million dollars. This would mean the salary of this team would be 190 million soft cap, plus 34.8 million Goodell Wears Lacy Panties cap, plus 25.2 exceeding the second level of the cap, plus an additional 44.1 million.

This money would be distributed to teams in softer markets who cannot afford to exceed the cap.

190 million soft cap
34.8 million Goodell is a mouth breather cap
25.2 million over spent above secondary cap
44.1 million penalty tax distributed among players and owners
Equals 294.1 million for one year

Now I do not pretend to be a capologist, but the price of QB's is headed to a point where teams will invest so much in one position - with the fallacy that the QB is the only reason a team wins....think not, read the posts here to validate that frame of mind - and then you will see the have's and have not's in the league where a guy is playing for peanuts so the team can pay one player 65 million a year.

The upheaval this creates reminds me of the Great Depression - no I did not live through that time - that there will be a crash and the league will turn into something unrecognizable as the have not's strike every year, and this turns in to the league surfing the crap tide.

I believe I can point to one owner who looks remarkably like Skeletor that would pay whatever it cost to win a Super Bowl to show the entire football world he is a football guy.

I understand there are some swank pawn shops that give pay day loans on yachts.

Thoughts?

 

[john van brocklin]

Perhaps the NBA has a legitimate solution to the salary cap era of the NFL.

As it stands there is a soft cap for the NBA. Teams can pay up to that cap without any financial penalty.

There is what is called the Larry Byrd rule, which allows a team to pay a player who is currently on the team a salary which pushes the franchise over the cap.

Finally there is a two tiered system wherein the team over the cap may continue to pay higher salaries, and the two tiers are essentially two distinct penalties factored in a dollar amount. The first is 1.50 and the second is 4.75 above the cap at a per dollar cost. The money gleaned from these penalties is distributed to the other owners and players who stay under the cap.

The NBA salary cap, as of last year was 123.665 million.

If I understand this it works this way.

Let's say the cap with the NFL is 190 million. Teams can safely stay under that dollar amount.

The Byrd rule, which surely would be called something else - I prefer The Goodell Is An Egg Sucking Dog Rule - would allow teams to pay up to 224.8 million, which allows them to pay a QB without penalty.

Finally, teams can exceed the 224.8 million at a penalty price.

Let's say Team A has exceeded the soft cap of 190 million, then added another 34.8 million to retain their QB. This puts them at the 224.8 million threshold. They have heavily played the free agent market and spent an extra amount which surpasses that amount and is paying 250 million in salary.

The extra 25.2 million would be taxed at 1.75 dollars to the tune of another 44.1 million dollars. This would mean the salary of this team would be 190 million soft cap, plus 34.8 million Goodell Wears Lacy Panties cap, plus 25.2 exceeding the second level of the cap, plus an additional 44.1 million.

This money would be distributed to teams in softer markets who cannot afford to exceed the cap.

190 million soft cap
34.8 million Goodell is a mouth breather cap
25.2 million over spent above secondary cap
44.1 million penalty tax distributed among players and owners
Equals 294.1 million for one year

Now I do not pretend to be a capologist, but the price of QB's is headed to a point where teams will invest so much in one position - with the fallacy that the QB is the only reason a team wins....think not, read the posts here to validate that frame of mind - and then you will see the have's and have not's in the league where a guy is playing for peanuts so the team can pay one player 65 million a year.

The upheaval this creates reminds me of the Great Depression - no I did not live through that time - that there will be a crash and the league will turn into something unrecognizable as the have not's strike every year, and this turns in to the league surfing the crap tide.

I believe I can point to one owner who looks remarkably like Skeletor that would pay whatever it cost to win a Super Bowl to show the entire football world he is a football guy.

I understand there are some swank pawn shops that give pay day loans on yachts.

Thoughts?

You don't like Goodell, I take it?

 

[speedkilz88]

The nfl owner's want a hard cap. If the nba could talk the nbapa to go to a hardcap they would but that isn't happening either.

The nfl would actually have even a harder cap if it wasn't for Tagliabue giving into his buddies with the 49ers allowing them to spread out bonuses into future years of the cap.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

They put revenue sharing in the last CBA. I like the idea because it helps teams keep their roster together and would definitely give us a huge competitive advantage.

 

[Jipper]

I gave you a like 1 for trying to use creativity to solve the issue and 2 for your funnies making fun of Goodell

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Does the NFL think it’s has a cap issue.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

Perhaps the NBA has a legitimate solution to the salary cap era of the NFL.

As it stands there is a soft cap for the NBA. Teams can pay up to that cap without any financial penalty.

There is what is called the Larry Byrd rule, which allows a team to pay a player who is currently on the team a salary which pushes the franchise over the cap.

Finally there is a two tiered system wherein the team over the cap may continue to pay higher salaries, and the two tiers are essentially two distinct penalties factored in a dollar amount. The first is 1.50 and the second is 4.75 above the cap at a per dollar cost. The money gleaned from these penalties is distributed to the other owners and players who stay under the cap.

The NBA salary cap, as of last year was 123.665 million.

If I understand this it works this way.

Let's say the cap with the NFL is 190 million. Teams can safely stay under that dollar amount.

The Byrd rule, which surely would be called something else - I prefer The Goodell Is An Egg Sucking Dog Rule - would allow teams to pay up to 224.8 million, which allows them to pay a QB without penalty.

Finally, teams can exceed the 224.8 million at a penalty price.

Let's say Team A has exceeded the soft cap of 190 million, then added another 34.8 million to retain their QB. This puts them at the 224.8 million threshold. They have heavily played the free agent market and spent an extra amount which surpasses that amount and is paying 250 million in salary.

The extra 25.2 million would be taxed at 1.75 dollars to the tune of another 44.1 million dollars. This would mean the salary of this team would be 190 million soft cap, plus 34.8 million Goodell Wears Lacy Panties cap, plus 25.2 exceeding the second level of the cap, plus an additional 44.1 million.

This money would be distributed to teams in softer markets who cannot afford to exceed the cap.

190 million soft cap
34.8 million Goodell is a mouth breather cap
25.2 million over spent above secondary cap
44.1 million penalty tax distributed among players and owners
Equals 294.1 million for one year

Now I do not pretend to be a capologist, but the price of QB's is headed to a point where teams will invest so much in one position - with the fallacy that the QB is the only reason a team wins....think not, read the posts here to validate that frame of mind - and then you will see the have's and have not's in the league where a guy is playing for peanuts so the team can pay one player 65 million a year.

The upheaval this creates reminds me of the Great Depression - no I did not live through that time - that there will be a crash and the league will turn into something unrecognizable as the have not's strike every year, and this turns in to the league surfing the crap tide.

I believe I can point to one owner who looks remarkably like Skeletor that would pay whatever it cost to win a Super Bowl to show the entire football world he is a football guy.

I understand there are some swank pawn shops that give pay day loans on yachts.

Thoughts?

I like it. I'd also add one rule that the MLS has called the "Home Grown talent" rule. This allows an MLS team to essentially declare I think it's one or two players that were developed as that, and the team is free to keep that player as long as they want. I'd essentially make it where a team can choose one player that was drafted from each draft pick, as their contract is about to expire, that they can declare a home grown talent, and can extend to whatever contract they want without salary cap penalty. Essentially, the starting QB and one player each draft regardless of draft pick, would be salary cap free.

 

[TwoDeep3]

You don't like Goodell, I take it?

He's my brother-in-law. I got him his job. He's never said thanks.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Does the NFL think it’s has a cap issue.

Probably not. But so much is discussed here that the idea came to me when i read the thread about Parson's getting 30 million.

A pipe dream, maybe. Most likely.

But QB's will end up ruining franchise after franchise.

Just an idea for discussion while we wait out the next draft.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

I like it. I'd also add one rule that the MLS has called the "Home Grown talent" rule. This allows an MLS team to essentially declare I think it's one or two players that were developed as that, and the team is free to keep that player as long as they want. I'd essentially make it where a team can choose one player that was drafted from each draft pick, as their contract is about to expire, that they can declare a home grown talent, and can extend to whatever contract they want without salary cap penalty. Essentially, the starting QB and one player each draft regardless of draft pick, would be salary cap free.

To expound on this, let's say we are about to try to extend Micah Parsons. We can declare him a homegrown talent, and then we are free to sign him for no hit to the cap. However, he'd be the only player from the 2021 draft that we can sign in that way. Everyone else from that draft for us would count. We wouldn't be able to use that designation until a player from our 2022 draft class is about to expire.

 

[Reality]

The problem is that the NBA is very different from the NFL.

A lot less people go to see their games, and more importantly, they play a LOT more games so the smaller market teams who phone it in every year are barely a blip.

Beyond that, the NBA regular season is a joke, as players sit for "rest", teams/players milk injuries and teams protect players even more closer to the playoffs so they are at the best when the seaon really matters.

If the NFL lets teams exceed the cap for a "tax" it would more likely end up like MLB where the same teams are in the playoffs most seasons with maybe one or two "surprises".

I am all for coming up with a better system, but I don't think letting rich teams have an advantage so the smaller market team owners can benefit from their cheapness is the answer.

 

[Bobhaze]

Perhaps the NBA has a legitimate solution to the salary cap era of the NFL.

As it stands there is a soft cap for the NBA. Teams can pay up to that cap without any financial penalty.

There is what is called the Larry Byrd rule, which allows a team to pay a player who is currently on the team a salary which pushes the franchise over the cap.

Finally there is a two tiered system wherein the team over the cap may continue to pay higher salaries, and the two tiers are essentially two distinct penalties factored in a dollar amount. The first is 1.50 and the second is 4.75 above the cap at a per dollar cost. The money gleaned from these penalties is distributed to the other owners and players who stay under the cap.

The NBA salary cap, as of last year was 123.665 million.

If I understand this it works this way.

Let's say the cap with the NFL is 190 million. Teams can safely stay under that dollar amount.

The Byrd rule, which surely would be called something else - I prefer The Goodell Is An Egg Sucking Dog Rule - would allow teams to pay up to 224.8 million, which allows them to pay a QB without penalty.

Finally, teams can exceed the 224.8 million at a penalty price.

Let's say Team A has exceeded the soft cap of 190 million, then added another 34.8 million to retain their QB. This puts them at the 224.8 million threshold. They have heavily played the free agent market and spent an extra amount which surpasses that amount and is paying 250 million in salary.

The extra 25.2 million would be taxed at 1.75 dollars to the tune of another 44.1 million dollars. This would mean the salary of this team would be 190 million soft cap, plus 34.8 million Goodell Wears Lacy Panties cap, plus 25.2 exceeding the second level of the cap, plus an additional 44.1 million.

This money would be distributed to teams in softer markets who cannot afford to exceed the cap.

190 million soft cap
34.8 million Goodell is a mouth breather cap
25.2 million over spent above secondary cap
44.1 million penalty tax distributed among players and owners
Equals 294.1 million for one year

Now I do not pretend to be a capologist, but the price of QB's is headed to a point where teams will invest so much in one position - with the fallacy that the QB is the only reason a team wins....think not, read the posts here to validate that frame of mind - and then you will see the have's and have not's in the league where a guy is playing for peanuts so the team can pay one player 65 million a year.

The upheaval this creates reminds me of the Great Depression - no I did not live through that time - that there will be a crash and the league will turn into something unrecognizable as the have not's strike every year, and this turns in to the league surfing the crap tide.

I believe I can point to one owner who looks remarkably like Skeletor that would pay whatever it cost to win a Super Bowl to show the entire football world he is a football guy.

I understand there are some swank pawn shops that give pay day loans on yachts.

Thoughts?

First of all, great post TD.

I have believed for years that the NBA has a much better cap system in place. The “softer” cap is better for the game, the fans, and the flexibility that comes with it. The NFL could adopt a soft cap that doesn’t have to be exactly like the NBA, but still containing some flexibility.

The “Bird rule” allows NBA teams to keep their star players longer at market price without destroying their cap space. That’s why it’s better for the game and the fans. If you draft and develop a star player, it benefits everyone that the home team keeps that player if both the player and the team can negotiate a deal. It’s a win-win. And NBA owners aren’t exactly losing money.

Unfortunately, there’s only ONE reason the NFL chooses to keep a hard cap: Greed. It benefits the owners to the max to have a hard cap. The soft cap would still allow owners to make huge profits…just not quite as much. Turns out greed is a very bad thing- in sports and everything else.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

First of all, great post TD.

I have believed for years that the NBA has a much better cap system in place. The “softer” cap is better for the game, the fans, and the flexibility that comes with it. The NFL could adopt a soft cap that doesn’t have to be exactly like the NBA, but still containing some flexibility.

The “Bird rule” allows NBA teams to keep their star players longer at market price without destroying their cap space. That’s why it’s better for the game and the fans. If you draft and develop a star player, it benefits everyone that the home team keeps that player if both the player and the team can negotiate a deal. It’s a win-win. And NBA owners aren’t exactly losing money.

Unfortunately, there’s only ONE reason the NFL chooses to keep a hard cap: Greed. It benefits the owners to the max to have a hard cap. The soft cap would still allow owners to make huge profits…just not quite as much. Turns out greed is a very bad thing- in sports and everything else.

And yet fans get upset when a player would like to be paid for his services.

 

[Jake]

Perhaps the NBA has a legitimate solution to the salary cap era of the NFL.

As it stands there is a soft cap for the NBA. Teams can pay up to that cap without any financial penalty.

There is what is called the Larry Byrd rule, which allows a team to pay a player who is currently on the team a salary which pushes the franchise over the cap.

Finally there is a two tiered system wherein the team over the cap may continue to pay higher salaries, and the two tiers are essentially two distinct penalties factored in a dollar amount. The first is 1.50 and the second is 4.75 above the cap at a per dollar cost. The money gleaned from these penalties is distributed to the other owners and players who stay under the cap.

The NBA salary cap, as of last year was 123.665 million.

If I understand this it works this way.

Let's say the cap with the NFL is 190 million. Teams can safely stay under that dollar amount.

The Byrd rule, which surely would be called something else - I prefer The Goodell Is An Egg Sucking Dog Rule - would allow teams to pay up to 224.8 million, which allows them to pay a QB without penalty.

Finally, teams can exceed the 224.8 million at a penalty price.

Let's say Team A has exceeded the soft cap of 190 million, then added another 34.8 million to retain their QB. This puts them at the 224.8 million threshold. They have heavily played the free agent market and spent an extra amount which surpasses that amount and is paying 250 million in salary.

The extra 25.2 million would be taxed at 1.75 dollars to the tune of another 44.1 million dollars. This would mean the salary of this team would be 190 million soft cap, plus 34.8 million Goodell Wears Lacy Panties cap, plus 25.2 exceeding the second level of the cap, plus an additional 44.1 million.

This money would be distributed to teams in softer markets who cannot afford to exceed the cap.

190 million soft cap
34.8 million Goodell is a mouth breather cap
25.2 million over spent above secondary cap
44.1 million penalty tax distributed among players and owners
Equals 294.1 million for one year

Now I do not pretend to be a capologist, but the price of QB's is headed to a point where teams will invest so much in one position - with the fallacy that the QB is the only reason a team wins....think not, read the posts here to validate that frame of mind - and then you will see the have's and have not's in the league where a guy is playing for peanuts so the team can pay one player 65 million a year.

The upheaval this creates reminds me of the Great Depression - no I did not live through that time - that there will be a crash and the league will turn into something unrecognizable as the have not's strike every year, and this turns in to the league surfing the crap tide.

I believe I can point to one owner who looks remarkably like Skeletor that would pay whatever it cost to win a Super Bowl to show the entire football world he is a football guy.

I understand there are some swank pawn shops that give pay day loans on yachts.

Thoughts?

Agree, and have advocated for this in the past but not in so much detail. Good post.

If you draft a QB, and want to retain him, such an exception like the Bird rule would be a good thing. There is a potential downside - teams choosing to pay QBs who may not really be worth it - but we've been seeing that, anyway.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

Agree, and have advocated for this in the past but not in so much detail. Good post.

If you draft a QB, and want to retain him, such an exception like the Bird rule would be a good thing. There is a potential downside - teams choosing to pay QBs who may not really be worth it - but we've been seeing that, anyway.

Yes, but that rule would also likely make it easier to trade said QB if needed. So, there's that too.

 

[Bobhaze]

And yet fans get upset when a player would like to be paid for his services.

It always amazes me when fans get mad at the players over money. The players have an incredibly short amount of time to make the most money most of them will ever earn. And they are risking their physical future health to do it.

Owners have zero risk. Look at Danny Snyder. Horrible, bumbling owner who turned his $800 million dollar investment into $6.5 billion. That’s a 700% profit for being a complete loser. He couldn’t have done that well anywhere else with his money. Owners are zero risk, huge profits over a lifetime- even generations. Players are high physical risk, some profit but in a short window of maybe 10 years if they’re lucky.

 

[TequilaCowboy]

Perhaps the NBA has a legitimate solution to the salary cap era of the NFL.

As it stands there is a soft cap for the NBA. Teams can pay up to that cap without any financial penalty.

There is what is called the Larry Byrd rule, which allows a team to pay a player who is currently on the team a salary which pushes the franchise over the cap.

Finally there is a two tiered system wherein the team over the cap may continue to pay higher salaries, and the two tiers are essentially two distinct penalties factored in a dollar amount. The first is 1.50 and the second is 4.75 above the cap at a per dollar cost. The money gleaned from these penalties is distributed to the other owners and players who stay under the cap.

The NBA salary cap, as of last year was 123.665 million.

If I understand this it works this way.

Let's say the cap with the NFL is 190 million. Teams can safely stay under that dollar amount.

The Byrd rule, which surely would be called something else - I prefer The Goodell Is An Egg Sucking Dog Rule - would allow teams to pay up to 224.8 million, which allows them to pay a QB without penalty.

Finally, teams can exceed the 224.8 million at a penalty price.

Let's say Team A has exceeded the soft cap of 190 million, then added another 34.8 million to retain their QB. This puts them at the 224.8 million threshold. They have heavily played the free agent market and spent an extra amount which surpasses that amount and is paying 250 million in salary.

The extra 25.2 million would be taxed at 1.75 dollars to the tune of another 44.1 million dollars. This would mean the salary of this team would be 190 million soft cap, plus 34.8 million Goodell Wears Lacy Panties cap, plus 25.2 exceeding the second level of the cap, plus an additional 44.1 million.

This money would be distributed to teams in softer markets who cannot afford to exceed the cap.

190 million soft cap
34.8 million Goodell is a mouth breather cap
25.2 million over spent above secondary cap
44.1 million penalty tax distributed among players and owners
Equals 294.1 million for one year

Now I do not pretend to be a capologist, but the price of QB's is headed to a point where teams will invest so much in one position - with the fallacy that the QB is the only reason a team wins....think not, read the posts here to validate that frame of mind - and then you will see the have's and have not's in the league where a guy is playing for peanuts so the team can pay one player 65 million a year.

The upheaval this creates reminds me of the Great Depression - no I did not live through that time - that there will be a crash and the league will turn into something unrecognizable as the have not's strike every year, and this turns in to the league surfing the crap tide.

I believe I can point to one owner who looks remarkably like Skeletor that would pay whatever it cost to win a Super Bowl to show the entire football world he is a football guy.

I understand there are some swank pawn shops that give pay day loans on yachts.

Thoughts?

Not new to me...as a matter of fact, i have written here before numerous times that there should be one player on each team that can be exempt from the team salary cap.. much like they could do here and using a QB for example because those are the salaries that handcuffs teams. So same concept. For a team still with a QB under a rookie contract...it could be used on a Micah Parson type player. This should be done asap.

 

[Reality]

It always amazes me when fans get mad at the players over money. The players have an incredibly short amount of time to make the most money most of them will ever earn. And they are risking their physical future health to do it.

Owners have zero risk. Look at Danny Snyder. Horrible, bumbling owner who turned his $800 million dollar investment into $6.5 billion. That’s a 700% profit for being a complete loser. He couldn’t have done that well anywhere else with his money. Owners are zero risk, huge profits over a lifetime- even generations. Players are high physical risk, some profit but in a short window of maybe 10 years if they’re lucky.

I think most fans who get upset about the money players make are associating it with the player getting validated as worth more than the fans think.

That combined with a player getting paid that the fans want the team to release just further annoys them.

I do not blame players for trying to capitalize on their skills and performance, but I do not like it when players demand new contracts with 2+ season remaining on their existing contract after they got all of their signing bonus money upfront.

The last year of a contract is another story though because I think it's fair for a player to ask for a commitment from their existing team before risking their career with a one-off season, especially since in many cases the team benefitted from the extra year of the contract with the salary cap by spreading out the signing bonus and guaranteed money.

I am not a fan of the franchise tag though. If a team has not secured a new contract with a player by the end of their contract, rookie contract or not, I believe the player should have the right to test the free agent market.

 

[TwoDeep3]

The problem is that the NBA is very different from the NFL.

A lot less people go to see their games, and more importantly, they play a LOT more games so the smaller market teams who phone it in every year are barely a blip.

Beyond that, the NBA regular season is a joke, as players sit for "rest", teams/players milk injuries and teams protect players even more closer to the playoffs so they are at the best when the seaon really matters.

If the NFL lets teams exceed the cap for a "tax" it would more likely end up like MLB where the same teams are in the playoffs most seasons with maybe one or two "surprises".

I am all for coming up with a better system, but I don't think letting rich teams have an advantage so the smaller market team owners can benefit from their cheapness is the answer.

Don't look now, but the same teams are in the play-offs as is. Transferring tax money to smaller franchises could level that playing field of the got's and the don't got's.
It's flawed, but it's April.

 

[Reality]

Don't look now, but the same teams are in the play-offs as is. Transferring tax money to smaller franchises could level that playing field of the got's and the don't got's.
It's flawed, but it's April.

I don't think you realize how many small market team owners are more than happy to go cheap (it's easy to do and stay within the cap minimum rules) by keeping a fan favorite or two and then collecting their free money from other teams for being cheap.

Now, as more small market teams are sold to richer owners, corporations and investment groups, that will probably change.

As it is right now, the worst thing you can do is finish around .500.

It incentivizes teams who have good coaches, a better-than-average quarterback and a solid offense and defense to go all in while it pushes teams without good coaches or without a good quarterback or that have poor offenses or defenses to just release or trade their best players away, especially if they were free agent signings.

What I would like is a system that would entice teams to compete more with each other and not just limit that to the teams with the deep pockets who are also willing to spend their money.