PoetTree
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 484
- Reaction score
- 438
---
So, do you think this will usher in a return of the "quality" football from yesteryear? -- which you yourself have noticed is not quite what it once was. And do you imagine... perhaps.... by chance..... that this might be the secret reason for it?
It has made the airwaves a lot lately; prognosticators pointing out the declined level of play in the league. Here, why don't we ask Chris Mortensen:
ME: "Hey, Chris. What do you think about the effects of returning to an un-salary-capped league? And why would the players union be willing to do so? I mean, yeah, some players will make A LOT of money. But gone will be the protection for the proverbial 'little guy'. Without a CBA, there will be no minimum salaries, either. Whereas, currently, vested veterans (7 years in the league) are guaranteed a minimum salary of seven-hundred-and-something-dollars, without a CBA, there's no guarantee for anyone. Why would the players dig on that, as well as having to wait 6 years for free-agency--rather than only 4? I mean, what gives?"
CHRIS MORTENSEN (his actual answer): Good question..don't know if I have all the answers. But the players will only have a tighter money market this year...after this year, there will be plenty of money. Sure, big stars may get more but there will be plenty to go around...and no salary cap can work for the players. There will be another CBA at some point and that will address benefits...in the uncapped year '07 under this current agreement, owners do not make their annual contribution to most of the benefit funds but the following years will certainly be negotiated with those things in tact. Could there be a strike/lockout in '08? Sure but a deal will get done at some point. Owners will lose the safety net of cost controls but good management, scouting, coaching will still rule in this league - perhaps more than ever. That may not be a bad thing. It's not a very good league right now in terms of quality of game and the current system is a contributor to that demise.
CHRIS MORTENSEN (continued): The league is a bad league right now. The quality of play is marginal at best. Too many rookies and young players are forced onto the field too early. The pereception of parity - that a team can turn it around in one year - creates an owner and public unrest when things don't go right. That triggers too many firings, too many changes, and that affects the game. It's one reason why quarterbacks struggle in this league, too. Deep subject.
So, if everyone else is noticing what I am... declined level of play, boring games, disappointing Superbowls, sloppy performances, less of the spectacular... then do you think that the "decision" to not agree on a new CBA at this point could have possibly been: ON PURPOSE?!
I mean, think about it. If we know one thing, it's that the NFL is committed to producing a quality product. More than in any other sport, in my opinion, this league takes great, great care in its presentation and "image". And so, I'm sure that if we on an internet message board are privy to the conversation and experience of poor play (which nobody likes to watch), the owners & league officials are as well.
So, given that not having a salary-cap is bound to lead us back to an NFL landscape that more resembles the "quality" of yesteryear, who here can fathom that this was all done on purpose? I mean, the supposed quibble is over 3.8 percentage points? This is why everyone is just up & walking away from the table??
I... don't think so.
But hey, maybe that's just me...
Peace and Love
- PoetTree -
So, do you think this will usher in a return of the "quality" football from yesteryear? -- which you yourself have noticed is not quite what it once was. And do you imagine... perhaps.... by chance..... that this might be the secret reason for it?
It has made the airwaves a lot lately; prognosticators pointing out the declined level of play in the league. Here, why don't we ask Chris Mortensen:
ME: "Hey, Chris. What do you think about the effects of returning to an un-salary-capped league? And why would the players union be willing to do so? I mean, yeah, some players will make A LOT of money. But gone will be the protection for the proverbial 'little guy'. Without a CBA, there will be no minimum salaries, either. Whereas, currently, vested veterans (7 years in the league) are guaranteed a minimum salary of seven-hundred-and-something-dollars, without a CBA, there's no guarantee for anyone. Why would the players dig on that, as well as having to wait 6 years for free-agency--rather than only 4? I mean, what gives?"
CHRIS MORTENSEN (his actual answer): Good question..don't know if I have all the answers. But the players will only have a tighter money market this year...after this year, there will be plenty of money. Sure, big stars may get more but there will be plenty to go around...and no salary cap can work for the players. There will be another CBA at some point and that will address benefits...in the uncapped year '07 under this current agreement, owners do not make their annual contribution to most of the benefit funds but the following years will certainly be negotiated with those things in tact. Could there be a strike/lockout in '08? Sure but a deal will get done at some point. Owners will lose the safety net of cost controls but good management, scouting, coaching will still rule in this league - perhaps more than ever. That may not be a bad thing. It's not a very good league right now in terms of quality of game and the current system is a contributor to that demise.
CHRIS MORTENSEN (continued): The league is a bad league right now. The quality of play is marginal at best. Too many rookies and young players are forced onto the field too early. The pereception of parity - that a team can turn it around in one year - creates an owner and public unrest when things don't go right. That triggers too many firings, too many changes, and that affects the game. It's one reason why quarterbacks struggle in this league, too. Deep subject.
So, if everyone else is noticing what I am... declined level of play, boring games, disappointing Superbowls, sloppy performances, less of the spectacular... then do you think that the "decision" to not agree on a new CBA at this point could have possibly been: ON PURPOSE?!
I mean, think about it. If we know one thing, it's that the NFL is committed to producing a quality product. More than in any other sport, in my opinion, this league takes great, great care in its presentation and "image". And so, I'm sure that if we on an internet message board are privy to the conversation and experience of poor play (which nobody likes to watch), the owners & league officials are as well.
So, given that not having a salary-cap is bound to lead us back to an NFL landscape that more resembles the "quality" of yesteryear, who here can fathom that this was all done on purpose? I mean, the supposed quibble is over 3.8 percentage points? This is why everyone is just up & walking away from the table??
I... don't think so.
But hey, maybe that's just me...
Peace and Love
- PoetTree -
