Some things people better start understanding

[baj1dallas]

Paying for the best LAST year is different than paying for the average THIS year.

That is the point about the cap increase and the market this year.

Next year or two years from now the outrageous prices we see this year will be even worse.

It is what it is, the market sets itself.

You can say all that but then we don't really know how this will all pan out in 2 or 3 years time. Could be all these teams overpaying right now are hurting and teams that sit back like Dallas seems to be doing are in a position to get better players even if they have to "overpay" to do it.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

You can say all that but then we don't really know how this will all pan out in 2 or 3 years time. Could be all these teams overpaying right now are hurting and teams that sit back like Dallas seems to be doing are in a position to get better players even if they have to "overpay" to do it.

One thing that I must mention again....this is a weak FA class. That is what makes it hard to get these insane prices.

If it was a group of great players getting the contracts we could all take it a little better.

Now one could say...well it was a weak FA class this year, maybe next year will be a great FA class.

However you also have to remember that teams that have the money under the cap will sign their players before they can become FAs, for the most part.

I imagine we will see more early extensions doled out so the players can not even sniff FA.

It will be a different risk for the team and the player with the extension category but still a team would be wise to do that before the FA increases each year.

It may be the new setting the price scenario with earlier extensions but the money saved, even though it may seem outrageous contract price at the time, will probably be worth it.

The one thing with that scenario is the player and his agent getting wise to the plan and refusing to sign extensions.

In the end we may have a settlement in the market but I highly doubt it, I look for it to keep going and going until we see things change drastically in the NFL or they become a tick that sucks too much blood and explodes.

 

[Crown Royal]

However you also have to remember that teams that have the money under the cap will sign their players before they can become FAs, for the most part.

I imagine we will see more early extensions doled out so the players can not even sniff FA.

As others would say, on the nosey.

Teams have figured the cap out, and the success of the NFL has allowed the cap to grow astronomically. It is no longer a big deal, and teams are re-signing players before they become free agents.

It's funny - the cap is watering down free agency because it is so large. Whodathunkit?

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Sooo...here's my question.

Who cares what they are getting paid? The way the cap is going, teams have figured out over the past several years how to operate. Very seldom are teams cap-strapped anymore, and if they are, it only lasts a year or so.

So basically, we are back to the days of pre-cap, but with free agency.

Everyone is looking at these contracts and thinking in terms of cap room, but I really think that you have to see that things have changed in the last few years, with extra cap room being added in the amount of 7-10 mil every year.

Exactly. We have to get used to these guys getting monopoly-money contracts. And that's fine, because the cap is getting so huge. The absolute dollar amounts don't matter; it's the cap space that matters.

Unfortunately, listening to that Stephen Jones interview on the team website, it sounds like we're going to be reluctant to join in. Sounds like Jerry is gun shy after Boiman and Vanderslice didn't work out. But he's going to have to get over it, or we'll be left behind as other teams pony up. Look at the Pats -- they are as smart as it gets when it comes to managing the cap, and they just gave what has to be a monstrous signing bonus (number hasn't been released as I type this) to a marquee free agent.

 

[Crown Royal]

Exactly. We have to get used to these guys getting monopoly-money contracts. And that's fine, because the cap is getting so huge. The absolute dollar amounts don't matter; it's the cap space that matters.

Unfortunately, listening to that Stephen Jones interview on the team website, it sounds like we're going to be reluctant to join in. Sounds like Jerry is gun shy after Boiman and Vanderslice didn't work out. But he's going to have to get over it, or we'll be left behind as other teams pony up. Look at the Pats -- they are as smart as it gets when it comes to managing the cap, and they just gave what has to be a monstrous signing bonus (number hasn't been released as I type this) to a marquee free agent.

Which leads to the other point I made. Outside of RG and now maybe RT, it isn't as if we are exactly hurting for talent. We have, right now, the most talented team we've had in a decade. It's all about if we can put it together and translate to winning.

I see no reason for us to get in any sweepstakes this offseason, because there really aren't any FAs that are going to make a big difference for us. We stand to have a good draft - focus on that.

 

[iceberg]

Exactly. We have to get used to these guys getting monopoly-money contracts. And that's fine, because the cap is getting so huge. The absolute dollar amounts don't matter; it's the cap space that matters.

Unfortunately, listening to that Stephen Jones interview on the team website, it sounds like we're going to be reluctant to join in. Sounds like Jerry is gun shy after Boiman and Vanderslice didn't work out. But he's going to have to get over it, or we'll be left behind as other teams pony up. Look at the Pats -- they are as smart as it gets when it comes to managing the cap, and they just gave what has to be a monstrous signing bonus (number hasn't been released as I type this) to a marquee free agent.

this is the catch no one is seeing right now - you can put the cap where ever the hell you'd like, but in the end the owners still gotta be able to make enough money to pay the players. that's gonna get harder and harder to do and while $8-$10mil may be the going rate for XYZ type of a player, if the franchise can't afford it then the entire point of the salary cap is almost moot again because those who can afford it will pay.

sooner or later the NFL will hit pay-per-view as another means to get revenue to fund these silly prices. but as long as we watch and as long as we shell out and encourage it, it will happen.

 

[skinsscalper]

Just proves my point that two players that are nowhere near the talent of Hutchinson would get, and this shows they did get, similar or better money.

It is the market price and as long as the seller and buyer set the price there is not much that can be done.

I like playing guitar. Sometimes I will just look on ebay at guitars, knowing I don't have the money for some of the top price custom ones.

However occasionally I will see some insane price. I would ask a guy that knows a great deal about some of the guitars if they are worth that amount.

He said something that fits this situation IMO....The guitar is worth whatever someone will pay for it.

This is something that happens in the market all the time. Paintings, gaming systems, guitars, other collectibles.

It sucks but it is what it is.

A bit off topic here, but What axes are you playing right now BP?

I'm playing a Jackson artist proffessional and a Carvin Ultra V (neck thru friggin beautiful)

Playing em through a Carvin Quad X pre-amp and Peavey 400 Power amp and A/B switch that kicks over to a Digitech 2120 artist pumped to a custom 4X12 loaded with green back celestions that a cousin raided from some idiot out of his Marshall stack for $100.00.

Practice with the 2120 juiced to a solid state Peavey Chorus 212.

Lookin at picking up the Zakk Wylde Epiphone Bullseye Les Paul for my B-day. I've never beena big fan of Epiphone axes, but I plyed this bad boy loaded with the EMG active pick-ups and it is bad to the bone. I don't care whose name is on it!

Anyhoo back to FA stuff :laugh2: . Just like to keep in touch with other axe grinders.

SS

 

[Crown Royal]

this is the catch no one is seeing right now - you can put the cap where ever the hell you'd like, but in the end the owners still gotta be able to make enough money to pay the players. that's gonna get harder and harder to do and while $8-$10mil may be the going rate for XYZ type of a player, if the franchise can't afford it then the entire point of the salary cap is almost moot again because those who can afford it will pay.

sooner or later the NFL will hit pay-per-view as another means to get revenue to fund these silly prices. but as long as we watch and as long as we shell out and encourage it, it will happen.

What are you talking about? The cap is less than 200million per year, and is set based on team revenues. The cap ensures that teams have the cash to pay players. If the league went into a recession, the cap would shrink.

 

[skinsscalper]

this is the catch no one is seeing right now - you can put the cap where ever the hell you'd like, but in the end the owners still gotta be able to make enough money to pay the players. that's gonna get harder and harder to do and while $8-$10mil may be the going rate for XYZ type of a player, if the franchise can't afford it then the entire point of the salary cap is almost moot again because those who can afford it will pay.

sooner or later the NFL will hit pay-per-view as another means to get revenue to fund these silly prices. but as long as we watch and as long as we shell out and encourage it, it will happen.

The NFL is already on track with that via NFL Sunday Ticket. I don't think it will ever go totally PPV, but it's moved in that direction already.

SS

 

[Chocolate Lab]

this is the catch no one is seeing right now - you can put the cap where ever the hell you'd like, but in the end the owners still gotta be able to make enough money to pay the players. that's gonna get harder and harder to do and while $8-$10mil may be the going rate for XYZ type of a player, if the franchise can't afford it then the entire point of the salary cap is almost moot again because those who can afford it will pay.

That's not how it works, though. The cap is calculated as a percentage of revenues. I don't know the exact number (Adam?), but it's set up so the owners have the money -- they wouldn't agree to a cap their revenues wouldn't support.

We just have to think like baseball, where completely average pitchers get $11 million per year. It sounds ridiculous, and it is, but that's what the revenues support.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

A bit off topic here, but What axes are you playing right now BP?

I'm playing a Jackson artist proffessional and a Carvin Ultra V (neck thru friggin beautiful)

Playing em through a Carvin Quad X pre-amp and Peavey 400 Power amp and A/B switch that kicks over to a Digitech 2120 artist pumped to a custom 4X12 loaded with green back celestions that a cousin raided from some idiot out of his Marshall stack for $100.00.

Practice with the 2120 juiced to a solid state Peavey Chorus 212.

Lookin at picking up the Zakk Wylde Epiphone Bullseye Les Paul for my B-day. I've never beena big fan of Epiphone axes, but I plyed this bad boy loaded with the EMG active pick-ups and it is bad to the bone. I don't care whose name is on it!

Anyhoo back to FA stuff :laugh2: . Just like to keep in touch with other axe grinders.

SS

Mine are all import stuff...can't afford the USA or Customs.

Have a Jackson Dinky bolt on that I had someone custom paint for me and I put in those EMG active 81/85 you are talking about. Man you can get some serious screams and pinched harmonics with them.

Have a schecter C-1 Classic neck through with the JB/Jazz Seymour Duncan pickup set. More of my mellow guitar when I just want to play mostly old blues or rock.

Have an BC Rich NJ warlock...It is not bad but far from great. Plus it has a Floyd Rose Speedloader on it...which means no tuning pegs on the headstock which just looks funky.
I would love to have a good old USA warlock, have always loved the shape.

Have an old 87 Charvel that I rarely take out of the case now.

My current fave is a Dean Razorback...It is a set neck, has a dimebucker in the bridge, you can get good screams and pinched harmonics but it is a tad treble high. However it has the most comfortable playing neck I have ever played in my life. Not too skinny like some ibanez necks, but not too thick like gibbys and fenders. It is a V neck profile and everytime I play it I am still amazed at how well it feels.

I would like to get the emg set put in it one day.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

What are you talking about? The cap is less than 200million per year, and is set based on team revenues. The cap ensures that teams have the cash to pay players. If the league went into a recession, the cap would shrink.

Yep...revenues drive the cap and the bargaining agreement.

However he did say something that I do see happening.

We already see the NFL gameday package on direct tv, but we are also seeing the NFL Network holding some games that are only played on their stations...unlike the NFL Gameday package that even though they play a game...most times that game is on local team channels as well where the NFL Network games are not.

So...I do see a day when if someone wants to watch the NFL games they will do it through some sort of pay per view / subscription method.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I need to stop checking on here every, 5 minutes, hoping to hear some news about the Cowboys

but I bet it must be hectic right now, not only are you approaching other free agents, but you're doing it while talking to some of your own too

 

[Crown Royal]

Yep...revenues drive the cap and the bargaining agreement.

However he did say something that I do see happening.

We already see the NFL gameday package on direct tv, but we are also seeing the NFL Network holding some games that are only played on their stations...unlike the NFL Gameday package that even though they play a game...most times that game is on local team channels as well where the NFL Network games are not.

So...I do see a day when if someone wants to watch the NFL games they will do it through some sort of pay per view / subscription method.

I didn't respond to that because I don't care.:laugh2: The league will do it whether I want them to or not, though I think it will be foolish. I don't think they will ever get away from network TV, at least not in the near future.

But the league is smart enough to know that I will happily pay to watch. My only hope is that they realize that I am an exception, not a rule.

 

[iceberg]

What are you talking about? The cap is less than 200million per year, and is set based on team revenues. The cap ensures that teams have the cash to pay players. If the league went into a recession, the cap would shrink.

sure it is. "team revenues".

what you and i pay for.
what the networks pay for.

what will happen when they push it out to a point where no one wants to pay that much anymore?

this isn't an endless cup where you just push back the total $ another 20 mil or so and wa-la, it's there. the NFL will have to find a way to get that $ into the pipe to pay the players via the cap they feel is going to come in.

the cap shrink? what will that do to owners who've paid on "todays high cap" if you lower it?

nah - won't hurt at all. just my imagination.

the house of cards is getting taller, that's for sure.

 

[iceberg]

That's not how it works, though. The cap is calculated as a percentage of revenues. I don't know the exact number (Adam?), but it's set up so the owners have the money -- they wouldn't agree to a cap their revenues wouldn't support.

We just have to think like baseball, where completely average pitchers get $11 million per year. It sounds ridiculous, and it is, but that's what the revenues support.

and that's my point. however baseball has 81 home games in which to get that money.

football has 8 homes games.

sooner or later they're going to pull a hockey and price themselves out of the market.

 

[SultanOfSix]

nah, i think more like you don't like the way it is.

what are you comparing that $20k yugo to? $20k? if so then you're not comparing apples to apples so yes, you'll get mixed results.

as long as *a team* is willing to set the standard, the rest have no choice but to follow. the *only* thing i can think of that would slow it down is a position cap.

I think you missed my point to.

I couldn't care less how much owners spend, because it's not my money, so it's never been a question of liking or not liking the way it is.

If you want to spend the big bucks, you spend it on players like Hutchinson, or Sanders, or another premier marquee player. You spend it on the players that you draft and develop. And if you do spend it on an average to an above average player, you better be filling a position of need and be close to contending for a championship.

Everyone has a choice. It's those who think they have none, that usually are the losers.