NFL salary cap dilemma

[boston area dtv]

So here we go players and owners at it again. Millionaires who cant get along with Billionaires.

Actually its the owners that are fighting amongst themselves that is causing the problem.

The league was built on revenue sharing and thats fine with me. I actually agree with revenue sharing to a point. What I dont agree with is owners who purposely take from the haves when they dont have to.

(the basis for the following points were made by a reporter on WEEI local sports radio in Boston.)

I give you the Pittsburgh Steelers for one. The Rooneys stated that they had the greatest fans around and didnt want to raise ticket prices on their fans. Well thats great ..the people in Boston will pay more to watch their team and then the people in Pitt can sit and celebrate a championship paid for by people in New England.

The other scenario is the Bengals. How nice of them to name their stadium after Paul Brown...last time I checked the name Paul Brown Stadium generated 0 revenue for the league. While the Pats sell their rights to Gillette and everyone gets a piece.

I hope they wipe out the salary cap and watch the teams that refuse to contribute financially to the league, to sink to the bottom. Im tired of footing the bill for everyone elses happiness.

 

[dragon002]

ill give you two reasons, george stienbrenner and jerry jones

they will buy high priced WH*RE players at any price ..


so your way of thinking is bill gates and the sultan of brunai should be allowed to buy teams in the NFL and buy all the best players. then simply buy a championship??!!

get over the patsys losing, its over billachech is not lombardi and brady is not montana or bradshaw.

 

[dragon002]

So here we go players and owners at it again. Millionaires who cant get along with Billionaires.

Actually its the owners that are fighting amongst themselves that is causing the problem.

The league was built on revenue sharing and thats fine with me. I actually agree with revenue sharing to a point. What I dont agree with is owners who purposely take from the haves when they dont have to.

(the basis for the following points were made by a reporter on WEEI local sports radio in Boston.)

I give you the Pittsburgh Steelers for one. The Rooneys stated that they had the greatest fans around and didnt want to raise ticket prices on their fans. Well thats great ..the people in Boston will pay more to watch their team and then the people in Pitt can sit and celebrate a championship paid for by people in New England.

The other scenario is the Bengals. How nice of them to name their stadium after Paul Brown...last time I checked the name Paul Brown Stadium generated 0 revenue for the league. While the Pats sell their rights to Gillette and everyone gets a piece.

I hope they wipe out the salary cap and watch the teams that refuse to contribute financially to the league, to sink to the bottom. Im tired of footing the bill for everyone elses happiness.

one more thing,the people of BOSTON?? they keep electing a murderer and a drunk as their senator, SO??????????
are they smart or just brain dead??

 

[boston area dtv]

When the drunk murderer was able to tell congress that our municipal roads project, the big dig, was gonna cost a few billion dollars and then have them pay over 24 billion to complete the job...Id say we are geniuses..thanks for the new highway system.

As for Rooneys who won their team in a card game I dont care about them or the fans in Pittsburgh. I think all sports should be run via free enterprise. If you can't support you team..(ala the Pittsburgh Pirates in the NLCS with bonds and bonilla and you cant sell out your park for the playoffs) you dont deserve to have one.

Fewer teams means better games. In football that would mean less washed up journeymen corners and QBs. Imagine teams with two number one WRs instead of One good one and two stiffs.

In baseball the games would be better with better pitchers and hitters..less stiffs.

In hockey..you would actually get to know peoples names.

Same in the NBA lets take the cap off and go! I mean imagine if all teams had quality players.

If you cant afford to keep up with players salaries fold your tent and go home. I have no grudge against Steinbrenner I loved it when they came up with Yankees (luxury tax) tax and he threw out the finger and spent almost twice as much as anyone for his team!

I also think all sports teams should have to finance their own stadiums without taxpayer $$ but thats a whole different topic.

 

[vurbano]

ill give you two reasons, george stienbrenner and jerry jones

they will buy high priced WH*RE players at any price ..

Thats called Capitalism. The current NFL model belongs in China.

 

[sikma]

The reason ALL the teams are able to buy their players is becaue of tv money, not names on stadiums. Also, I would bet you my paycheck the Steelers make a lot more money (and according to you have to share it with the league...which I seriously doubt) than the Pats selling team merchandise. The names on stadiums mostly go to pay for the stadium in the first place and also to line an owners pockets.

If the salarly cap goes away, the nfl will turn into the mlb............and that would be a joke.

And when/if your Pats start losing, all the 'loyal' fans WON'T pay high ticket prices than everyone else.

 

[dragon002]

the steelers/rooneys do make more profit per year than the patriots.
by an average of $5 million per year. (forbes)

can you buy season tickets for the pats?? here in pittsburgh you have to go on a waiting list, and the waiting period is 14 YEARS, average. talk about loyalty!

 

[vurbano]

If the salarly cap goes away, the nfl will turn into the mlb............and that would be a joke.

Wrong, dead wrong infact. There was nothing wrong with the NFL before 1994, the first year of this ridiculous cap that turned the majority of the teams into Average teams and the ERA of 8-8 teams making the playoffs. Its ridiculous.

 

[sikma]

If the NFL isn't as popular as it was in 1994, how come tv ratings are up, attendance is up and team merchandise profits are up???? because you don't have the same 3-4 teams in the superbowl every year.

 

[vurbano]

If the NFL isn't as popular as it was in 1994, how come tv ratings are up, attendance is up and team merchandise profits are up???? because you don't have the same 3-4 teams in the superbowl every year.

Because now they have created widespread mediocrity. Just look at the clowns that won the SB. It all results in few games are even convincingly won anymore and bad officiating deciding the outcome of too many games. So everyone watches and buys. WHoopieeeee. Its about as exciting as IROC racing where everyone has the exact same car.

 

[sikma]

All I can say is, I'd rather have a cap than no cap. Don't like it, don't watch it. You did make me chuckle when you quipped about the bad refs. like my dad always says, "the refs. are crooked, they're all doctors, lawyers and insurance salesmen anyway."

 

[dragon002]

Because now they have created widespread mediocrity. Just look at the clowns that won the SB. It all results in few games are even convincingly won anymore and bad officiating deciding the outcome of too many games. So everyone watches and buys. WHoopieeeee. Its about as exciting as IROC racing where everyone has the exact same car.

vurbano,

im at a bbq, ill get back to you later, and i got your clown, hanging!:

 

[dragon002]

vurbano,

why are the steelers clowns, please explain that.

bad officiating?? the steelers had more blown calls go against them in the playoffs than went for them.

the officiating has nothing to do with the salary cap.

so if you will , oh brilliant one, please enlighten us know nothing fools.

 

[rjc3895]

Having no salary cap does not mean that the big market teams will dominate in the playoffs. Let's use the Yankees as the example. How many years has it been now since the Yankees won the World Series? Having no cap only keeps the big market teams competitive every year which can help draw a crowd.

As for the Pirates, keep an eye on them this year and next year. They have a solid minor league program with a lot of players coming up who show some promise. The problem with "small market" teams is that they can't afford to keep the talent for long. Remember the good ol' days when teams leat players go becuase they wanted a million dollar contract? How times have changed!

 

[sikma]

I firmly believe that you take a cap off the NFL, you'll never see 75% of the teams in the SB. Plus, you'll lose teams and overall fan base. I don't think most of the teams in the NFL should suffer, just to make fans of New England and any other egotistical multi-million dollar owner happy so he/she can line their shelves with trophy's.

 

[cebbigh]

Remove the cap and all you'll see is the big market teams year after year. This isn't about the free market. The NFL is a closed club. It's more about how they manage their own affairs. Long live parity.

P.S.

Shaun Alexander is resigning with the Seahawks. Eight years 62 million. The Seahawks remain enough under the cap that they should be able to resign the remaining key players to reload and go for it again. Tim Ruskell is walking on water.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sports/2002846963_kelley06.html