Originally posted by Gabberwocky:Originally posted by jonnydel:Originally posted by JEP83:And......
Originally posted by NYniner85:Originally posted by jonnydel:They agreed to a floor, meaning they don't know the revenues with the uncertainty but all agreed that anything below 175 mil would destroy the league as the revenues on a per team average could be as low as 270 million.
That doesn't mean they agreed to a cap. To me, it's a good faith gesture by the owners to set the precedent with the union that they're willing to bypass the 47% cap calculation to protect the game - but will then expect players to do their part and agree to a league wide pay-cut claused into all contracts to try and maintain the market values of players.
I get that it's capitalism, but the NFL is also a product based game. They've worked for their audience for decades and while we can act like owners are just greedy guys, they're business men first and foremost and entertainment business men. You protect your audience - that's your real product. That's what they sell advertisers. They don't sell advertisers the games or the scores, they sell the audience. If you lose your audience, you lose your product.
They're not going to further risk losing an audience because once you lose an audience, it's very, very hard to get them back - just ask WCW or WWF/E, if you're familiar with wrestling, how easy it is to get the 11 million people who were watching in 1998 and aren't watching now, to come back.
If you allow the league to be gutted of dozens and dozens of playmakers and fill out teams with 1 year players or UDFA's because of the cap, the audience will leave and your product is less valuable.
The audience isn't going anywhere, especially if it's for a season. The owners having a good faith gesture is funny. The literally wanted the opposite of what the players wanted during negations
It's not just about the cap, but actual cash that they have to hand out
https://www.nfl.com/news/2021-nfl-salary-cap-conundrum-three-major-consequences-of-projected-decrease
Before diving into the potential ripple effects of a decreased cap, I want to state that I believe the need for cash spending by clubs will increase in 2021. Generally speaking, the way most club's lower cap numbers is by spending more cash in the present to spread the cap hit out over future years. However, as we all know, it has been a very difficult year for teams and owners to generate revenue, so the availability of cash might be a real issue for some organizations. In addition, this type of cash now/credit card borrowing will likely increase to push spending forward, but past credit card borrowing may exacerbate problems for teams this year because the bill might come due.
Once the TV rights are done (2022) they will have plenty of capital going forward.
Like everything in the world s**t is gonna be a little lean for the next yr....the NFL like everything else will have to adapt. Including the players.
And why is this in this thread?
Because it has been brought up a bunch of times that to keep the team together next year with COVID affecting the cap that we need to tank, cut Jimmy and draft a rookie to get a cheap rookie qb contract.
Tanking isn't something you purposefully do, but speaking of businessmen, it is definitely bad business to pay Garoppolo what we're paying him if an rookie can also throw -6 yard passes that turn into 8 yard gains for four to six times less money, especially with players on the rise like Jason Verrett we might want to extend.
Keeping Verrett, Sherman, and others will be hard with Jimmy's completely undeserved contract. "Market value" my asp; Jimmy has played BELOW what his contract's current market value is, and only the blind homers don't see it. Everyone else, from this forum to the sports media, knows he's being paid way more than his production warrants.
What rookie can get us to the SB next year? That's the bar for any JG replacement.
Top 10 for TDs and passer rating too.
We have seen how CJ has worked out.
I mean he clearly watched all of Jimmy's 2017 games too. but all of a sudden that week 17 one doesn't count, and he doesn't understand the contract being given based off those starts lol
