View Single Post
Old 12-21-2006, 03:04 PM   #26
Bill B
Impact Rookie
 
Bill B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 721
Re: Article: 2007 and the Cap

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10 View Post
I'm having a tough time figuring out what this post means. But I do like the current system a lot. Teams do have the ability to keep players together if they want.

I like the NFL's system because contracts aren't guaranteed. You don't play up to your ability, the team isn't stuck with you.
Sorry for the confusion - I guess what I am getting at is having a hard cap like the NFL currently has at $107 million or so, and than having a soft cap that allows teams to resign their own players and go over the hard cap. The soft cap would have a luxury tax similar to what NBA teams pay - which is 100% for every dollar over.
So looking at the future when Chris Cooley's contract expires next year the Redskins could resign him at any rate they seem fit without regard to whether it would push them over the hard cap number (which I believe in that year will be $116 million). Now with the Redskins doing this they would have to pay whatever amount over the $116 in a luxury tax to a league wide pool which I assume would be distributed to smaller market teams.

I completely agree with you on keeping contracts non-guranteed. So if you sign someone to a long term deal and the contract is backloaded than you can still cut him and not be on the hook for anything. I would leave the bonus penalty as they are so yu would cut players before or after June 1st to comply with the cap.

Also, if you could find players with similar salaries the second part would allow you to trade them and get an exemption. Right now most trades are really hard because teams can afford to take both the cap hit of the player they are trading and the cap hit of the player they have coming in.
Bill B is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
 
Page generated in 0.80610 seconds with 10 queries