Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
CBA Question (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter jeter23
- Start date
roadkill1292
Footballguy
The NBA's lack of a hard cap makes it a different situation but, truthfully, I haven't given the matter any thought at all. Ditto the NHL, which I know even less about. Seems that the NBA's biggest problems are (1) length of schedule and (2) guaranteed contracts. Those two realities greatly water down the intensity level during the regular season, something definitely not a problem in the NFL.I'm also well aware that the odds against eliminating the NFL draft are practically insurmountable. But its abolition is an interesting scenario to me and would hardly be the foundation for competitive disaster that some think.
Blue Onion can attest that I have spent a lot of time over in the FFA tilting at a parallel windmill (fairtax). Despite being part of a hopelessly small minority of opinion, I've enjoyed both discussions.
Last edited by a moderator:
BlueOnion
Footballguy
Let me challenge you on this position. Why do differentiate between the salary cap and the NFL draft when both are in place to maintain a competitive balance and cater to the underachievers?The NFL salary cap is in place to ensure all NFL teams have a level playing field; ensuring all underachieving and overachieving teams have the same payroll expense regardless of revenue?
Yes I agree with you on the schedule and guaranteed contracts. But I was just curious as to what your thoughts were on a Lottery style draft. Where all the teams that don't make the playoffs, are put into a lottery to decide the order.I'm just curious, I don't think I've ever talked with anyone that has been in favor of disbanding the draft. (at least one that makes as intelligent points as you are making)
msommer
Footballguy
Riffraff
Footballguy
Scabs = replacement players playing NFL football while the real guys are locked out. Happened in the 80s, appears it may be forced to happen again. Good to see players that really wanted to play the game (lots of heart and soul); bad to see not so talented of players trying to play the game.Packers becoming the Montreal Expos = a MLB league run team that ended up essentially a minor league team supplying other MLB teams with groomed players. Could not afford to keep any good players and lost them all to big market teams. The Expos were eventually eliminated as a team due to non-support/competitiveness. Packers are "owned" by a small community of people (in the middle of nowhere), they won't be able to compete with big market teams. No revenue sharing = goodbye Titletown, USA.
Off to work, so can't comment further if you need more explanations.
GregR_2
Footballguy
NFL teams compete against each other on the field, economically the individual franchises are pretty tightly bound to each other. It is in the best interest of all the clubs that teams be able to turn things around in a short enough period of time that they don't lose their fan base. It keeps up the price of broadcast contracts which is shared between the teams, as well as the ticket, merchandise and concessions sales when those other clubs come to town to play.It sounds like you're basically advocating that the teams act against their own best business interest because your philosophy outside of football is that you don't like welfare. I don't think there's been any positive effect for the league that's been presented has there? In addition to what I said previously, I was thinking this morning and two other downsides is the loss of revenue from broadcast of the draft itself and lack of publicity that the draft spectacle garners them.
And another point that I hadn't thought of previously that further hurts teams turning it around... I already mentioned how FAs seldom seem to be the backbone of turning a team around. The Redskins have been trying it for years and last year is arguably the first time it might have paid off, and one could speculate acquiring a HoF head coach had more to do with it than the FA acquisitions. The Cowboys under Parcell, also a HoF coach, are really the only team I can point to that have turned it around via FA, but even they have a solid core of very talented players on defense that they drafted.
But, I can point to a lot of teams that made significant trades to fill in important pieces. And that is going to be hurt by the no-draft situation since most trades in the NFL are players for picks, not players for players.
roadkill1292
Footballguy
Because I see a giant leap from the maintenance of an equal salary cap, monies used to compensate talent, to giving teams exclusive rights to the best incoming players. It seems like substantially more help than is necessary. As you pointed out, the lower revenue teams are already being helped by the cap. So I guess it's a matter of degree with me.
The draft lottery has certainly gone a long way towards discouraging teams from tanking late in the season and I think that's a good thing. But, even so, there still remains the concept of exclusivity which I view as something of an abrogation of a player's rights. Thanks for your kind words, BTW. I know my ideas are unpopular with the huge majority of members here but I've been treated quite courteously by most and I appreciate that.
roadkill1292
Footballguy
My bad, I thought you were responding to something else.
These are very reasonable points although I don't agree that it's in anyone's best interest to constantly assist the underachievers. I do agree that this would make life more difficult for teams' GMs but I'm not very worried about that. Late add: I'm certainly not opposed to welfare in general for those who cannot help themselves. But that's not really the case with NFL teams, is it? We've got a level playing field where money is concerned; do we really want to handicap things based on brains, too?You're also very correct in how the draft has become a huge TV spectacle. I love watching it, too, wondering how the new acquisitions will change the balance of power in the next few seasons. That's not reason enough, however, for me to drop my advocacy of a no-draft league.
Teams may very well build more often through the draft (and trades, or trades for picks) but I think that's more a factor of focusing on good young talent than anything else. It's very difficult building a winner by procuring veteran free agents but that's because they're in short supply and expensive. Without a draft, teams could still focus on building a team for the long haul by focusing their procurement efforts on young prospects.
Last edited by a moderator:
The draft lottery has certainly gone a long way towards discouraging teams from tanking late in the season and I think that's a good thing. But, even so, there still remains the concept of exclusivity which I view as something of an abrogation of a player's rights.
Thanks for your kind words, BTW. I know my ideas are unpopular with the huge majority of members here but I've been treated quite courteously by most and I appreciate that.
My pleasure....you do have a rather unpopular and very rare opinion. Are you a fan of getting rid of drafts for sports in general? Or just the NFL. I think that the NFL is a good bit differnt then other leagues, as they have no farm or minor league teams, to develop talent.
roadkill1292
Footballguy
Tough, but fair, question. While I'm generally in favor of more freedom for the player (in a way that doesn't upset the competitive balance), I don't think I've thought hard enough about the other three majors to render a meaningful opinion. So my plea, your honor, is: stupid.
