Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
is this a result of the NFL's horrible no good salary cap?
Teams are allowed to spend whatever they want on 2 players but are prevented from spending when it comes to the rest of the roster.
Here is the perfect example.A 32 year old Tony Romo, not even close to being a top 5 QB (probably not even a top 10 QB) is given a 6 year $108 million deal.
Ed Reed, one of the best defensive players in the NFL can only get a 3 year deal for $15 million. The Raven's hands were tied by the cap after giving Joe Flacco (again, not a top QB) a 6 year $120 million contract. So Reed signs with the Texans and is not given his true market value because of the salary cap.
It's a bit of a head scratcher when you look at the Romo and Flacco contracts. Neither of these QB's is special. But if you think of the NFL as not a sport (which increasingly it is not) and more like an object of entertainment much like a motion picture then it makes sense. Tony Romo and Joe Flacco are stars of the movie. Ed Reed plays a smaller part and is a much better actor, but its easier to market the movie through the more handsome leading men. They give a better Jay Leno interview.
Yeah, we've reached FUBAR when it comes to the NFL. And now a running back cannot put his head down to run over a guy or he'll be called for a penalty.
No... they didn't have any other options. Had they not re-signed Romo, they wouldn't have gained that 5 Mil back. They've already cut about 4 players already and NO ONE is taking another pay cut.
The Cowboys were in Cap hell. This was the best way to free up cap space, and apparently a lot of you don't get this.
Besides, you act as if this means they could never trade Romo in the future. Good lord....
Again, they had many other options and I just listed them. The Cowboys overpaid for him IMO and there are not any teams out there dumb enough to take on this contract in a trade...only the raiders possibly.
is this a result of the NFL's horrible no good salary cap?
Teams are allowed to spend whatever they want on 2 players but are prevented from spending when it comes to the rest of the roster.
Here is the perfect example.A 32 year old Tony Romo, not even close to being a top 5 QB (probably not even a top 10 QB) is given a 6 year $108 million deal.
Ed Reed, one of the best defensive players in the NFL can only get a 3 year deal for $15 million. The Raven's hands were tied by the cap after giving Joe Flacco (again, not a top QB) a 6 year $120 million contract. So Reed signs with the Texans and is not given his true market value because of the salary cap.
It's a bit of a head scratcher when you look at the Romo and Flacco contracts. Neither of these QB's is special. But if you think of the NFL as not a sport (which increasingly it is not) and more like an object of entertainment much like a motion picture then it makes sense. Tony Romo and Joe Flacco are stars of the movie. Ed Reed plays a smaller part and is a much better actor, but its easier to market the movie through the more handsome leading men. They give a better Jay Leno interview.
Yeah, we've reached FUBAR when it comes to the NFL. And now a running back cannot put his head down to run over a guy or he'll be called for a penalty.
In the case of the Ravens, Ed Reed is past his prime, is always hurt and missed a ton of tackles last year. He is a risk taker, so he gives up a lot of big plays by being out of position. A lot of the time it is the cornerback who looks bad when it was really Reed's fault for not playing his position. In the past, Reed had the speed and his body wasn't so banged up that he could recover or when he did guess right, he had the skills to turn it into a big play. But the last couple of years his skills and body have diminished. He is no longer the player he used to be. He is still good, but not great. The better teams, such as the Ravens, know when to stop paying the big contracts to players past their prime. The teams that stay at the bottom year after year always make the big splash in free agency and over pay players because of their past or name. Or, they pay big money to a guy who had 1 good year. Then they end up in cap hell because those players usually don't pan out like they thought. Reed is past his prime. He got paid big bucks by the Ravens on his last contract when he was in his prime. No way they could pay him again. They had to go younger and cheaper.
Flacco is in his prime and just hitting his peak. He should have a lot of good years left. He has definitely been a top 5 qb the last couple of years. Who's better now? Peyton Manning is at the end of his career, Flacco has outplayed Brady the last three times they met. Who is better going forward? Yes, Brady and Manning were better in their prime but not now. So that leaves Aarron Rogers, maybe Bree's, who else? No one else has won more playoffs games than Flacco the last 5 yrs. The Ravens defense wasn't that good last year. They gave up a ton of points, especially in the playoffs. The defense almost blew the SB after the offense gave them a big lead. But the defense did finally make the goal line stand at the end. But the Ravens won the SB behind their QB and the offense. That's what you want from your QB....win playoff games and championships and be smart with the football. That's what Flaco did. He was a scoring machine with 11 TDs and zero picks. That's why they won and that's why he got the big bucks. He has played 5 years, been to the playoffs every year and 3 times got them to the AFC championship game and should have won it last year. He has proven himself, in my opinion. No one has been better. He has off games, but all QBs do. He's good when it counts. Romo is the opposite but more flashy. Romo has some really good games, but hasn't been good in the clutch. He cost the cowboys some important games because he doesn't come through in the clutch consistently. He has the skills but just can't close the deal. That 's the difference between him and Flacco.
By the way, I like the cowboys even though I live in Maryland and the Ravens are my team.I loved the boys back in the Tom Landry days. Even went to Texas stadium and also went to see them in the playoff days of Danny white back in the 80's. So I follow them too. Guess they are my second favorite team. I just wish Jerry jones would hire football people and let them run the show. But at least he is an owner that is passionate about the team. Good luck to the boys this year. Maybe they can meet the Ravens in the SB. Lol
Aaron Rogers is probably telling his agent that based on the contract Romo just signed, he doesn't think one billion dollars for six years is asking too much.
In the case of the Ravens, Ed Reed is past his prime, is always hurt and missed a ton of tackles last year. He is a risk taker, so he gives up a lot of big plays by being out of position. A lot of the time it is the cornerback who looks bad when it was really Reed's fault for not playing his position. In the past, Reed had the speed and his body wasn't so banged up that he could recover or when he did guess right, he had the skills to turn it into a big play. But the last couple of years his skills and body have diminished. He is no longer the player he used to be. He is still good, but not great. The better teams, such as the Ravens, know when to stop paying the big contracts to players past their prime. The teams that stay at the bottom year after year always make the big splash in free agency and over pay players because of their past or name. Or, they pay big money to a guy who had 1 good year. Then they end up in cap hell because those players usually don't pan out like they thought. Reed is past his prime. He got paid big bucks by the Ravens on his last contract when he was in his prime. No way they could pay him again. They had to go younger and cheaper.
Flacco is in his prime and just hitting his peak. He should have a lot of good years left. He has definitely been a top 5 qb the last couple of years. Who's better now? Peyton Manning is at the end of his career, Flacco has outplayed Brady the last three times they met. Who is better going forward? Yes, Brady and Manning were better in their prime but not now. So that leaves Aarron Rogers, maybe Bree's, who else? No one else has won more playoffs games than Flacco the last 5 yrs. The Ravens defense wasn't that good last year. They gave up a ton of points, especially in the playoffs. The defense almost blew the SB after the offense gave them a big lead. But the defense did finally make the goal line stand at the end. But the Ravens won the SB behind their QB and the offense. That's what you want from your QB....win playoff games and championships and be smart with the football. That's what Flaco did. He was a scoring machine with 11 TDs and zero picks. That's why they won and that's why he got the big bucks. He has played 5 years, been to the playoffs every year and 3 times got them to the AFC championship game and should have won it last year. He has proven himself, in my opinion. No one has been better. He has off games, but all QBs do. He's good when it counts. Romo is the opposite but more flashy. Romo has some really good games, but hasn't been good in the clutch. He cost the cowboys some important games because he doesn't come through in the clutch consistently. He has the skills but just can't close the deal. That 's the difference between him and Flacco.
By the way, I like the cowboys even though I live in Maryland and the Ravens are my team.I loved the boys back in the Tom Landry days. Even went to Texas stadium and also went to see them in the playoff days of Danny white back in the 80's. So I follow them too. Guess they are my second favorite team. I just wish Jerry jones would hire football people and let them run the show. But at least he is an owner that is passionate about the team. Good luck to the boys this year. Maybe they can meet the Ravens in the SB. Lol
well insert Anquan Boldin into my argument. At $6 million a year he was too expensive for the Ravens because of all the money they gave Flacco. The NFL salary cap prevents teams from keeping players and it leeds to teams overpaying for 1 or 2 players on their roster.
Or put another way, it prevents a minority of teams from acquiring a disproportionate number of really good players.
that didn't even happen before the salary cap. But you did have teams like the 1980's 49ers that had a roster full of a great players. How did they get those players? The draft. And they were able to keep their own players because the NFL didn't force them to give them up.
Again, they had many other options and I just listed them. The Cowboys overpaid for him IMO and there are not any teams out there dumb enough to take on this contract in a trade...only the raiders possibly.
well insert Anquan Boldin into my argument. At $6 million a year he was too expensive for the Ravens because of all the money they gave Flacco. The NFL salary cap prevents teams from keeping players and it leeds to teams overpaying for 1 or 2 players on their roster.
Boldin only had a year left on his contract. Flacco's contract had nothing to do with it. I think Flacco's salary only counts for 7 million against the cap this year. It kicks in a lot higher starting in the third year, I believe. Boldin was the only guy that I scratch my head about. It seems they could have kept him. But they like their younger receivers. Boldin really came through in the playoffs. But he he didn't have a great regular season. He only had a couple of TDs. But still, he is a clutch player and came through when needed. I wish they would have kept him for one more year.
that didn't even happen before the salary cap. But you did have teams like the 1980's 49ers that had a roster full of a great players. How did they get those players? The draft. And they were able to keep their own players because the NFL didn't force them to give them up.
Every team is on equal footing with the salary cap. Before the cap, it could take years before a bad team could make it to the playoffs. If they had a bad draft and a serious injury, they would struggle against the better teams for years. That's why you usually saw the same teams at the top each decade. In the 60s it was the packers, 70s... Steelers and cowboys, 80s....49ers and redskins, 90s....cowboys and bills. There were other good teams through that period.....raiders, Vikings, broncos, dolphins. But it seemed 1 or 2 teams dominated each decade. The last ten years, the SB has been won by the steelers, ravens, packers, giants, patriots, saints, colts and other teams like the bears, rams, titans, Seahawks, and cardinals have played in the big game. Seemed like the same handful of teams were always in it each decade before.
Each team has the same amount of money. If they overpay certain players or misjudge talent, they lose out but they can reload within a year or two. The ownership and front office that isn't very good, keeps their teams on the bottom. They have the same money as everyone else. There is no excuse to always be at the bottom in today's game. It is a reflection of a weak front office. They overpay, keep players too long, and don't draft well. In the old days it would take decades to rebuild. Now they can do it in a year. The front office people and scouting are more important than ever. You can't just waste money on players. So if they keep failing year after year, it's on them. But every team has a chance to get drastically better every year, even if they were bottom dwellers the previousnyear. Before, once you sank to the bottom, it would be years before your team got good again. It would take 5 years of good drafting to build a decent team. But if you had 1 or 2 bad drafts, you would never reach the top.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No... they didn't have any other options. Had they not re-signed Romo, they wouldn't have gained that 5 Mil back. They've already cut about 4 players already and NO ONE is taking another pay cut. 
