Salary Cap

[Rich-League Officer]

Every now and then it's good to take the temperature of the league.
I was curious who would prefer to see the return of the salary cap and floor.
I ask because I calculated the 2044 salaries and there does seem to be wide gap in overall salaries.

A big component of removing the cap was it allows teams to freely trade, which is good for the league.
What if, we allowed teams to continue to make trades but share the contract burden for that one season the deal was made in.
Perhaps a team is tight to the cap, wants to acquire a 10m player with only 3m in space left, but you can make the deal because one team will pay 8m of the contract for the current season.
It technically would increase the value for the player for the team trading him.
If Dean trades a talented player and pays 8m of his salary, that player is more valuable.
It gives the "dumping" team with a lower cap number to perhaps get a better deal.

The following season, the acquired player is the full responsibility of the team he went to.

Just curious how coaches feel about the cap after the last few seasons of no cap.

[Mitch-Oilers]

I'm open to the return of so.e sort of cap. I found tge previous cap very fun.

[Donovon-Steelers]

I have no baseline to compare, but anything which would make management more complex, I'd be against. There's already a lot of administration to do, which really makes very little difference in the on-field results since ratings are so close.

[Mitch-Oilers]

@Donovan - It would make things spicer with more ratings differentiation and a salary cap.

[Dean-Atlanta]

I think there are many issues with bringing back enforcement of the salary cap and floor as we once did. As I see it now, it appears that my team and Detroit are likely to be below the floor, and Jax might be near it. I rmember when I was KC and had the under-rated (in skill ratings) Patrick Mahomes as my QB, and I was below the floor substantially and had to make some trades to reach the floor. Some above the cap teams were likewise forced to make trades. I picked up a safety and a CB that were quality veterans that helped my team, and a couple over-paid QBs that did nothing as starting QBs for my team (Kizer and Hurts) and I was magically in compliance with the salary cap. My team still went 5-11 that season. Only trading for the 3rd pick overall and taking Justin Fields lead to the 10-6 2039 season.

I think in many instances, the teams forced to trade higher paid players will dump players needing to be signed the next season, and unload salary and players needing contracts that cost points, at the same time. The mix of the salary cap and still having to sign players to contract using points will prove to mix as well as oil and water. The highly played players who are signed for 2 or more seasons will be more valuable and less likely to be traded.

My team and Detroit are the ones most likely to be below the floor. Detroit is there because of how young his roster is. Forcing Detroit to trade for veterans to comply with the salary cap floor will disrupt the plan James has for his team, I would guess. I think the low salary number, given how I understand player salaries are calculated, reflect weaknesses in the M model I have been using, and I will be changing that plan for my team. I think in my case, being forced to trade for higher paid veterans players will severely disrupt that plan, and make it MORE and not less challenging to rebuild my roster the right way.

there are some reasons to bring it back. But I think it works much better if we sign players by salary under the cap and not points. I think if we bring the cap back, it should come back while eliminating contracts and using points to re-sign via restructuring of player contracts. I think we should do the current system OR a salary cap, but not both.

[Dean-Atlanta]

GM model I meant... typo

[Barney - Vikings]

I would be fine with a cap. I don’t see much need for a floor since the player ratings are so tightly bunched that even a very young team can be competitive.

[Matt-Jacksonville]

Whatever we do, we need to give everyone a full season to plan/prepare before enforcement. I'm not against a cap, but everything needs to work together. We've been steadily reducing the points people have each year in an effort to force more decisions on restructures. However, if we enforce a cap and the over cap teams trade veterans that need to be signed to the teams below the floor, we need to make sure they have the points to sign those guys or they may be left high and dry without a good way to get up to the floor and still be able to follow their team building plan.

Bottom line, it's not a bad idea to bring it back, but it has to be well thought out and everything needs to work together in synergy.

[Steve-LA Chargers]

LA chooses C

[Dean-Atlanta]

C is better than D?