Salary Cap Poll

[Justin-Chicago]

How exactly does the cap hurt new coaches? I don't get this argument.

The cap creates the premise of equal talent rosters. Removing it means the most skilled owners (who are already the best coaches) have another avenue to excel. That reduces parity on another level and further steepens the success curve for any new owner. As I recall that's a main reason why the cap was introduced in the first place.

The irony is, there used to be threads arguing about how lopsided and unfair any given trade was, and now there are threads where some of you are complaining there's not enough trading. But nobody objects to the fairness of trades nowadays.

We all knew the cap would take a while to become self sustaining, I think it will take a full 12 seasons or so, with the AA and retirement rules currently in place. We're 7 seasons in. Why would we turn back now? The hard part is behind us. Charlie's draft classes and Rich's salary cap system are working well in tandem.

From here on out it will get better, let's just see it through a couple more years.

[Dean-Atlanta]

As it regards new GM/coaches coming in as team owners, look at NO, PHI, NE, and CAR. What if you were the new owners coming in and taking one of those teams, what would you do as GM to improve that team and then creating game plans and profiles to win games?

If we are going to get new owners for those teams, they will be in that position. Managing those teams and keeping them competitive is something this league does a LOT better than other leagues I have played in during the past. Keeping those rosters strong is key to having them be a good option for new owners. I've been in leagues where open teams are poorly managed and they are major rebuilding projects for new owners. Someone could come in and take over Carolina and make post-season with solid PPPs. But will they see the complexity of the GM role and/or the game planning process as challenges?

[Justin-Chicago]

Those teams Dean mentioned are far better equipped for immediate success than the unowned teams of yesteryear. As you know I feel strongly that we should simply see the current salary cap system through to its maturity before we consider any other options. I sense we have more parity in the league now than ever, and I think that's a good thing.

For a new owner, I feel we should consider what it means for there to be "a lot to learn" vs. "a lot to compete." Admittedly there is a lot to learn within the nuances of the cap, however with the cap intact any unowned team is far better equipped to compete right away. Adeptly managing the cap is not required to be competitive, and newbie mistakes work themselves out in a few seasons.

Removing the cap, we return to the days of an owner having to compete with uncapped juggernaut type teams. The most immediate way for them to do this is to outflank the competition making lopsided trade deals. It is this that will then take their attention away from the coaching aspect of the game so integral for success, and they make mistakes that cost them much more permanently than any cap mistakes. Rosters are ruined, owners leave, and then the appeal of an open team is much less for the next prospective owner.

I was curious what effect the salary cap has had on the overall talent level of the league's teams top to bottom from 2032 to 2039, so I loaded up both sets of league files and ran some scouting reports. I scouted teams by the top 3 depth chart players at each applicable position. I left out TEs because there have been some attribute changes. Here is a summary:

From 2032 to 2039 the league's lowest skilled team has improved at every position.

Counting the league's highest skilled team each year at each position as 1.000, the lowest skilled team went from .9826 on average at the end of 2032 to .9867 on average now.

Also the highest skilled team at each position did improve slightly from the end of 2032 to the end of 2039, most notably at QB (1.006), WR (1.005), and RB (1.004). However the lowest team outpaced the highest team in gains at each of these positions (QB 1.013, WR 1.007, RB 1.005). Other positions were less pronounced, however the main takeaway id that the progress of the lowest skilled team vs the highest skilled team was pronounced across the board.

I used actuals only, and of course my own ratings system. But I encourage you guys to take a look, maybe run a report or two, and see what data you may observe.

To me, this means we are headed in the right direction. Through continued draft pool evolution and the inevitable attrition of some of the pre-2033 draft class studs as they age and retire, the highest skilled teams coming down over the next few seasons will be the final stage of the process.

[Rich-League Officer]

I can assure you, the open teams will continue to be well maintained.
There was a time in this league decades ago where we let them slip.
There were some coaches who resented the idea someone would try and improve them.
Those days are gone. They will stay strong no matter if the cap is 150m 300m or no cap at all.

[Jerry-Redskins]

Just to clarify my new owner comment. This is a competitive league. It takes work and has many aspects. I can tell you from my interactions the quantity of rules is an issue for new guys. They do feel overloaded and looking in multiple directions. I do try to push patience and to slow down but, it is a challenge. Dropping the cap and just maintaining the points keeps all the basic concepts that adds fun for different owners, but definitely lowers the bar on roster management. It makes one less thing seem overwhelming to learn and lowers the pressure to maintain a roster.

I'm convinced this would greatly increase the keeping around of new guys.

[Shawn-Giants]

The cap isn't chasing anyone off for new people, new folks can't even get the damn game loaded.

Rich or anyone can suggest moves or even do the cap for new people, it's one aspect of the off-season that once the season starts it's behind you.

The cap isn't making this impossible to adjust for new owners. New owners can't take the perpetual losing, everyone comes in thinking it's easy and when they find out it isn't and the losses pile up they bounce. We've seen it time and time again, let's not blame that on the cap or think removing the cap will make anything easier.

[Justin-Chicago]

As it regards new GM/coaches coming in as team owners, look at NO, PHI, NE, and CAR. What if you were the new owners coming in and taking one of those teams, what would you do as GM to improve that team and then creating game plans and profiles to win games?

If we are going to get new owners for those teams, they will be in that position. Managing those teams and keeping them competitive is something this league does a LOT better than other leagues I have played in during the past. Keeping those rosters strong is key to having them be a good option for new owners. I've been in leagues where open teams are poorly managed and they are major rebuilding projects for new owners. Someone could come in and take over Carolina and make post-season with solid PPPs. But will they see the complexity of the GM role and/or the game planning process as challenges?

As a new owner I'm always excited to cut some older guys and do a bit of overhaul. I think most new owners are...

New Orleans, I see about five guys I'd resign and six I'd release. Probably draft a LB, a CB, and try to land a premeir HB--SF and Washington have one on the block. Shedding about 30M cap seems pretty straightforward, then it would be down to personal preference to fine tune the roster.

New England, several FAs-to-be would be released. Comfortably under cap, I'd re-tool the O-Line, likely through FA as ther'e snot a ton of picks, and try to either trade into a top pick for QB Lawrence or plan on getting that franchise QB in year two.

Carolina, I release some older FAs to be, drop about 35M in cap, draft to build the OL and DL depth, and am confident Haskins is taking me to a division title, the team is pretty solid.

Philadelphia, would totally depend on how confident I am in my coaching abilities. This would be one that could either compete right away or be rebuilt.

A couple of these teams have had failed owners, but I believe any major roster damage was limited in large part by the presence of our salary cap. The cap being in place has kept all of these teams from becoming the "have nots" and has also kept the "haves" from having too much.

[Mitch-Oilers]

I recently conducted a poll on the FBPRO Facebook page. I asked people what has kept them away from joining the PNFL.

Top responses:

- Don't understand the rules
- Prefer H2H
- Can't get the game to load

[Rich-League Officer]

"New Orleans, I see about five guys I'd resign and six I'd release. Probably draft a LB, a CB, and try to land a premeir HB--SF and Washington have one on the block. Shedding about 30M cap seems pretty straightforward, then it would be down to personal preference to fine tune the roster."


Hey, back off on the New Orleans roster, I'm busy over here

[Rich-League Officer]

"Philadelphia, would totally depend on how confident I am in my coaching abilities. This would be one that could either compete right away or be rebuilt."


I'm very confident in my coaching abilities but these Eagles just are not doing what I told them!