Salary Cap Poll

[Dan-Cincinnati]

Im definitely in favor of ending the cap. I don’t think you would get an answer from anyone that they quit or couldn’t handle the league because of it, but there is just so much other stuff to worry about and it adds up. It’s just unnecessary. The setup when I started here was actually pretty great. You built through trades and drafts, and you could basically keep ur team together. Now as others have said, it’s a constant debate about cutting guys. The thing is tho, nobody is cutting good players, they are letting them age first and then they are worthless, because as steve has said a few times, you aren’t giving ur studs to a rival for nothing. You would rather watch them be worthless. So it doesn’t add to free agency anyway. The point system was simple and easy. As someone who was excited about a cap, I admit I was wrong, and it’s just an annoyance at this point

[Steve-LA Chargers]

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

If we become H2H, I'm gone.

[Rich-League Officer]

Hey Steve, it would only be 3 hours per game

[Dean-Atlanta]

Some new owners might need some help, perhaps via team viewer, with getting the games installed, patched and set up to run as well as the process of cresting and saving game plans and profiles.

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.

[Xzlent1 - Seattle]

I would prefer ending the salary cap and using the point system only. If the points are allocated fairly, maybe based on team record or something similar, the team will have to make a decision on who to keep and who to let go. I not really a fan of the cap but would definitely be in favor of the point system.

Mark Seattle

[Steve-LA Chargers]

After reviewing this thread, it's obvious there are more people in the league in favor of getting rid of the cap than there are in favor of keeping it.

As much as I'd be fine with ending the salary system and going points only, my main concern is if it leads to future roster imbalances. My understanding is that we implemented it to create balanced rosters and realism. If we go points only, how do we ensure we have balance?

If we keep the salaries, maybe we only use the floor? It would motivate owners to use their XF and XT tags every offseason and ensure no team is full of only scrubs.

Even if we do this or go to points only, nothing stops the best owners from stockpiling the best talent and becoming unbeatable dynasties that last forever. There would need to be some kind of additional restriction to prevent this.

Maybe if we keep the salaries, we don't put a total salary cap. Instead, maybe we limit high priced players? For example, no team can have more than 6 players with salaries >= $9 million. Any tagged player and any player with a 'career contract' (i.e., signed through their final age protection year) is exempt from the count. You have until the start of the season to hit the player limit. This forces coaches to use their tags or their points for long contracts to protect expensive players.

As you can see from the below, if we go with a limit of 6 players with $9+ Million salaries, only three teams would need to cut/trade some of these high priced players or protect them with career long contracts or tags. This would be reduced by tags and new career contracts. The great thing is if you want to stack your team with expensive players, you have to spend the points to protect them.

*CHI (11 players - 2 protected via career contracts = 9)
CIN (8 players - 2 protected via career contracts = 6)
*WAS (7 players)
*NO (7 players)
LAC (5 players - 2 protected via career contracts = 3)
DET (5 players)
GB (5 players)
PHI (5 players - 2 protected via career contracts = 3)
CAR (4 players)
SF (4 players)
NYG (4 players)
SEA (4 players - 2 protected via career contracts = 2)
OAK (4 players)
JAX (4 players)
KC (3 players)
NE (3 players)
MIN (1 players - 1 protected via career contracts = 0)

[Steve-LA Chargers]

Forgot the Jets

NYJ (7 - 1 protected player with career contract = 6

We'd probably have to make the limit 4 or 5 to make this system work as intended.

Just an idea I came up with that I know all of you will hate vehemently.

[Mitch-Oilers]

@Steve - Unless I have misunderstood some things over the weekend with all the posts and emails, I believe it has been decided that there will not be a salary cap going forward. However, there will be a floor to ensure teams do not "tank".

[Justin-Chicago]

Steve, what is a “career contract?”

If we are going to go back to the cap in the future, which I understand I am currently the only owner in favor of (although at some point five voted to keep it) I think you have to give owners the ability to spend it how they want. If somebody wants stars they should be able to have stars but they have to balance them with scrubs. That’s actually a fun challenge, and where we have our unique opinions about, for example, which positions are most important.

If we’re considering the route of forced mediocrity then we should just all have identical rosters, no GM aspect, and put 100% of the focus on the field.

[Steve-LA Chargers]

Fine. I switch my vote to points only. I don’t care anymore.