Losing Parity in the NFL

by Brian (DaBolts) on Oct 15, 2008 1:42 PM PDT Comment 5 comments

The NFL has maintained a competitive environment by limiting how much teams can spend on the payroll. That number has been going up so fast however that only eight teams are within 3 million dollars of it; only 12 within six million. In baseball the big market teams can be competitive every year, because they can outspend the competition up to 10 to 1 and pick up all the great free agents. Football has done much better at keeping all the teams competitive with a combination of the cap and allocating draft choices based on record. The cap was 85 million in 2005, 102 in 2006; 116 million this year; that's almost 50% over four years. If you look at payroll some teams, like the Titans, 49ers, Dolphins and Bills are in the 80-90 million range. The teams at the top (Panthers, Colts, Redskins & Rams) are coming out at 112-123 million. Teams can game that top 116 million with 'bonus' clauses that can't be achieved. Here are the teams ranked by payroll:

Titans	79
Dolphins	85
49ers	87
Bills	89
Jaguars	89
Saints	89
Bengals	92
Giants	95
Chargers	95
Bears	96
Texans	96
Raiders	96
Bucs	97
Lions	98
Browns	99
Jets	99
Steelers	99
Packers	101
Vikings	101
Cowboys	103
Seahawks	103
Eagles	104
Broncos	105
Chiefs	106
Cardinals	110
Ravens	110
Falcons	112
Rams	112
Patriots	113
Panthers	121
Redskins	123
Colts	126

So roughly half the teams are not even within 20 million of the cap, and the teams that spend the most are more than 50% higher than those that spend the least. The cap has gone so high that it is almost not a cap anymore, income is. Now the NFL has opted out of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, that means that there will be caps for 09 and 2010, but if nothing happens 2011 will be uncapped and the NFL could be headed to less competition. I'd hate to see the NFL go the way of baseball where the teams location has more to do with success than any other factor.

2 recs | Comment 5 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I love how

many of the higher payroll teams are some of the worst in the NFL.

For the record, this is not my attempt to imply subtly that Belichick is nothing without cheating and Tom Brady. Seriously. I am straight-out saying: Belichick is nothing without cheating and Tom Brady ~ DJ Gallo

by Sam (sdsuaztec4) on Oct 15, 2008 2:02 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't think

losing the salary cap will make much of a difference, as demonstrated by the wide range of salaries above. 2011 could be a crazy year if that happens. I guarantee that if there is no cap, either Oakland or San Fran loses their football team to another city.

We're gonna dazzle you with our super play.

by soulSD on Oct 15, 2008 2:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Shared pool of income

The TV deals the NFL has allow the teams to share revenues. So as long as teams are filthy rich they can keep parity alive.

I agree that cap is increasing to the point where teams can’t spend enough to keep up with it. What that means though is that they can keep their own players for as long as they want. Most free agents to be had are guys that teams don’t want for reasons other than money (too old, too injured, too troublesome, or not talented enough to make the 53). So teams really don’t have anywhere to spend the extra cap space.

Of course, what may happen is that the lack of a cap will create a new market that players may want to try out, so they’ll forgo early contract extensions in order to hit free agency. Maybe after these new market values are set then you will have the NFL of the 80s and early 90s where the NFC East can outspend anybody and win most of the championships.

Homer: Ohhhh, The Denver Broncos.
Marge: Whats wrong with the Denver Broncos?
Homer: Marge you just don't understand football.

by Wonko on Oct 15, 2008 3:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs