FanDuel - WFBC

December 06, 2005

Based on this comment: I thought I'd challenge my google-fu to see what kind of resources I could find related to the NFL salary cap. Here's a nice FAQ. Here's John Clayton's salary cap status, updated Nov 19. Here's a sortable/filterable USA Today database of player's salaries, unfortunately, it only goes from '01 through '04. Here's an interesting thesis on the effect of the salary cap and the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) on revenue and league parity (warning: 3.7Mb pdf totaling 121 pages). More in the comments...

posted by redsnare to football at 10:41 AM - 20 comments

More good general info and a slate analysis piece. Pertaining to the Eagles; based on this Free Agency link (warning: pop-ups) and the fact they're projected to be so far under the salary cap, it would seem they're ripe for some major off-season moves. Obviously, a necessary pick-up for them will be at WR (Reggie Wayne to Philly?)-- what other key positions will they be pursuing next year? -Snare

posted by redsnare at 10:50 AM on December 06

Damn, anyone who works so hard to find a posting deserves more than one comment, so here's mine.

posted by drevl at 12:38 PM on December 06

Football economics hurt my head.

posted by HATER 187 at 12:41 PM on December 06

I'll be bookmarking this thread for future reference. grum is probably trying to memorize it all before commenting.

posted by DrJohnEvans at 12:42 PM on December 06

unfortunately, it only goes from '01 through '04. Hmm, baseball goes up through 05. Maybe it'll be updated eventually.

posted by justgary at 12:44 PM on December 06

Damn, anyone who works so hard to find a posting deserves more than one comment, so here's mine. I'd say they worked harder than the Eagles players did last night. Oooooooooo! Yeah I went there, and you know what, you know what. I don't regret it! Ha ha! Go Bears!

posted by timdawg at 01:14 PM on December 06

BTW I still am confused as hell by the NFL salary cap but it appears to work better than most other sports

posted by timdawg at 01:15 PM on December 06

This is a part of the pro game that's woefully misunderstood and no less vital to putting a winning team on the field than good scouting or team chemistry or anything else. Good to have all this info in one place. Thanks for this. I'll be digesting this for a while.

posted by chicobangs at 01:41 PM on December 06

BTW the only reason I brought up the 'Iggles' is because of the question regarding their salary cap from the previous post I linked. I just felt all these links on the cap merited its own post. Personally, I hate the Eagles. I only care about having to hear from their fans at work and if they happen to pick up some playmakers in the off-season, the trash-talking will be incessant. timdawg, I think thoroughly understanding the salary cap takes at least a Bachelors Degree in Economics. I tried for a good 20 minutes to wrap my head around this article before finally deciding crunching numbers here at work was more exciting. I second your Go Bears! -Snare On preview - chicobangs- absolutely! Plus, it makes for good ammo when berating convincing folks that, yes, there actually is parity in the NFL.

posted by redsnare at 01:50 PM on December 06

Parity is OK, but how does that explain why the Cardinals are the most pathetic team on this planet - year, after year, after year.

posted by drevl at 02:37 PM on December 06

Yeah, I'll have to read the general info and slate analysis piece tonight when i get home from work. I'd love to now, but I think "the man" may not appreciate it. Just wait til I study up and take over for Millen in Detroit (tugging at collar). Maybe I'll just stay in billing.

posted by timdawg at 02:39 PM on December 06

How about Reggie Wayne to the Bears. Hell it would'nt matter who's throwing the ball then, I think a monkey could quarterback the team. Although I do like Orton a smidge better then a monkey.

posted by sadsadcubsfan at 02:44 PM on December 06

drevl: Piss-poor management? Wow, I just checked on the Cardinals historical record and, man, I knew they were pathetic, but, ouch! They've only had two winning seasons in the past twenty years. The last time they had back-to-back winning seasons was the mid-70's. Replace my question mark above with a period. Here's a list of their draft picks. Almost all have either fallen flat or the talented ones get the hell out of Arizona. Granted, a lot of that has to do with their extremely low attendance and, therefore, revenue stream. I've newfound respect for how pathetic the Cards are - - right up there with the Clippers. on preview - cubsfan - I'd be stunned if Wayne ended up going to Chicago. I don't think he wants to play second-man to anyone and Moose has the #1 spot locked even if he hasn't put up numbers like last year. -Snare

posted by redsnare at 02:58 PM on December 06

Granted, a lot of that has to do with their extremely low attendance and, therefore, revenue stream. Let's not put the cart before the horse. Generally, crappy teams lead to poor attendance, which leads to low revenue, which leads to crappy players, which leads to lower attendance, which leads to even crappier players. That seems to have been the pattern for the Cards. They busted in Chicago, which should be able to support two teams. After all, Chicagoans have supported two rather crappy baseball teams for, like, 2000 years. God Bless the people of Chitown. They have the patience of a saint. Also, St. Louis should have been able to support one team, just not one as lousy as the Cardinals. Therefore, your first comment must be the answer - Piss-poor management.

posted by drevl at 03:49 PM on December 06

Personally, I hate the Eagles. I only care about having to hear from their fans at work and if they happen to pick up some playmakers in the off-season, the trash-talking will be incessant. Hey,enjoy the silence while it lasts, hopefully they won't be talking much next year either.

posted by sumokenobi at 05:35 PM on December 06

Here's a list of their draft picks. Almost all have either fallen flat or the talented ones get the hell out of Arizona. Is it me? Or are the best three recent picks that are still there WRs? Does Millen's cousin work in the front office or something.

posted by sumokenobi at 05:37 PM on December 06

Let me state for the record that I HATE the salary cap. It is just a way to make sure that most of the teams have meaningful games late into the year, as a means to maximize revenue. It rewards being mediocre. I personally like watching high caliber teams rather than the mess we have now. This is why I will be rooting for the Colts come playoff time (Lions have no shot) And please don't get into the small market big market debate all of these owners have more money than all of us put together will see in a lifetime. Some, without the cap would choose to spend it on the product others ala Bidwell will pocket it. Just something to think about, which teams were more fun to watch, the 80's 90's 49ers and Cowboys, or the Superbowl winning Ravens and Bucs. SALARY CAP = COMMUNISM

posted by Fade222 at 06:03 PM on December 06

Did someone say "Salary Crap"?

posted by Tazz1 at 07:36 PM on December 06

drevl - That's exactly what I meant by that statement -- sorry for the confusion. Really, I don't see the Arizona market as lucrative for any sports (except maybe golf) but for some reason they still end up with these pro teams. sumo - the silence is oh-so-golden. why I will be rooting for the Colts come playoff time - How do you think the Colts became the team they are today? The salary cap and the CBA. You don't want to talk about the big vs. small markets but it's an integral part of professional sports. Really, though, all of this essentially rolls up to good management. The buck stops there. just a way to make sure that most of the teams have meaningful games late into the year - Would you rather have pointless games at the end of the year? No games at the end of the year? I, for one, actually like seeing football throughout December (besides pointless bowl games), especially when those games actually mean something.

posted by redsnare at 08:38 PM on December 06

Generally, crappy teams lead to poor attendance, which leads to low revenue, which leads to crappy players, which leads to lower attendance, which leads to even crappier players. Has anybody thought this about the Green Bay Packers? Living only fourty miles from there, and with the inability to get tickets notwithstanding, I wouldn't go to Lambeau Field right now if someone GAVE me a ticket. They caused their own problems with crappy MANAGEMENT. They still have a packed house for every game, but the fans own them, not an owner. Which probably explains all the crap. They allow an inept Board of Directors to control who coaches, who selects players, who stays and who goes. Although, granted, they have not been terrible for as long as the Cardinals have

posted by mrhockey at 05:02 AM on December 07

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.