downbeat87 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 do you think we could simply buy a sb? with unlimited options or whatever you want to call it, what do you think the redskins would really do? (twas talked about on riggo today or yesterday i believe) how do you all think the cowboys-redskins rivalry would be then?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inmate running the asylum Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 do you think we could simply buy a sb?with unlimited options or whatever you want to call it, what do you think the redskins would really do? (twas talked about on riggo today or yesterday i believe) how do you all think the cowboys-redskins rivalry would be then?!? Your topic is fine, but your thread title is misleading or at least confusing. The thread would create more interest, if you entitled it something like: "Can the Redskins or Snyder ever buy a Super Bowl?" Just a helpful suggestion. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinSabbath Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Dan Snyder VS Jerry Jones = Yankees V Red Sox (in baseball terms) An uncapped league means championships for the richest teams... $$ = best players. In my opinion, that removes the strategy required to own a team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinSabbath Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 No salary cap would also create a HUGE disparity of wealth in the league... The richest teams would basically be in a "league of their own." And even though the Redskins would be in the upper echelon of the wealthy teams, disparity is not something I look forward to. Think about it: If we were uncapped THIS YEAR, the Redskins would get Chad Johnson, Lance Briggs, Marcus Trufant, Randy Moss, Zach Thomas, and every other free agent worth consideration... IMO that is NOT how the league should operate. Without the cap, the NFL would NOT be competitive, and would become just as boring as baseball... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downbeat87 Posted February 28, 2008 Author Share Posted February 28, 2008 well its how it was back in the true glory days. im all for it. this is professional football, and teams should be aloud to try all they can to win... esp with all the money flying around the nfl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inmate running the asylum Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Without the cap, the NFL would NOT be competitive, and would become just as boring as baseball... Hmm. Is that why baseball is really boring? Funny, when I got out of high school and quit playing baseball myself, I found it very boring to watch on TV, whether it was competitive or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bedlamVR Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 well its how it was back in the true glory days. im all for it. this is professional football, and teams should be aloud to try all they can to win... esp with all the money flying around the nfl. The true glory days? You mean when the NFL lagged behind the collage game in popularity and baseball was Americas game ? The days when games would be cut short by networks to show re runs of feature films? When the Superbowl was rarely nationalized, let alone shown over the world ? The 1980s were great .. there was a hand full of teams who could win games it was great for us because we were one of the handful of teams but in the 80s the Squire often threatened to move the franchise out of DC because they were struggling financially . If the NFL is such a bad model why are other sports such as soccer, rugby etc etc moving closer and closer the the closed league salary capped model that we want to get rid of? I am not sure there was this much money flying around and there was not the massive disparity in team incomes . At the moment the Redskins are turning over twice the money as the next nearest rival and some teams even make a loss . With no cap there is no revenue sharing and some very historic teams WILL fold, franchises will be moving every other year. With no CBA there is no universal TV coverage, some teams may sign exclusive deals with clashing networks so you may not be able to watch say the Redskins Cowboys games in Washington. Without the cap there will be no such thing as "free" agency as the good teams will tie up the best players to lifetime contracts and the poor teams will become nothing but feeders . There is also the possibility of strikes and lock out all of which play into the hands of any start up league and if the NFL lets something like the USFL take hold by giving the fans what they really want close competitive football between even teams rather than the weekly blowout of the super rich over those scrapping for survival then eventually it will be a slow lingering death for leauge and within maybe 20 years the Redskins, Cowboys etc etc will just be names in History . This push to leave the CBA behind is driven by greed pure and simple, and most notably the greed of one Jerrah Jones. My belief is that this posturing will lead to a reworking rather than an abandonment of the cap with less revenue sharing, particularity to the NFLPA. What i think is interesting is the big revenue teams were the drivers to get the new deal a couple of years ago where as it was the small market teams dragging their heals, so you have to hope that the owners see the value of competitive compelling football in terms of the bottom line . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan since a Fetus Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Hmm. Is that why baseball is really boring? Funny, when I got out of high school and quit playing baseball myself, I found it very boring to watch on TV, whether it was competitive or not. I stopped playing baseball about the same time Angelos bought the O's. One of the two killed my interest in the game. I find the game incredibly boring these days. I would rather watch basketball, and I find that boring also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan since a Fetus Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I know the Skins will be able to buy anyone in uncapped football. However, I do not think this is in the league's best interest. I really enjoy the salary cap these days. Even if the Skins are not dominate. It really forces teams to compete and it handcuffs other teams from buying everyone great. It just makes the game interesting. I think the salary cap is one of the main reasons the NFL has done so well over the last several years. It keeps fans of team, without owners who spend, interested in the season because their team always has a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I disagree with that premise One, each team has a budget, no matter how much money they make. Granted the Redskins could have a higher budget, but I have a sneaking suspicion that Six Flags' stock falling, and the Redskins suddenly staying out of the FA market are somehow related These teams will still make hand over fist, and in baseball in the past few years small market teams have been competitive Chemistry and intangibles still matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfbovey Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Other teams wouldn't have a cap either. Problem isn't the cap anyway, it's who they choose to spend the money on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revallenjr Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 No salary cap would also create a HUGE disparity of wealth in the league... The richest teams would basically be in a "league of their own." And even though the Redskins would be in the upper echelon of the wealthy teams, disparity is not something I look forward to.Think about it: If we were uncapped THIS YEAR, the Redskins would get Chad Johnson, Lance Briggs, Marcus Trufant, Randy Moss, Zach Thomas, and every other free agent worth consideration... IMO that is NOT how the league should operate. Without the cap, the NFL would NOT be competitive, and would become just as boring as baseball... There are a couple of flaws in that assumption. Other teams like Dallas, Miami, New York, New England, want to win also, so I don't think that it is a guarentee that we are able to get those guys. Secondly Chad Johnson is not a FA. We would not be trading our future away, when we could possibly just pay to get a FA in here just as good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kvarlo12000 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Uncapped football would not be as fun as it is t now. Teams would not be able to go from worst to first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy8467 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I think that everybody is forgetting about Paul Allen, owner of the Seattle Seahawks. He dwarfs the rest of the owners in terms of wealth, with $18,000,000,000. The Seahags would be champions year in and year out, forget about the Cowboys and Redskins :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Clark Fan Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 No, b/c we will still have the same clowns calling the shots in the front office.....this management will never figure out how to win unless they man up and hire a gm........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coyote4848 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 If that happened, there would be only 20 - 25 teams left in the league......teams like Buffalo, Jacksonville, Carolina and Texans couldn't compete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I think that everybody is forgetting about Paul Allen, owner of the Seattle Seahawks. He dwarfs the rest of the owners in terms of wealth, with $18,000,000,000. The Seahags would be champions year in and year out, forget about the Cowboys and Redskins :laugh: No owner will spend one dime of his personal money on player salaries None do, none have in this day and age of multiple revenue sources Paul Allen will not be giving out 1 billion dollar contracts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottishskinsfan Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Soccer is my first sport and over here in Scotland, two teams dominate the league year in, year out. No other team stands a hope in hell of winning the league and it doesn't make for interesting viewing. Part of the draw to the NFL for me is that unpredictability that comes from any team being able to turn from the worst to the best in a matter of a few years, that's entirely down to the cap. Even if we did win the SB almost every year, I just couldn't enjoy it and the achievement certainly wouldn't be the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuraitengai Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 ok, didnt want to start a new thread when i could just put this question in here... but everyone is talking about 2011 and being an uncapped year. instead of going out and spending big bucks on all the big named FAs to try to buy a super bowl, could we use the uncapped year as a way to get out of our perennial cap hell? the thread in around the nfl where the bucs are 44 million under the cap and there was rumor that they would sign asante samuel and give him a huge roster bonus (around 20 million) this year since they have to much cap space. that would make the following years of his contract much lower in regards to the cap hit. so the question is could the redskins do something similar in the uncapped year? assuming snyder doesnt magically fix everything before then. could we convert all the guaranteed money for the high-priced contracts already on the books to roster bonuses that year? then the players still get the same amount of money, but their future cap hits are remarkably lower. in doing that, could we get out of our cap hell and be more like the teams that are 20-40 million under the cap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinSabbath Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 There are a couple of flaws in that assumption. Other teams like Dallas, Miami, New York, New England, want to win also, so I don't think that it is a guarentee that we are able to get those guys. Secondly Chad Johnson is not a FA. We would not be trading our future away, when we could possibly just pay to get a FA in here just as good. If there were no cap, the Bengals would not have to take a 10 mil cap hit by trading him. Hence, we would get him if there were no cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kansas-redskin Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Without the cap, the NFL would NOT be competitive, and would become just as boring as baseball...........I agree completely and to be perfectly honest, miss the days when we KNEW our team and they stayed OUR team. Never been a big free agency guy. Took us awhile to get to the SB but it was guys who were "Redskins" and now it's just hired guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truskinsfan18 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 NO, you simly cannot "buy" a Super Bowl team. To win you need chemistry between the players and good coaching. You can have all the superstars you want but if they can't play well together it wont matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins8921 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Here's what I said about this in the Redskins Myspace group: I think no salary cap would be retarded. It'd be like the MLB where teams are always trying to buy a championship(well Dan already does that, but it'd be even worse). Oh and for people that think this would be a huge advantage for us, there are lots of owners out there that are much richer than Dan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moviedude25 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 The answer to this is NO. It would buy the Seahawks a Superbowl, Paul Allen owns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squatch66 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 snyder would treat the skins like a madden franchise with the cap turned off. hopefully he would show some restraint otherwise folks are going to be paying 50 bucks a beer to pay the salaries of the players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.