DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**shumozar** · 04-25-2008, 10:30 PM

You have to work an agreement favorable to teams and players, neither will 100% like it. If you want to limit it total dollar, players will need shorter deals. This will cause better players to be paid sooner and the busts to be cut w/o killing cap.

It's a win win in my book.

Teams lose on the draft picks they have success with

And the Lions can stay out cap hell.

My suggestion should satisfy both the owners and the players.

Setting a maximum amount of years just makes both sides miserable. If a team drafts a player #1, they don't want him for just 2 years. If a player is drafted #1, he wants security for all the hard work he's put in the past 4+ years.

Setting a cap allows the team and player to negotiate other terms, such as length. However, it limits the amount of money a team will have to pay while still offering the financial security that a player is looking for.

04-25-2008, 10:30 PM	#14
shumozar Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 524 Senior Member	You have to work an agreement favorable to teams and players, neither will 100% like it. If you want to limit it total dollar, players will need shorter deals. This will cause better players to be paid sooner and the busts to be cut w/o killing cap. It's a win win in my book. Teams lose on the draft picks they have success with And the Lions can stay out cap hell. My suggestion should satisfy both the owners and the players. Setting a maximum amount of years just makes both sides miserable. If a team drafts a player #1, they don't want him for just 2 years. If a player is drafted #1, he wants security for all the hard work he's put in the past 4+ years. Setting a cap allows the team and player to negotiate other terms, such as length. However, it limits the amount of money a team will have to pay while still offering the financial security that a player is looking for.
	Quote