It says here Players talking of $60 million luxury tax threshold
View Single Post
09-09-2004, 02:14 AM
Join Date: Feb 2003
Originally Posted by
Which is why the argument that a cap is equally unfair for everyone is crap. You can't equalize the abilty to scout or develop players.
Yes, that's the point - you can't equalize that ability, and how would that be possible anyway? You want team quality to be based more on scouting/development/management than the ability to shell out more money for players than other teams. It isn't perfect, but it makes it
fair than the current system. And it would definitely
player salaries, which is the other goal we want.
Let me simplify this a bit so you'll understand. Imagine each team's budget represented as a glass. The way it is now, some glasses (New York, Detroit, Colorado, Toronto) are way bigger than others, so they're able to hold more liquid (salary). That isn't fair.
In a cap system, every team's "glass" would be exactly the same size, which is fair (or I should say more fair than it is now). Because even if the team offered the $8 mil + 1 to the player, they'd be filling their
cap and would be most likely out of the running for other expensive players. Not like now where you can have teams like New York and Colarado go on basically "shopping sprees" and pick up multiple FAs for $6 mil here, $8 mil there, etc...
Last edited by Scheme: 09-09-2004 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Scheme