Cap to drop to 58 mil
View Single Post
08-29-2012, 05:41 PM
unholy acting talent
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Error 503
Originally Posted by
eva unit zero
So what you're saying is:
Reducing the cap from about $70m to about $58m is a reduction of about 1/6.
We currently have 30 teams of 23 players make a maximum of $70m per team, or about $3m per player. If we reduce that to $58m per team for 23 players, the average goes to about $2.5m. But reducing the cap by 1/6 doesn't include a reduction in the players' salaries or cap hits because, you know, they're still making just as much on the average.
Except they aren't. Oops.
Not sure why you're using 70M here; 57% of HHRs that are marked for the players dictate the cap mid point. If every team spent to the cap max, the players share would exceed 57% and they'd be forced to return a percentage back to the owners via escrow.
How again is that two separate concessions?
Just because the total share of the players revenue falls, doesn't mean
player has his salary reduced.
It's really not a hard concept. Without a rollback in salary, a player making 6M in a 70M cap will still make 6M in a 58M cap. With a proportionate rollback, said player would make ~5M.
How are "Each of 30 teams, having 23 players, can only spend 5/6 of what it would have been able to." and "Each player receives less money." two separate concessions?
They seem to be basically the same thing. Even if there aren't rollbacks, what happens to the 16 teams that are over that $58m mark?
You should really finish reading something before commenting. Like I already said, amnesty buyouts.
No rollback means current players wouldn't lose anything while future players would get the short end of the stick. And as history has shown, professional athletes are more then willing to pass the buck down the road.
Amnesty buyouts meanwhile see players get paid twice, once from the buyout, and again from their second contract.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Calculon