View Single Post
Old
10-29-2012, 12:27 PM
  #55
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestrel View Post
I tend to agree with you. The idea that the owners should control themselves is very naive, and way too simplified. They have to be controlled as a group, otherwise individual owners will have the choice of controlling themselves and not competing - or competing, and continuing to accelerate the problem. Controlling themselves as a group takes CBA type measures.
As long as the Salary Cap and the Salary Floor are considered to be within range of each other so that any team spending within that range should have a decent chance of being competitive, then I don't see why teams should have to spend beyond the Salary Floor if they can't really afford to. It's not as if other teams can spend limitlessly and buy up all the good players. Now of course if there are only a couple of teams spending to the Floor, then that leaves lots of other teams to be grabbing up all of the good players. But if the League has about half of its teams losing money, then there should be about half the teams trying to spend near to the Salary Floor.

The problem is that as owners they're putting their financial limitations aside and trying to get the upperhand with each. The Salary Floor therefore becomes something almost meaningless, because very few teams keep themselves at that level.

Of course, the other possibility is that the difference between the Salary Floor and Ceiling is just too much, and those teams that only spend to the Floor simply can't be competitive. If this is the case, then there simply must be less difference between the two, and therefore we're not hear debating a realistic scenario.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote