Following an exciting first round, we break down the favorite picks, most pleasant and biggest surprises, most under-appreciated pick, worst move and more.
Peyton Manning, Mario Williams, Mike Wallace and Carl Nicks headline an intriguing free agent class that can shift the balance of power this offseason.
The Eagles seemingly came out of nowhere to sign Nnamdi Asomugha as they eye a trip to the Super Bowl.
RealGM Search
By now you've read all kinds of doom and gloom about the lack of a new Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) between the NFL and its players. One of the ramifications is that the 2007 season will be played without a salary cap, and Union Chief Gene Upshaw has repeatedly declared that once the cap is gone, it isn't coming back. And while it will change the NFL to some extent, it's not something that most fans should worry about. In fact, it might just be a good thing for all involved.
The great fear is that no salary cap will create a system of haves and have nots amongst teams. And there's the potential for that to happen, especially in the short term. The 2007-2009 seasons are probably going to be vastly different than the current league, where pretty much any team can beat any other team and the difference between the 10-6 and 6-10 teams is only a player or two. The owners willing to pony up the mega dollars will have no limitations on their own extravagant spending. It will be the greatest time ever to be a free agent, especially at a position of need for the teams with the open checkbooks. Despite that short-term hiccup, I believe this orgy of free spending will end after a couple of seasons.
The reasons? There are three. First and foremost, overpaying for free agents has almost never worked in any sport. Because the time before a player hits free agency jumps from 4 years to 6 years, teams are going to be able to more easily replace from within and maneuver themselves to recover via the draft and preemptive trades. It's a similar concept to the "Moneyball" A's in baseball. The teams that can't afford the superstar free agents can load up on the cheaper, second tier guys and hungry young players on the way up, instead of paying top dollar for what the stars have already done. Everyone talks about baseball and its big divide between the big market teams and the lower-revenue clubs. But the team with the highest payroll hasn't won a World Series since the Blue Jays in 1993. The Yankees sneaked into the playoffs last season not because of their enormous contract stars, but because an unheralded rookie 2B and a career minor league pitcher both exploded onto the scene. The Yankees teams of the late 90s and 2000-02 were all great mainly because of homegrown talent like Derek Jeter, Bernie Williams, Mariano Rivera, and Jorge Posada were all in their primes. Ever since they started egregiously overspending for aged talent, they haven't been as successful. Other great examples of teams that tried to buy their way to greatness and failed, often spectacularly, include the late 90s Baltimore Orioles, the early 90s Mets, hockey's New York Rangers for the past decade, and the NBA's New York Knicks, the worst team in basketball depsite being almost 100% over the league's soft salary cap. It's the teams that spend wisely and find value for their dollars, plus scheming to make the most of the talent they've got, that are successful. The Steelers and Patriots use that model already, and they've captured 4 of the last 5 Super Bowls.
Another reason is simple economics. Many owners have bought in since the league received its multi-billion dollar cash infusion from the television networks. Several of them have also footed at least part of the bill for extravagant new stadiums with expensive luxuries and creature comforts. In short, they bought high. Because of different factors, not the least of which is the NFL moving several games to its own network which few people get on their cable packages, the next contract won't be so lucrative. The overall economy is no longer so robust, and ticket prices have hit (and some have blown beyond) the ceiling of what fans will pay to attend. Tax breaks for new stadiums range between improbable and "What are you smoking?". People like Dan Snyder (Redskins), Zygi Wilf (Vikings), and Steve Bisciotti (Ravens) all accumulated enough wealth to buy in at those prices for a reason--they're smart business people. Smart business people don't like to lose money, and a decline in TV contracts, higher employee costs, and relatively flat income from attendance and concessions means the only way to not lose money is to not spend so much. It seems simplistic and unrealistic, but these guys did not buy teams with the altruistic vision of losing money to put a winning product on the field. Good businessmen don't buy high and sell low, not when dealing with a $500 million+ investment.
The last reason deals with the competitiveness of football players themselves. Professional athletes have big egos, and the most successful have drives to be the best. That drive extends into the locker room. A team with several mega contracts will inevitably have a clash of egos. A divided locker room is not a winning locker room. There's also the pressure to perform, and the increased expectations with the increased salaries. Football players are excellent at policing their own, and a guy with a fat contract not pulling his weight is worth far less than an underpaid guy producing on every play. The players know that, coaches know that, and most front offices know that. It will only take a few prominent examples of outlandish contracts that flop before the teams begin to self-regulate. Because the NFL is much more league-oriented than baseball, and because NFL teams love to mimic the current success models (see the rise in 3-4 defenses and West Coast offenses), two or three seasons of experimenting and fiscal insanity will settle into more reasonable spending and more balanced locker rooms.
The NFL future is going to look a little different, and for a couple of years you'll probably see a complete loss of the current parity. But in the long term, losing the salary cap shouldn't drastically change the league. It might even raise the quality of play. You might wind up paying more to enjoy the NFL, but the league will remain a vibrant, entertaining, competitive, recognizable entity far beyond a couple of years of change.
