No Cap after 09?

[39thebeast]

Its is looking more likely that there will be no cap after the 2009 season. Hopefully our ownership situation will be settled by then. How do you think this would effect the Rams ownership situation settled or not.

[Mooselini]

It looks like it might be that way. I think we should all pitch in $10 and donate it to the cap salary.


EDIT::

Wait, like no Cap for the Rams? or no cap at all...cuz that would be stupid...

[RamFan_Til_I_Die]

Originally Posted by 39thebeast

Its is looking more likely that there will be no cap after the 2009 season. Hopefully our ownership situation will be settled by then. How do you think this would effect the Rams ownership situation settled or not.

So after the 2009 season teams can spend all they want on salaries? Where did you hear that? Seems rediculous to me that they'd allow owners willing to spend to build All-Star teams.

[Goldenfleece]

I'd have to disagree about it looking likely. Last I heard teams were grumbling that with the cap increasing the way it has been, players are already making too much in free agency. I'm sure they'll hammer out a new CBA before a free agency period starts uncapped. Remember when the last CBA was about to expire and there was speculation about what it would mean? But sure enough they got a deal done.

[RamOfDenmark]

If that did happen I can't imagine that it would be good for the Rams. A lot of other teams are much bigger financially and would be able to scoop up all of our best players. The earning potential that we have in St. Louis is just not up there with the top teams in the league and after the lousy seasons we couldn't increase prices without people staying away. I believe a no cap season would lead to all our top free agents that year leaving. It would make more sense to base a team in a bigger market like Los Angeles in a no cap league as well.

[TekeRam]

Denmark makes a very very good point. If the owners and players union can't come to terms on a new deal before the 09 season, expect the owners to vote to eliminate the cap. Both large and small market teams would for one simple reason. With no cap, there's no cap penalties for cutting super high paid players. Small markets like Buffalo (and St. Louis) could cut players without fear of who they'd be able to sign going forward, though the uncapped league would look a whole lot like baseball, in that the rich will overpay talent, and the poor will "underpay", at least to todays standards. You'll see a $100 million difference in the payrolls of NE and Buffalo, I kid you not.

The only divisions I see as being competitive will be the NFC East(all large market teams), NFC South(for a time, Atlanta's the big market, but would have a lot of retooling to do), AFC North(Baltimore's the biggest market, but I think the other teams could keep it competative), AFC South(for a time, as they're all pretty close now, Houston's the larger market, but Indy would keep ahead I'd imagine). The west divisions are possible, as no one is in LA, but I think the Chargers and possibly the Seachickens or Whiners would end up as the continual champions.

Of course, this would take a couple seasons to completely play out the roster purging/building, but the issue with the last CBA was that if you kill the golden goose(salary cap), you are unlikely to ever get it back. After years of pretty good parity, what would the public do? Would they gravitate to the powerhouse teams, or would they stay fans of the lesser teams that don't have a shot ever, because all the quality players are on other teams? Last, I would imagine the Rams to immediately look to move back to LA, so that they can stay competitive, drawing upon the greater revenues of the SoCal region.