Look at this year when everyone thought that teams were going to spend out of control. They still have to budget accordingly when you’re talking about a 65 man roster.

The reason it doesn’t work in the MLB (what, 25 player roster) and NBA (12 player roster) is because there are less players and still a lot of money to go around. Teams can afford to spend ridiculous guaranteed dollar amounts on players in these leagues where they’d be out of business doing it with 65 players in the NFL.

Thank the Lord the Ravens tendered Yanda…he is very underrated as a guard and can also fill in at RT. Clayton also got a 2nd round tender…I know Jimmy is praying that some teams signs him to an offer sheet, taking him off our hands and giving us a 2nd round pick.

Woodman – I agree that there will be some cheap-o owners out there that will cut salary and put a garbage product out on the field. Like I said in the blog, some owners will take a nod from Donald Sterling.

Beagle – I generally agree that the NFL would probably handle a non-capped league much better than MLB. The best thing about NFL deals is that they are for the most part not guaranteed. I mean players get guaranteed money, but the contracts as a whole are not…No risk of signing the football equivalent to Albert Belle. I mean you’ll take a cap hit, but you won’t pay a bum to sit on the couch.

GREAT article. The best you’ve written yet. Short, sweet, and to the point. And on a legit subject too.

On topic, there are two HUGE differences between baseball and football.

1. Football is a combat sport, and injuries play a FAR bigger role than they do in baseball. As such, the risk-premium to over-paying for bums (like Danny-boy did with the likes of Jason Taylor, Fat Albert, and others) is much higher in the NFL. Small-market teams can be more competitive in the NFL even IF they sign name-brand players, because a lot of those high-priced players may not play the full 16-game schedule.

2. Baseball playes a 6-month schedule, whereas there are only 8 home games in the NFL. A place like Pittsburgh can pack 70-80K fans into a stadium for 8 Sundays a year; it’s WAY harder to fill a baseball stadium (even for a perennial powerhouse) for a full slate of 81 games per year.

I’m not saying the NFL shouldn’t have a salary cap; I think the jury is IN on a cap being beneficial to the league. But I don’t think it will have as adverse an effect as it has had in baseball.

Thanks for the article…great insight. My main concern is the small market teams who are forced to spend a minimum amount of money under the current salary structure will decide to spend way less under an uncapped collective bargaining agreement. I don’t worry about the big market teams overspending relative to their peers, I worry that the bottom 10 small market teams that will spend next to nothing and field the equivalent to the Pittsburgh Pirates every year. Part of what makes the NFL great is the parity amongst the 32 teams. I don’t mind the NFL being a bit top heavy to give the league some marquee Champions. But we can’t have a dozen teams that truly can’t compete at a legit NFL level. That would be a crime.

C’mon Ravens….bring on Boldin!!! Because we haven’t heard a peep out of the Ravens front office regarding Boldin, you know they are interested!!