Should QB Compensation Be Carved Out of the Salary Cap?

[Matt_In_NH]

Need more details but I don’t get what problem this solves.  Would qb have no cap?  what does a carve out mean?  That basically eliminates the cap which is already able to be manipulated significantly.  

Depending on the details I ca not see the owners interested.  Revenues are split 50/50. What would the new ratio be?

 

qbs have always had a bigger percentage of the cap.  Has the qb as a percentage of the cap gone up?

 

The unintended consequence   is the rich owners would have the best qbs.  Guys would force their way out like Watson did in Houston. 

 

10 hours ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

I think it is a great idea but I would modify it.  Have a cap that is 52+1. You can designate any player as the +1 that is exempt from the salary cap calculation.  You coudl even put a tax on that +1 if you wanted to and spread that money around the league.  There should not be this degree of a penalty for drafting and developing a franchise QB.  

Why not just eliminate the cap?

Edited February 1, 2023 by Matt_In_NH

[Matt_In_NH]

11 hours ago, 4th&long said:

I don’t know about that but the owners better loosen up that cap. I have never tuned into a game, went to the stadium or bought a jersey because of the owner in the box!

Works for who? After waiting 20 years to get this roster built now we get to watch it get broken up because of the salary cap?

Every team has to decide where to spend their resources.  The GM has to decide if giving piles of money to good but not great players is the right thing.  They can decide not to and then have more resources.   Teams with the best qbs have been winning the Super Bowl with the system as is.  Yes you have to make decisions on players like trading tyreek  hill understanding what that really means to your chances of going to the Super Bowl.   

Edited February 1, 2023 by Matt_In_NH

[Buddo]

The best idea is to have the QB salary account for no more than a given percentage of the cap.

 

I don’t think it can happen though. The NFLPA wouldn’t stand for it, for one thing, and for another, it makes there be little differentiation between franchise QBs.

 

So Allen, Burrow, Mahomes etc. would all end up on the same money eventually.

 

While many Owners and Front Offices could be in favour of it, as it would make their lives easier, I don’t believe the NFL as an entity would want it, as the constant speculation regarding QBs and their contracts, is part of the media grist for the mill, that keeps the game in the spotlight all the year round.

[PatsFanNH]

13 hours ago, st pete gogolak said:

Full disclosure.  I've been a Bills fan since 1965 so I'm obviously biased about this because if it somehow came to pass it would benefit the Bills enormously.  That said, QB compensation in the NFL and how it distorts the salary cap is, if not unfair, frankly bizarre and unlike any other sport that maintains a salary cap.  That's because QB compensation is so dramatically higher than any other position.  That's not true in basketball or hockey.  Yes, you pay your superstars but McDavid isn't making double or triple every single one of his teammates.  

 

You're punished for selecting a QB who turns into a franchise QB.  That's if you do it right.  Heaven help you if you pay a QB that lands you in cap purgatory (Prescott, Cousins) or, even worse, one that lands you in cap hell (Wilson).  

 

A carve out probably lets the Raiders keep Carr.  I don't know what the solution is but you shouldn't have to gut your team because you found your franchise quarterback.  

Your beginning premise is wrong. Saying other leagues don’t have one player eating up their salary cap.  The difference is how they work.. Basketball has the Bird exceptions rule.. which is dumb! baseball just makes you pay a tax but is also a dying sport. The only other league with a true salary cap is Hockey.  The Bruins this year will use the equivalent in salary cap space to keep Pasta as the Bills did to keep Allen. You just have to make it work around your key player in any sport.

[ArtVandalay]

This is by far the most ridiculous idea I've ever heard. 

 

We have a good QB so let's now change the rules in our favor. 

 

Also you don't need to "gut" your team, you just can't throw $15MM per year at a mediocre tight ends and you probably shouldn't exercise $10MM 5th year options on undersized average DTs.

[Bill from NYC]

12 hours ago, 4th&long said:

I don’t know about that but the owners better loosen up that cap. I have never tuned into a game, went to the stadium or bought a jersey because of the owner in the box!

Works for who? After waiting 20 years to get this roster built now we get to watch it get broken up because of the salary cap?

And who is to blame for that? The league? No. The present and past Bills administrations are at fault.

 

Other teams look OK wrt the cap, especially those that are able to draft better than 12 year old kids with a computer. Yes, the teams that know how to draft are on top, not a team that sends McClappy out there to grab the nearest 1st round cornerback, DT, or LB, even in he has to trade up!

 

If QBs didn't count against the cap, players like Josh would command 100 million per season. If you owned an NFL Franchise, woold you like to pay 100 million to a QB after he gets injured, which they all do?

 

The system isn't perfect but it is pretty damn good.

 

Jmo.

 

 

 

[Freak-O]

Personally I don’t understand why 10 million dollars per year is not enough money for anyone. How much damn stuff do you need? And it’s not like they can’t afford good financial advisors. Insisting on being paid 35 million per year instead of 30 or whatever is just greedy. 

[Matt_In_NH]

33 minutes ago, ArtVandalay said:

This is by far the most ridiculous idea I've ever heard. 

You must have been born yesterday

[T master]

16 hours ago, st pete gogolak said:

Full disclosure.  I've been a Bills fan since 1965 so I'm obviously biased about this because if it somehow came to pass it would benefit the Bills enormously.  That said, QB compensation in the NFL and how it distorts the salary cap is, if not unfair, frankly bizarre and unlike any other sport that maintains a salary cap.  That's because QB compensation is so dramatically higher than any other position.  That's not true in basketball or hockey.  Yes, you pay your superstars but McDavid isn't making double or triple every single one of his teammates.  

 

You're punished for selecting a QB who turns into a franchise QB.  That's if you do it right.  Heaven help you if you pay a QB that lands you in cap purgatory (Prescott, Cousins) or, even worse, one that lands you in cap hell (Wilson).  

 

A carve out probably lets the Raiders keep Carr.  I don't know what the solution is but you shouldn't have to gut your team because you found your franchise quarterback.  

 

FA - IMHO has put the NFL in this place ! Like the rookie cap that they put in place a over 10 years ago after Bradford signed a rookie contract of $76 million i feel would be a good thing for the QB position because as you said it would allow teams to keep more of their core players for a longer period of time .

 

I didn't like it when FA came about because since then there have been very few teams that could compete like the Bills of the 90's or the Cowboys - Steelers or other teams that had long runs with good players .

 

If FA wasn't implemented Bruce, Thurman, Andre, & others would have all retired as Bills instead of being let go which totally sucked after watching them give so much to the Bills . But today's NFL is all about the money & i don't see that changing anytime soon ...

[Big Turk]

It's what helps drive parity and larger contracts every year in Free Agency(since huge QB contracts force you to not be able to keep good players at other positions), so it is exactly the way the NFL and NFLPA want it to work.

Edited February 1, 2023 by Big Turk

[essential]

i don't necessarily think QB compensation alone should be carved out of the salary cap, but i've said this for many years that the salary cap should dual tiered.  for example:

 

2023 salary cap tier 1: $224.8 million

2023 salary cap tier 2: $232.4 million (+$7.6m)

 

how do i think this should work?  tier 1 functions exactly like it does now.  the tier 2 bonus money can only be allocated to players you drafted.  so, we'd have up to $7.6 million in 2023 to allot toward deals for Edmunds, or to pay part of Josh's contract for 2023, however the Bills would choose to divvy it up.  i'm not sure how the NFL would calculate the tier 2 bonus money, i'm sure they would devise some complicated formula, but either way it would reward good drafting, helping teams keep their own, and could be used for any position.

 

Edited February 1, 2023 by essential

[BADOLBILZ]

 

I love how fans want to spend owners money above and beyond the collectively bargained levels.

 

The cap is there for a reason.........to keep the league competitive despite HUGE market discrepancies from team to team.........so creating a new variable where one team can spend $50M more at their discretion creates a competitive balance issue.

 

Small markets like Buffalo, Cinci and KC don't want to end up like they would be(or are) in MLB (where my Yankees can have a winning record for 30 straight seasons).

 

The system works great right now.........teams who luck into great QB's should have to pay a price to encourage competitive balance.    And yes, while I give the Bills massive amounts of credit for taking the chance on Allen, they got lucky that he is this good.

[Don Otreply]

No, the owners should just be smart and not pay these QBs so much that it keeps their teams from being successful. Oh, by the way, parody is highly over rated, 

[The Frankish Reich]

17 hours ago, Nextmanup said:

the day will come when the QB and a few key players make ALL the money, and everyone else makes league minimum.

Good point. Think about the Bills: our O line play was terrible. Objectively below replacement level as a group, excepting Dawkins. There is a good argument to be made that 4 league minimum salary guys would have performed about as well. And there are teams that will be doing exactly that. It is the moneyball era, NFL version. A few star/highly conpensated players (mostly QB, and then some mix of WR, edge rusher, primo CB) and minimize salary commitments everywhere else. 

[Don Otreply]

4 hours ago, Freak-O said:

Personally I don’t understand why 10 million dollars per year is not enough money for anyone. How much damn stuff do you need? And it’s not like they can’t afford good financial advisors. Insisting on being paid 35 million per year instead of 30 or whatever is just greedy. 

This is America, where being filthy rich and greedy as possible is the American way, “I got mine, so screw you”, it the one percenters mantra, 

[Florida Bills Fanatic]

The real issue is that QB's take up a disproportionate percentage of a team's cap.  This causes much of a team's roster to be paid significantly less.  I'm surprised that there isn't more friction within the NFLPA about wage disparity.  If there were limits on the cap percentage that could be paid to any position, players throughout the roster would benefit.  In a traditional unionized environment, improved compensation equity is a basic principle.  I don't believe the owners care one way or the other because they have to pay the same amount in salaries regardless of who receives the money.

[Alphadawg7]

I think there are ways it could be balanced more, but a separate cap isn’t the answer.  It greatly benefits teams with great QBs while doing nothing for teams with rookie contract QBs or lower tier QBs.  

[skibum]

No, then the richest teams would be the only ones with top QBs, and small-market teams that struggle to meet cap-level payroll already would never have a shot. 

 

I could see a 'max contract' type of scenario working, though. 

1 hour ago, Florida Bills Fanatic said:

The real issue is that QB's take up a disproportionate percentage of a team's cap.  This causes much of a team's roster to be paid significantly less.  I'm surprised that there isn't more friction within the NFLPA about wage disparity.  If there were limits on the cap percentage that could be paid to any position, players throughout the roster would benefit.  In a traditional unionized environment, improved compensation equity is a basic principle.  I don't believe the owners care one way or the other because they have to pay the same amount in salaries regardless of who receives the money.

Good point about the NFLPA, especially considering this negatively impacts the vast majority of players. They should be doing something to address this.

[Billz4ever]

19 hours ago, st pete gogolak said:

Full disclosure.  I've been a Bills fan since 1965 so I'm obviously biased about this because if it somehow came to pass it would benefit the Bills enormously.  That said, QB compensation in the NFL and how it distorts the salary cap is, if not unfair, frankly bizarre and unlike any other sport that maintains a salary cap.  That's because QB compensation is so dramatically higher than any other position.  That's not true in basketball or hockey.  Yes, you pay your superstars but McDavid isn't making double or triple every single one of his teammates.  

 

You're punished for selecting a QB who turns into a franchise QB.  That's if you do it right.  Heaven help you if you pay a QB that lands you in cap purgatory (Prescott, Cousins) or, even worse, one that lands you in cap hell (Wilson).  

 

A carve out probably lets the Raiders keep Carr.  I don't know what the solution is but you shouldn't have to gut your team because you found your franchise quarterback.  

That would only create a rich get richer scenario because it would allow rich owners to pay out the nose to keep them loaded at the QB position and still have the entire cap to use for the rest of the team.

 

We don't need to turn the Cowboys into the New York Yankees of the NFL.

[Call_Of_Ktulu]

The GM has 3 major hurdles to overcome. The highest level of difficulty from top to bottom.

 

1. After signing your franchise QB you have to draft well and make little to no mistakes.

 

2. Draft your franchise QB

 

3. Sign your franchise QB to a deal that is fair and doesn’t handicap the team.

 

I think The Bean has done 2 and 3 perfectly but is struggling with number 1.

 

 

[DJB]

19 hours ago, Nextmanup said:

I've often thought about having a separate salary cap or some type of similar control in the league, JUST for the Quarterback position.

 

You would think the NFLPA would love that idea, because the day will come when the QB and a few key players make ALL the money, and everyone else makes league minimum.

 

 

So basically the CFL

[TheFunPolice]

it's a bad idea and makes having a top tier QB even more of a competitive advantage.

 

So now, not only do I have a Mahomes/Allen type QB but I ALSO can disregard his huge salary and stack the rest of my roster.

 

Yes, I know you can do the same with Kirk Cousins... Good luck competing! 

Edited February 1, 2023 by TheFunPolice

[hjnick]

I always liked the idea of a subsidy of the QB position.

 

Basically you could deduct lets say the first 15Mil of the QB position from the salary cap.

 

So if you have 3 QBs on the roster and they are 40, 10, and 5 Mil cost (or 55Mil total), the cap hit would be 55-15 = 40 Mil.

 

And if you are under the 15Mil cost, then you can use the excess on other positions.

[Spiderweb]

21 hours ago, st pete gogolak said:

Full disclosure.  I've been a Bills fan since 1965 so I'm obviously biased about this because if it somehow came to pass it would benefit the Bills enormously.  That said, QB compensation in the NFL and how it distorts the salary cap is, if not unfair, frankly bizarre and unlike any other sport that maintains a salary cap.  That's because QB compensation is so dramatically higher than any other position.  That's not true in basketball or hockey.  Yes, you pay your superstars but McDavid isn't making double or triple every single one of his teammates.  

 

You're punished for selecting a QB who turns into a franchise QB.  That's if you do it right.  Heaven help you if you pay a QB that lands you in cap purgatory (Prescott, Cousins) or, even worse, one that lands you in cap hell (Wilson).  

 

A carve out probably lets the Raiders keep Carr.  I don't know what the solution is but you shouldn't have to gut your team because you found your franchise quarterback.  

The reason for the cap, in part anyway, was to enhance competition. Big market teams not able to outbid small market teams for players. If anything, there could or should be a cap on how much anyone counts against the cap, but the NFLPA would never go for that.

[Fleezoid]

Why not have an individual maximum salary? There's a league minimum player salary. Why not have a league maximum player salary. And not different for each position, just a player maximum salary. You could have 1 player at the max, or multiple, which would change how the rest is divvied up.

[4th&long]

On 2/1/2023 at 7:14 AM, Bill from NYC said:

And who is to blame for that? The league? No. The present and past Bills administrations are at fault.

 

Other teams look OK wrt the cap, especially those that are able to draft better than 12 year old kids with a computer. Yes, the teams that know how to draft are on top, not a team that sends McClappy out there to grab the nearest 1st round cornerback, DT, or LB, even in he has to trade up!

 

If QBs didn't count against the cap, players like Josh would command 100 million per season. If you owned an NFL Franchise, woold you like to pay 100 million to a QB after he gets injured, which they all do?

 

The system isn't perfect but it is pretty damn good.

 

Jmo.

 

 

 

I didn’t say to take the qb out of the cap. I said they better loosen it up a little. The cap is not going up as fast as players salaries. As a fan I don’t care about the cap or what the owners and players make $. I care about putting together a winning team. We finally get a good team put together and we have to watch it get broken up because of the cap? I’m not ok with that.

 

 Again. I don’t tune into a game, go to a game or buy a jersey because of the owners. 

[Simon Says]

On 1/31/2023 at 5:54 PM, Nextmanup said:

I've often thought about having a separate salary cap or some type of similar control in the league, JUST for the Quarterback position.

 

You would think the NFLPA would love that idea, because the day will come when the QB and a few key players make ALL the money, and everyone else makes league minimum.

 

 

The players VOTE on the CBA,dont they? No way in hell they allow this to happen. Why would a linebackerbor punter vote for separate, huge salaries for QBs?More likely the should players demand a bigger cut to share among ALL pkauers with significant cap increases. 

[Simon Says]

On 1/31/2023 at 6:01 PM, st pete gogolak said:

That's just the point.  Is that system a fair system?  What if in the NHL goalies made four times what any other player made?  You could field a good team with a crap goalie or a great goalie with a crap team.  Who would want a system like that?

It's a ridiculous idea. 

If this ever came up for a Players Union vote all the Linemen would stand up and say "how will you protect that even BIGGER Quarterback investment with scab linemen? Were going on strike".

Followed by the receivers who will ask "who will the grossly over-paid QBs throw to when WE go on strike?'

Then the pass rushers, CBS and everyone else says...'we're also on strike".

The Billion dollar media deals would be cancelled because of the lack of product. 

On 1/31/2023 at 6:23 PM, 4th&long said:

I don’t know about that but the owners better loosen up that cap. I have never tuned into a game, went to the stadium or bought a jersey because of the owner in the box!

Works for who? After waiting 20 years to get this roster built now we get to watch it get broken up because of the salary cap?

Thats the NFL process, Pegulas better deal with it

[Bill from NYC]

33 minutes ago, 4th&long said:

I didn’t say to take the qb out of the cap. I said they better loosen it up a little. The cap is not going up as fast as players salaries. As a fan I don’t care about the cap or what the owners and players make $. I care about putting together a winning team. We finally get a good team put together and we have to watch it get broken up because of the cap? I’m not ok with that.

 

 Again. I don’t tune into a game, go to a game or buy a jersey because of the owners. 

I get what you are saying but remember when the NFLPA insisted on cap adjustments? Iirc they wanted minimums for vets and a rookie cap. The thing is, the QBs took virtually all of the money that was saved from the rookie cap.

 

I am merely saying that if they didn't count towards the cap, NFL QBs would likely be the highest paid players in all of sports, and owners would be furious watching the 75-100 million dollar per season QB out for the season with an injury which happens often.

 

And do remember, people watch and attend games and buy jerseys because of QBs, not offensive guards.

 

[Cheektowaga Chad]

I think a QB carve out will eventually happen but won't be for a while

 

Things I think will bring about a QB carve are the cap stagnating or if teams actually stop spending money and term on mediocre/bad qbs and start to churn rookie qbs on rookie contracts 

 

With covid the cap has stagnated slightly and now with the 49ers with the success of Brock purdy might be the start of churning qbs 

[Simon Says]

On 1/31/2023 at 7:09 PM, Success said:

Almost everything the NFL does has a goal of parity.

 

It's fair the way it is.  You want an elite QB?  Cool - but you'll have to cut corners elsewhere. Can't find an elite QB?  Spend your money on other impact players.  

 

Theoretically, it gives every team a chance to contend.

 

But we're in good shape. JA's contract will seem cheap the year after next.

 

Draft a good,NFL-ready QB and get the most from him while he is on his rookie deal

On 1/31/2023 at 11:22 PM, Rew said:

What about keeping the current system, but adding a rule that the top cap hit can only be 10x (or 20x or whatever the right number is)  the median cap hit?  Or just adding a hard limit that a single player may only account for 20% of the cap before hitting penalties.  

How would a "cap tax " work in the NFL? The cap exists to ensure parity so that needs to be maintained 

On 2/1/2023 at 10:46 AM, T master said:

 

FA - IMHO has put the NFL in this place ! Like the rookie cap that they put in place a over 10 years ago after Bradford signed a rookie contract of $76 million i feel would be a good thing for the QB position because as you said it would allow teams to keep more of their core players for a longer period of time .

 

I didn't like it when FA came about because since then there have been very few teams that could compete like the Bills of the 90's or the Cowboys - Steelers or other teams that had long runs with good players .

 

If FA wasn't implemented Bruce, Thurman, Andre, & others would have all retired as Bills instead of being let go which totally sucked after watching them give so much to the Bills . But today's NFL is all about the money & i don't see that changing anytime soon ...

Yeah, I want to see you convince NFL PLAYERS to give up their right to free agency.

[T master]

On 2/2/2023 at 11:53 AM, Herb Nightly said:

Draft a good,NFL-ready QB and get the most from him while he is on his rookie deal

How would a "cap tax " work in the NFL? The cap exists to ensure parity so that needs to be maintained 

Yeah, I want to see you convince NFL PLAYERS to give up their right to free agency.

 

Well we all know that it will never happen because money is the only motivating reason they play any more .

[Mr. WEO]

this is a solution in search of a problem.

 

Now more than ever, teams are experiencing unprecedented success with super cheap franchise QBs on rookie contracts.  That gives you 4-5 years to figure out how to pay the guy's second contract.  maybe win a ring in the interim.

[Albany,n.y.]

On 2/1/2023 at 5:39 PM, Fleezoid said:

Why not have an individual maximum salary? There's a league minimum player salary. Why not have a league maximum player salary. And not different for each position, just a player maximum salary. You could have 1 player at the max, or multiple, which would change how the rest is divvied up.

It's against the law.  They would lose in court every time.  

[Low Positive]

2 minutes ago, Albany,n.y. said:

It's against the law.  They would lose in court every time.  

I don’t know about that. The NBA has max contracts.

[Albany,n.y.]

3 minutes ago, FrenchConnection said:

I don’t know about that. The NBA has max contracts.

League limits & salary caps have to be approved by the players unions.  The NBA players agreed to this.  I doubt the NFL players would, even though they let the salary cap work.  The NFL rosters are 4-5 times the NBA rosters.  

As long as the courts say that NFL teams are in competition with each other, they are not permitted to fix a maximum salary without an agreement with the players association.  https://www.justice.gov/atr/file/903511/download

Agreements among employers not to recruit certain employees or
not to compete on terms of compensation are illegal.

An HR professional should avoid entering into agreements regarding terms of
employment with firms that compete to hire employees. It does not matter
whether the agreement is informal or formal, written or unwritten, spoken or
unspoken.
An individual likely is breaking the antitrust laws if he or she:
• agrees with individual(s) at another company about employee
salary or other terms of compensation, either at a specific level or
within a range (so-called wage-fixing agreements), or
• agrees with individual(s) at another company to refuse to solicit or
hire that other company’s employees (so-called “no poaching”
agreements).
Even if an individual does not agree orally or in writing to limit employee
compensation or recruiting, other circumstances – such as evidence of
discussions and parallel behavior – may lead to an inference that the
individual has agreed to do so.
Naked wage-fixing or no-poaching agreements among employers, whether
entered into directly or through a third-party intermediary, are per se illegal
under the antitrust laws. That means that if the agreement is separate from
or not reasonably necessary to a larger legitimate collaboration between the
employers, the agreement is deemed illegal without any inquiry into its
competitive effects. Legitimate joint ventures (including, for example,
appropriate shared use of facilities) are not considered per se illegal under
the antitrust laws.
 

 

[st pete gogolak]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

this is a solution in search of a problem.

 

Now more than ever, teams are experiencing unprecedented success with super cheap franchise QBs on rookie contracts.  That gives you 4-5 years to figure out how to pay the guy's second contract.  maybe win a ring in the interim.

No, it's an issue in search of a solution.  You certainly don't want the NFL to devolve into the NHL where teams are openly tanking to obtain the next Gretzky, McDavid or Bedard.  At least in the NHL you have a lottery to potentially prevent a successful tank (looking at you, Buffalo Sabres).  

 

Plus, recent Super Bowl history doesn't support your thesis.  In the last ten years, there are maybe two QB's who won Super Bowls on rookie deals.  Mahones winning over SF.  KC is back this year when Mahones isn't on his rookie deal, so what does that prove?  Maybe that if your QB HC and GM are good enough it doesn't matter if your QB is on his rookie deal.  Wilson winning when Legion of Doom destroyed the Broncos.  Yes, that fits.  Otherwise, it's mostly Brady, Manning and Stafford at the tail end of their careers.

 

The original point of the post is that there isn't any other sport with a salary cap or luxury tax where one position knocks the whole system totally out of whack other than QB in the NFL.  The solution can't be tanking to hit on a franchise QB and then sign a bunch of free agents to win a Super Bowl on the QB's rookie deal.  That's nuts.

[Chaos]

On 2/1/2023 at 2:21 PM, TheFunPolice said:

it's a bad idea and makes having a top tier QB even more of a competitive advantage.

 

So now, not only do I have a Mahomes/Allen type QB but I ALSO can disregard his huge salary and stack the rest of my roster.

 

Yes, I know you can do the same with Kirk Cousins... Good luck competing! 

You are correct. If you were too pursue this idea, why have a salary cap at all. 

[Orlando Tim]

As long as we have Josh I agree with the OP but once he is gone that kind of rule is dumb.😄

[LOVEMESOMEBILLS]

On 1/31/2023 at 7:07 PM, BUFFALOBART said:

Jeez, just get rid of the cap, but the owners, would go into convulsions.

 

 Oh yeah. Late 80s -1993 Bills teams all over again! We take a HOFer here and a HOFer there, oh you have 3 All-Pros come on over. Uncharacteristically Ralph was spending money like crazy in those years trying to win a title.