Re:
I've heard that. They want to re-arrange the cap so that vets can stay on board with the drafting team, or any long-term team, without as much of a cap hit. In previous decades, guys would be kept on the same team, but with Free Agency, and cap-savy Gm's, people manage the cap to buy or overbuy players. We'll see what it does to the NFL. Personally I think poor ownership is the biggest killer of a teams potential.
Look at Oakland.
Look at Washington.
Look at TEN.
Look at Houston.
Look at DET. Millen sux. And the ford Family is very lax. 4 top offensive players in a row for 3 years straight?
Poor drafting, poor scouting, poor management, poor hiring of Coaches (I'm not labeling Kubiak, or Fisher, but HOU didn't want BUSH, who is CLEARLY 100x better than the next RB that early as compared to Mario Williams. Mario isn't 100x better than the nearest DE, even if you need one. Get one in the second round. And Tenn got Young, a poor choice, IMO @ QB.)
Parity, although they force it, is like trying to distribute wealth evenly in the world, and hoping ALL people live the same. We know people in the US have access to anything they desire (for the most part), yet only 5% ever make it in a given year. They can enforce the rules, but they can't force teams to properly manage the team or the cap, or hire talented coaches, or let the GM's draftly properly.
My contention regarding the PATS is, though they let Branch go, they weren't going to TIE up 8+ million in a WR, ine ONE PLAYER, in a PLAYER that doesn't materially effect the teams success. Rather, they'd pay high dollars for the QB and the lines, because THATS where the respective offense and defeneses emerge from. The Pats also will remain GOOD, just like PHILLY has for a decade or decades to come, because they are about the "team." To think the Pats fall off would be to think that Philly could/can/will, too, since I'd seen them with LESS talent and depth than the Pats. Also, we will have MORE cap space should any values arise, on top of MANY picks in this upcoming draft. 2 firsts, a 5th for patrick cobbs to PITT, and other picks for the loss of givens to tenn. They will remain good for awhile, because they constantly bring guys through the system each year, and don't tie up big money in positions that can't materially effect a team. How many games has TO played where his stats were phenomenal, YET, the team lost? Probably half his games. Even in week 1, TO was good, but Dallas LOST, so what good is a guy like that if the REST of the Team can't get it together? Not to mention, Branch isn't as good as TO, not even close. He won't catch as many balls with Hasselback now. His success was that he was not viewed as a number one, so he was open. That, and he's small and hates going over the middle. He's a santana moss, minus the tough-ness.
A-Unit
