The problem I see now is how the spoiled brats are deciding where they will play. I don't agree with the I want a new contract or trade me scenario that is being played way to much. If I was an owner I wouldn't give in He is still under contract and will be until he plays that final year out.
Originally Posted by: dhazer
My issue with that logic is that teams are allowed to use all the tools in their toolbox when they want to renegotiate, and fans have no issues with that.
But when players try to do that same thing (which they are equal parts of the contract) then fans complain.
I think both sides should be treated the same and locked into the contract, or both sides should be allowed to use all the different tools in their toolboxes. Either way, it should be equal.
But then again I believe all positions should have a cap on them. Like a qb is only allowed 18% of the total cap. It's getting to a point where the QB is taking up 30 to 35% of the cap space.
Originally Posted by: dhazer
I think that would be extremely too hard position to position, I think a better method would be to set a cap space limit on any one individual player period, so no single player could make more than 20% or 25% or a teams cap limit.
I think that might work.
I'd be very interested on where the Union would come down on a rule like that, obviously at first they would be against more restrictions period. And against it as QBs would hate it and QBs are the face of the players and teams, but also the QBs have not usually been the most involved with the Union... and non-QBs might love it as it'd be more money left for them.