My outrage is more about the allocation, which is tied to how the NFL owners view players as expendable. This diminishes the product if some teams do it, but if the entire league does it, the diminished product is just hard to see. I think if the NFL simply lifted the hard cap, you would see a marked change. First of all, teams playing in older, less revenue generating stadiums are a huge detriment to the revenue of the league since the new CBA since the stadium revenue now goes into the player salary equation. If perhaps, they lifted the soft cap or made the local money private to the individual team's payroll, this might be some incentive for some of these teams to step up their local sponsorship and revenue creation. Lifting the hard cap would push the top salaries and push the middle salaries. There needs to be a minimum guranteed length over a certain dollar amount as well. Too much expendability and not enough trading and transfer. There's almost no development or continuity in the league. Its like this temp worker BS companies are trying to push on the public. It comes at the expense of the product. As popular as the NFL is, I think they are leaving money on the table in that sense of not investing in the actual players. The owners are having a great time using what they pocket though as well as credit off of the worth of the franchise. Jerry ouchea building massive real estate developments with hospitals and shyt out in Collin County off the strength of the Cowboys money and value. Why are the players that make that value possible worth so little in comparison. Yes, there are 53 players, but that doesn't mean they should be expendable. Moving the RAMS to LA should be a big boost to the pool. Raiders to Vegas, Minny and ATLs new stadium should boost that big time as well before the new TV deals even hit the skreets.
.
