The NBA Has A Salary Cap, YET!!!

Since 1996, there have only been 3 different NBA champions: Chicago Bulls, San Antonio Spurs, and Los Angeles Lakers.

In baseball, since 1996, there have been 4 different World Series champions: NY Yankees, Florida Marlins, Arizona Diamondbacks, and Anaheim Angels.

In fact, if you go back to 1991, there have only been 4 different NBA champions: Chicago Bulls, Houston Rockets, San Antonio Spurs and LA Lakers.

YET, since 1991, baseball has had 7 different champions: Minnesota Twins, Toronto Blue Jays, Atlanta Braves, NY Yankees, Florida Marlins, Arizona Diamondbacks, and Anaheim Angels.

So, you see having a salary cap does little or nothing to affect competitive balance.

Not how much.

Go Yankees!!!

Ramirez gets 20 million but he ain't got shit on our boys. :)

C'mon people, are we Republicans? Let's gets some valid statistical analysis before we overgeneralize from data so insufficient that a third grader would look at you like you're from the planet ignorant.

How many superbowl champs have there been since the NFL instituted its hard cap?

-AA

baseball to be like football, where the Super Bowl title just passes around from city to city like it's on tour, and this years Super Bowl champ is god-awful in two years because the cap has made them let go any decent player. That's the reason I don't care about football. Pete Rozelle strove for parity, but teams who could be 3-13 or 13-3 in any season? Sorry, that's not greatness.

They did release Jackson but he leads the Cardinals with interceptions with only 1. Yes it is greatness, you win enough games to get to the playoffs and you win at least 3 games in the playoffs your good. The Buccaneers and Raiders didn't have 3-13 seasons the year before. The Rams could've won two straight but lost due to a last second field goal by the Pats kicker. One thing I hate about baseball is if a team looses 1 game, it doesn't matter. The Yankees lost game 1 in each of it's series but still came out on top. Teams don't get competitive till game 4 and they are sure as hell not competitive in the regular season unless they are in a playoff chase.

REd wings
Avalanche
New Jersey
basically since 1995

I agree with you, you can still have a dominant team with a salary cap but you have to start young like the Cowboys got Aikman, Irving, Smith young and happened to win 3 championships. I like Salary caps because it prevents teams with more money spending however much money they do on players.

The salary cap in the NFL is too strict for MLB. The player's union in MLB is strong enough to prevent an NFL-style cap. The best type of salary cap structure that can work in MLB is like the NBA's where teams get to keep the players that they develop. The NFL's cap punishes teams for developing good players. Teams are forced to purge their payrolls every two or three years, which makes for mediocre play. The NY Jets won their division last year with a 9-7 record.

..because the owners insist upon playing a MLB-like game of overpaying free agents. If the owners and players would limit individual salaries, then teams could stay together longer. Unfortunately, players have little team loyalty and simply migrate to whatever team happens to be able to afford their salary demands at any particular time.

The Broncos went 9-7 and didn't make the playoffs. The AFC East didn't have a loosing team in their division that year. You play a division team twice, so the Jets played Buffalo twice, New England(super bowl champs at the time) twice, and the Miami Dolphins twice.

Here are the standings

NY Jets 9-7
NE Patriots 9-7
Miami Dolphins 9-7
Buffalo Bills 8-8

I don't consider that mediocry play, I consider that playing in the toughest division in football at the time. To make my point the Jets were the only 9-7 team to win their division and 3 AFC teams went 9-7 and didn't even make the playoffs. NE Patriots and the Dolphins are two, the Broncos are the third one. I think that just proves that the AFC are a tough conference and going 9-7 doesn't mean you are in the playoffs but funny you use 1 example to prove a point but ignore the other evidence.